In short, they're good at what they do and how they do it; I simply had totally different primary objectives to them, which is fine.
Quote: Mission146
When you have someone who has been adding content for that long, and also getting interaction from others (which is more added content), then the least you can do is show some loyalty back and try to keep them around.
Well, yeah, it's like I and many others have said.... EvenBob gets special treatment and the rules don't apply to him as much as the rest of us simply because he has generated a lot of content, no matter how terrible that content is, or how often it breaks the rules. He's a "made man," as I've said before.
Quote:In short, Wizard is a better person than I am as he is, clearly, the more compassionate of the two of us.
link to original post
Wizard can have compassion for EB in the real world. Here in the forum, if there are rules with moderators enforcing them, then they should be enforced equally. Otherwise there's no incentive for anyone else to try and have legitimate discussions when the most prolific member of the forum is allowed to constantly break the rules. "Just block him" is a cop out and lazy moderation (although I have now blocked him and a number of his threads, it still doesn't solve the overall problem).
Quote: rxwineQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: rxwineQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: rxwineQuote: WizardQuote: SOOPOOMike, EvenBob has posted his make believe stories, hundreds, maybe thousands of times. And the rest of us find it to be trolling the forum. Why doesn’t he get suspended for the same reason you just suspended Billy? I just don’t understand? Someone making something up can repeat it ad infinitum but the person pointing it out can’t? I’ll bet Billy has pointed it out FAR fewer times than EB has made his silly claims.
link to original post
Point taken. However, EB is often responding to attacks, which he is allowed to do. If everyone quit showing interest, I bet he would stop. Funny how everyone wants him silenced, yet his posts always engender many replies. I can spend hours on a post, for example those on the Secret Santa puzzle, and nobody says a peep.
Meanwhile Billryan says the same thing over and over -- attacking me for what EB says.
Trust me, if you think EB is trolling the forum, stop responding to him and the problem will go away. I don't view this as my fault, but the moths who can't resist an open flame.
link to original post
I might get banned because I've said this more than once. Make the blocking someone PERMANENT, not reversable. It will get rid of the "moth effect" Or at least you can say something like if you choose not to block someone, you can get banned for repeating a complaint. Or at least make it an option. People can choose to start over, but that carries its own hazards if it's not approved, and someone is caught under new names.
edit, well it will probably help get rid of some of the moth effect. "quoting" enables reading posts of people you block.
link to original post
Just don't unblock them. PERMANENT. Fixed.
link to original post
Did "just don't unblock them work?" No, it apparently does not. So, either someone needs to try something different or stop bringing it up. But that doesn't work either. I'm betting it will just keep being brought up.
link to original post
it works as long as you do not unblock them. I have about 3 people blocked and gollygee I do not have to see what they say. You just have to be responsible to yourself.
link to original post
Well,, why have any mods at all for anything? You're saying everyone can just be responsible. Wow. Why didn't the Wizard and everyone else think of that?
link to original post
I am saying that adults do not need to have a one-way ignore button, they can use it once and unblock if they like.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: Mission146
When you have someone who has been adding content for that long, and also getting interaction from others (which is more added content), then the least you can do is show some loyalty back and try to keep them around.
Well, yeah, it's like I and many others have said.... EvenBob gets special treatment and the rules don't apply to him as much as the rest of us simply because he has generated a lot of content, no matter how terrible that content is, or how often it breaks the rules. He's a "made man," as I've said before.Quote:In short, Wizard is a better person than I am as he is, clearly, the more compassionate of the two of us.
link to original post
Wizard can have compassion for EB in the real world. Here in the forum, if there are rules with moderators enforcing them, then they should be enforced equally. Otherwise there's no incentive for anyone else to try and have legitimate discussions when the most prolific member of the forum is allowed to constantly break the rules. "Just block him" is a cop out and lazy moderation (although I have now blocked him and a number of his threads, it still doesn't solve the overall problem).
link to original post
Let's be fair: I wasn't perfectly equal in my enforcement of the rules; I just enforced them unequally in ways that the more...eh...useful posters tended to like.
I don't think being relegated to a thread for a particular topic is unfair treatment such as to be a travesty. Quite frankly, my tendency is to think that Administration believes (and I haven't discussed EB with anyone, so this is just my opinion) that the guy simply can't help himself unless he's reined in a bit. For reasons that I have already speculated, it seems that they don't want to be forced into a long-term banning of EB, which I find a quite justifiable position for them to have given all that he's done for both forums. At a certain point, even if it's by way of quantity...if only quantity...someone has added tremendous value as a poster.
