Discussion III about the Suspension List
He was nuked a few years back.Quote: darkozWhy is Redietz in red?
link to original post
Quote: JoemanHe was nuked a few years back.Quote: darkozWhy is Redietz in red?
link to original post
link to original post
I see. Thanks
hm.. but No link to the offending post in the suspension list?Quote: JoemanHe was nuked a few years back.Quote: darkozWhy is Redietz in red?
link to original post
link to original post
But here's Wiz's explanation of his nuke:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/36338-discussion-iii-about-the-suspension-list/10/#post828351
edit:
The threat was made in another forum.
Thx Mdawg
His last visit was June 21, 2022 but I can't find his name in the 2022 or 2023 suspension list?
😃
Starburger was nuked as a Tasha/Nathan sock.
Tasha/Nathan is still upset, angry dismayed, and still thinking daily about her nuke here.Quote: MDawgIs today, look up people who were suspended long ago and figure out why, day?
😃
Starburger was nuked as a Tasha/Nathan sock.
link to original post
She swears to be on the sock puppet wagon for a very long time now, however, there are a few accounts on here that I suspect are her. She is reading and she will deny it, but she's denied and denied and denied and denied many times in the past, only to later confess.
Quote: AxelWolfTasha/Nathan is still upset, angry dismayed, and still thinking daily about her nuke here.Quote: MDawgIs today, look up people who were suspended long ago and figure out why, day?