So, when I talk about, 'Compassion,' I'm saying that everything that EB has added matters, so with that in mind, it seems that he should be kept around unless the alternative to him being kept around is completely unavoidable. I understand and respect that position.
I also don't think that I've noticed EB doing that kind of stuff in new user threads, which is something I would place a high priority on strictly moderating.
The reason why is because Forums are a declining social medium. Forums, in general, are being replaced by your major social media companies as well as private messaging groups, such as those created in Discord. While the quality of the content here on the forums is of great importance to forum sustainability, the most important thing (to me) is creating an environment such that new users will be compelled to return and engage with the forum and its participants.
I consider that to be of utmost importance because it can be expected that long-time users will slowly drop off. Whether that be by way of leaving, or in some cases, by way of that person's eventual, and unfortunate, physical death---if we can't compel new users to stay and engage, then given enough time, there won't be anyone left.
Granted, I have all but accepted the inevitability of the total death of message boards as a viable medium, but even given that inevitability, being attractive to new participants seems, to me, to be the only way to forestall such an eventuality as long as possible.
Quote: MDawgAll that matters today is how the current active moderators do it.
link to original post
Quite true, but this is the Discussion About the Suspension List (read: Administration) Thread, so I was simply discussing it.
Quote: SOOPOO. Assuming EB does not specifically attack me I will avoid commenting on his gambling inanities for at least a month. Then I will reassess.
Good for you, I hope it works out. I gave up commenting on his stories about six months ago.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: rxwineQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: rxwineQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: rxwineQuote: WizardQuote: SOOPOOMike, EvenBob has posted his make believe stories, hundreds, maybe thousands of times. And the rest of us find it to be trolling the forum. Why doesn’t he get suspended for the same reason you just suspended Billy? I just don’t understand? Someone making something up can repeat it ad infinitum but the person pointing it out can’t? I’ll bet Billy has pointed it out FAR fewer times than EB has made his silly claims.
link to original post
Point taken. However, EB is often responding to attacks, which he is allowed to do. If everyone quit showing interest, I bet he would stop. Funny how everyone wants him silenced, yet his posts always engender many replies. I can spend hours on a post, for example those on the Secret Santa puzzle, and nobody says a peep.
Meanwhile Billryan says the same thing over and over -- attacking me for what EB says.
Trust me, if you think EB is trolling the forum, stop responding to him and the problem will go away. I don't view this as my fault, but the moths who can't resist an open flame.
link to original post
I might get banned because I've said this more than once. Make the blocking someone PERMANENT, not reversable. It will get rid of the "moth effect" Or at least you can say something like if you choose not to block someone, you can get banned for repeating a complaint. Or at least make it an option. People can choose to start over, but that carries its own hazards if it's not approved, and someone is caught under new names.
edit, well it will probably help get rid of some of the moth effect. "quoting" enables reading posts of people you block.
link to original post
Just don't unblock them. PERMANENT. Fixed.
link to original post
Did "just don't unblock them work?" No, it apparently does not. So, either someone needs to try something different or stop bringing it up. But that doesn't work either. I'm betting it will just keep being brought up.
link to original post
it works as long as you do not unblock them. I have about 3 people blocked and gollygee I do not have to see what they say. You just have to be responsible to yourself.
link to original post
Well,, why have any mods at all for anything? You're saying everyone can just be responsible. Wow. Why didn't the Wizard and everyone else think of that?
link to original post
I am saying that adults do not need to have a one-way ignore button, they can use it once and unblock if they like.
link to original post
Doesn't benefit you. But it might benefit the mods if there is less chance for fewer volatile interactions.
Quote: rxwine
Doesn't benefit you. But it might benefit the mods if there is less chance for fewer volatile interactions.
link to original post
Actuating the left button seems to precede most of the trouble.
Insert whatever cliches will motivate you here.
Excelsior.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOO. Assuming EB does not specifically attack me I will avoid commenting on his gambling inanities for at least a month. Then I will reassess.
Good for you, I hope it works out. I gave up commenting on his stories about six months ago.
link to original post
If everyone does what DRich has done, and what SooPoo pledges to do, then we will not have an EvenBob Roulette issue. I won't list your names, but the members who are beating EB like a pinata, seemingly for sport, can end this episode by refusing to discuss and comment on EB's claims. Surely, everything that can possibly be said has already been said.
Rule# 1. Absolutely no personal insults.
Rule# 5. Do not post the same message more than once.
Rule# 12. No bullying/trolling. . .. "Members may not be overly divisive or abusive to another member."
Quote: lilredrooster.
The Wiz has taken action - he has confined EB's outrageous claims to just one thread
as far as I know no other member has ever been restricted in that way
it's a difficult issue because the concept of free speech also comes into play
.
link to original post
Thank you! Nathan also had such a restriction -- Nathan's Corner.
Quote: TigerWuWait a minute.... it's not your fault for allowing someone to troll the forum repeatedly?
link to original post
I don't view EB's roulette posts as trolling, but as protected free speech. Trolling generally has a specific victim and are negative in nature -- Somebody who mainly attacks somebody else.
Quote: WizardI don't view EB's roulette posts as trolling, but as protected free speech. Trolling generally has a specific victim and are negative in nature -- Somebody who mainly attacks somebody else.
That is your opinion, but let's see what the experts at this sort of thing have to say on the subject...
"The Oxford Dictionary describes trolling as making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”. There are many different types of troll, such as:
The insult troll, who posts pure hateful comments just for the sake of it. They don’t need to know the person or have a reason for posting spiteful comments.
The forever offended trolls are experts in taking a humorous piece of content and turning it into something sour and offensive.
The show off troll doesn’t particularly like to take part in discussions, but prefers to share their opinion without having any particular knowledge of the subject being discussed.
The “look at me” troll isn’t interested in anything you have to say - they’re on a mission to get you to look at their page, buy something from them, download their content or follow them."
source: https://www.endsleigh.co.uk/blog/post/what-is-internet-trolling/
Quote: MrVQuote: WizardI don't view EB's roulette posts as trolling, but as protected free speech. Trolling generally has a specific victim and are negative in nature -- Somebody who mainly attacks somebody else.
That is your opinion, but let's see what the experts at this sort of thing have to say on the subject...
"The Oxford Dictionary describes trolling as making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”. There are many different types of troll, such as:
The insult troll, who posts pure hateful comments just for the sake of it. They don’t need to know the person or have a reason for posting spiteful comments.
The forever offended trolls are experts in taking a humorous piece of content and turning it into something sour and offensive.
The show off troll doesn’t particularly like to take part in discussions, but prefers to share their opinion without having any particular knowledge of the subject being discussed.
The “look at me” troll isn’t interested in anything you have to say - they’re on a mission to get you to look at their page, buy something from them, download their content or follow them."
source: https://www.endsleigh.co.uk/blog/post/what-is-internet-trolling/
link to original post
So have you made “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”? Haven't you repeatedly been making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting" EvenBob? Or with the aim of "eliciting an angry response from" EvenBob?
Before judging other people, take responsibility for your own behavior.
Quote: gordonm888
So have you made “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”? Haven't you repeatedly been making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting" EvenBob? Or with the aim of "eliciting an angry response from" EvenBob?
Before judging other people, take responsibility for your own behavior.
link to original post
I have absolutely done that, and gotten suspended for it, as per the rules of the forum. I will take responsibility for what I said, which is why I don't feel bad judging EB's behavior and accusing him of trolling.
Quote: Rule 12No bullying/trolling: Members are expected to act like ladies and gentlemen. Members may not be overly divisive or abusive to another member. This includes starting a thread only the for purpose of attacking another member. (Added 2/24/2012). This also includes threats against another member. (added 9/3/12) If the totality of one's posts is one huge lie, then it becomes trolling. (Added 2/2/22)
Note that it endeavors to clarify what type of trolling is not allowed -- the bullying kind. One might make the argument that the "totality" of EB's posts are "one huge lie," but he posts about other things, mainly cats, as well. Most of his roulette posts are in response to a challenge out of the blue, which he is allowed to do.
I also invite EB's critics to accept what I'll call the "SOOPOO challenge" -- Block EB for 30 days. I think you'll notice an improvement in your happiness and decrease in blood pressure.
Quote: JohnzimboI have blocked two threads that mostly contain what I feel are preposterous claims, and I feel better for it.
link to original post
The forum feels so much "cleaner" after doing something like that!
Quote: TigerWuQuote: gordonm888
So have you made “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”? Haven't you repeatedly been making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting" EvenBob? Or with the aim of "eliciting an angry response from" EvenBob?
Before judging other people, take responsibility for your own behavior.
link to original post
I have absolutely done that, and gotten suspended for it, as per the rules of the forum. I will take responsibility for what I said, which is why I don't feel bad judging EB's behavior and accusing him of trolling.
link to original post
You have been previously suspended for Violation of the No personal Insults Rule, but for everyone of those violations that we have acted upon there have been multiple instances where you have made “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting" EvenBob or with the aim of "eliciting an angry response from" EvenBob - and in these instances we have chosen not to act upon the bullying and trolling (for a variety of reasons.)
I agree with Wizard that what EvenBob has been doing is not trolling. EB has offered his viewpoints, initially with enthusiasm and in high spirits. I have a couple of times posted that I think these viewpoints of EB's are outlandish but then, like a couple of dozen other members, I simply stopped engaging EB on his viewpoints and stopped commenting. But there have been a number of members, yourself included, who have persisted in making offensive posts with the aim of upsetting EvenBob or eliciting an angry response from EvenBob. This has frustrated me greatly, because I have considered your behavior (and the behavior of Soopoo, OnceDear, lilredrooster and others) to be bullying or trolling and in violation of our rules. I have many times asked members to stop this bullying behavior and simply ignore EB, but I did not hand out violations because I believed that this type of behavior has been allowed in the forum in the past.
But now, Wizard has announced a 14 day suspension of BillRyan for bullying, trolling and making many posts about EvenBob that repeatedly make the same statement. Perhaps the world has changed.
This is like the ACLU that defends the rights of groups to state opinions that most people find to be abhorrent, in the name of free speech. This is Wizard's forum and he has publicly stated many times his support for the principles of free speech. Most of us disagree with EB's opinions, but we don't have the right in Wizard's forum to be persistently abusive to EB and to bully EB because we completely disagree with his views.
I think that sums it up. If Wizard doesn't deem EvenBob antics to be trolling, then so be it.Quote: TigerWuEvenBob . antics...
link to original post
For now, I suggest we don't feed the antics, just as we wouldn't feed a troll.
For those in the know. E, E. We need to get to E, E, E, E, E.
Quote: MrVQuote: WizardI don't view EB's roulette posts as trolling, but as protected free speech. Trolling generally has a specific victim and are negative in nature -- Somebody who mainly attacks somebody else.
That is your opinion, but let's see what the experts at this sort of thing have to say on the subject...
"The Oxford Dictionary describes trolling as making “a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them”. There are many different types of troll, such as:
The insult troll, who posts pure hateful comments just for the sake of it. They don’t need to know the person or have a reason for posting spiteful comments.
The forever offended trolls are experts in taking a humorous piece of content and turning it into something sour and offensive.
The show off troll doesn’t particularly like to take part in discussions, but prefers to share their opinion without having any particular knowledge of the subject being discussed.
The “look at me” troll isn’t interested in anything you have to say - they’re on a mission to get you to look at their page, buy something from them, download their content or follow them."
source: https://www.endsleigh.co.uk/blog/post/what-is-internet-trolling/
link to original post
Given that Wizard is in charge of the Forum, as far as this Forum is concerned, his opinion is (and should be), de facto, a fact.
Quote: WizardLet me take a minute to clarify the rules. Let's look at rule 12.
Quote: Rule 12No bullying/trolling: Members are expected to act like ladies and gentlemen. Members may not be overly divisive or abusive to another member. This includes starting a thread only the for purpose of attacking another member. (Added 2/24/2012). This also includes threats against another member. (added 9/3/12) If the totality of one's posts is one huge lie, then it becomes trolling. (Added 2/2/22)
Note that it endeavors to clarify what type of trolling is not allowed -- the bullying kind. One might make the argument that the "totality" of EB's posts are "one huge lie," but he posts about other things, mainly cats, as well. Most of his roulette posts are in response to a challenge out of the blue, which he is allowed to do.
I also invite EB's critics to accept what I'll call the "SOOPOO challenge" -- Block EB for 30 days. I think you'll notice an improvement in your happiness and decrease in blood pressure.
link to original post
First impressions for new forum members? You can’t fix that part of it if they think nonsense is posted about gambling.
Or at least, one would think.
Quote: gordonm888This is Wizard's forum ...
Really?
I thought he sold it for a couple million and is moderating because he is required to under the terms of the sales agreement.
He's now just a mod, a "super-mod" if you will, but no, this is no longer "his" forum, ownership-wise.
As for the policy of coddling the weakest link ... that makes for a lousy chain.
this will be my last post on this subject
the thing that does not seem to have been considered by those defending EB is this:
he has claimed he wins 80% of his even chance bets
he has also at times claimed he wins all of his even chance bets
this is beyond improbable - it's impossible
so in defending EB, they are in fact defending horrible, impossible posts
stating that those posts should not be vigorously attacked is wrong imo
although I will no longer participate in it - I've done more than my share
I don't at all think it's wrong for his posts that state as fact what everyone knows to be impossible to be strongly criticized
but I wouldn't go as far to state that his posts of this nature should be banned -
if his posts were actually factually accurate - then he has made what is probably the greatest discovery in the history of gambling analysis
would anyone like to assign a probability to that being the case_____________?
.
Quote: MrVQuote: gordonm888This is Wizard's forum ...
Really?
I thought he sold it for a couple million and is moderating because he is required to under the terms of the sales agreement.
He's now just a mod, a "super-mod" if you will, but no, this is no longer "his" forum, ownership-wise.
As for the policy of coddling the weakest link ... that makes for a lousy chain.
link to original post
He may be more like the Pope now. Direct access to the top.
Quote: lilredroosterthis will be my last post on this subject
link to original post
Heard that before. And not just on this subject or person.
Quote: lilredrooster.
if his posts were actually factually accurate - then he has made what is probably the greatest discovery in the history of gambling analysis
would anybody like to assign a probability to that being the case_____________?
.
link to original post
80%?
Quote: MrVQuote: gordonm888This is Wizard's forum ...
Really?
I thought he sold it for a couple million and is moderating because he is required to under the terms of the sales agreement.
He's now just a mod, a "super-mod" if you will, but no, this is no longer "his" forum, ownership-wise.
As for the policy of coddling the weakest link ... that makes for a lousy chain.
link to original post
With that, I would suggest it makes sense that the owners trust the judgment of a man who made a small family of gambling websites, WoV/WoO/Las Apuestas/WoM, that they saw fit to pay millions (multiple millions) of dollars for. Whatever you think of moderation, it sure seems like Wizard knows what he's doing in terms of creating successful websites.
In any event, as far as I understand it, he's basically the final word on Forum Administration, so that's functionally no different from when he owned the sites.
Quote: MrVI've no beef with the wiz or the mods, nor how they moderate, I was simply correcting a misstatement; regulars know about the sale years ago by the wiz but newbies may not.
link to original post
Apparently, even some folks who've been around for a minute only recently heard of LCB.
Only the owners know if WOO is bringing in enough clicks to justify whatever they paid for it.
Quote: MDawgI assume the WOO is what brings in the traffic. With the shuttering of Alexa I'm not aware of any free way to measure traffic on a given random website, but I doubt this forum has much going on traffic wise compared to WOO.
Only the owners know if WOO is bringing in enough clicks to justify whatever they paid for it.
link to original post
They still pay my invoices, so I assume it's doing at least okay.
I can prove 2+2 = 5Quote: rxwine/as far as kind of trolls, I suggest the anti-math troll is the worse we can have here.
Or at least, one would think.
link to original post
:)
I thought $2.4M?Quote: Mission146Quote: MrVQuote: gordonm888This is Wizard's forum ...
Really?
I thought he sold it for a couple million and is moderating because he is required to under the terms of the sales agreement.
He's now just a mod, a "super-mod" if you will, but no, this is no longer "his" forum, ownership-wise.
As for the policy of coddling the weakest link ... that makes for a lousy chain.
link to original post
With that, I would suggest it makes sense that the owners trust the judgment of a man who made a small family of gambling websites, WoV/WoO/Las Apuestas/WoM, that they saw fit to pay millions (multiple millions) of dollars for. Whatever you think of moderation, it sure seems like Wizard knows what he's doing in terms of creating successful websites.
In any event, as far as I understand it, he's basically the final word on Forum Administration, so that's functionally no different from when he owned the sites.
link to original post
Back then i thought it was mind boggling that the owners could recoup that amount of $ from ads.
But then i saw all the referral links to gambling sites.
Plus if like the old online poker sites of 20yrs ago, they also get a continual % of the theo the players who sign up.
Shutting of Alexa, as in Amazon's voice box thingy?Quote: MDawgI assume the WOO is what brings in the traffic. With the shuttering of Alexa I'm not aware of any free way to measure traffic on a given random website, but I doubt this forum has much going on traffic wise compared to WOO.
Only the owners know if WOO is bringing in enough clicks to justify whatever they paid for it.
link to original post
I think the new owners pay him primarily for new content on WoO and not for modding this small forum.Quote: MrVReally?Quote: gordonm888This is Wizard's forum ...
I thought he sold it for a couple million and is moderating because he is required to under the terms of the sales agreement.
He's now just a mod, a "super-mod" if you will, but no, this is no longer "his" forum, ownership-wise.
As for the policy of coddling the weakest link ... that makes for a lousy chain.
link to original post
BTW- Has Wiz put out anything new lately on WoO?
The last thing i saw was Buffalo Ascension, i think.
(I only know new stuff there when he mentions it here on WoV)
Quote: 100xOddsShutting of Alexa, as in Amazon's voice box thingy?Quote: MDawgI assume the WOO is what brings in the traffic. With the shuttering of Alexa I'm not aware of any free way to measure traffic on a given random website, but I doubt this forum has much going on traffic wise compared to WOO.
Only the owners know if WOO is bringing in enough clicks to justify whatever they paid for it.
link to original post
link to original post
That almost certainly means "Alexa traffic rankings", which was a utility website/service used by digital marketeers.
Quote: 100xOddsBTW- Has Wiz put out anything new lately on WoO?
The last thing i saw was Buffalo Ascension, i think.
(I only know new stuff there when he mentions it here on WoV)
link to original post
I have not written about a variable-state slot game for a while. I did a slew of them for my book, which is now out. Maybe I'll write about some more in 2024, but I'm not feeling as motivated. Nobody is giving me good feedback unless I pay them, which discourages me to write about more games.
New book?Quote: WizardQuote: 100xOddsBTW- Has Wiz put out anything new lately on WoO?
The last thing i saw was Buffalo Ascension, i think.
(I only know new stuff there when he mentions it here on WoV)
link to original post
I have not written about a variable-state slot game for a while. I did a slew of them for my book, which is now out. Maybe I'll write about some more in 2024, but I'm not feeling as motivated. Nobody is giving me good feedback unless I pay them, which discourages me to write about more games.
link to original post
Link?
Quote: 100xOdds]I thought $2.4M?
Back then i thought it was mind boggling that the owners could recoup that amount of $ from ads.
But then i saw all the referral links to gambling sites.
Plus if like the old online poker sites of 20yrs ago, they also get a continual % of the theo the players who sign up.
link to original post
Yes. And, with two, I have multiple kids. Fewer than multiple could only be one or zero. I actually emphasized (multiple millions) because I didn't want anyone getting the impression I was suggesting it sold for ten million dollars, or something.
I don't know what the revenue sharing/advertising arrangements are as they are none of my business or concern. The only guess that I would make is that not only might they vary, but also, that they could be incentive/goal driven such that returns from even the same underlying contract could vary.
JB hasnt been around since 2020?!Quote: gordonm888Inactive Mods: JB, FACE
link to original post
https://wizardofvegas.com/member/jb/
So this forum's software didnt need any tweaking in 3 years?
And Face is also gone: https://wizardofvegas.com/member/face/
Last seen 2021
Quote:So this forum's software didnt need any tweaking in 3 years?
And Face is also gone: https://wizardofvegas.com/member/face/
Last seen 2021
link to original post
I hope JB won't mind me saying that he is still around. I asked him to promote Mission to moderator at DT and it was done within a few days. He seems focused on other projects right now.
I lost contact with Face, but hope he's doing well.
Well, for what it's worth, here's my feedback:Quote: WizardI have not written about a variable-state slot game for a while. I did a slew of them for my book, which is now out. Maybe I'll write about some more in 2024, but I'm not feeling as motivated. Nobody is giving me good feedback unless I pay them, which discourages me to write about more games.
Thank-you for posting on WoO about variable-state slot games, I found it very well written and interesting.
I prefer paypal. Hahaha, just kidding.
Quote: darkozWhy is Redietz in red?
link to original post
Is that supposed to be a joke? like your challenging Wizard's authority at his own forum?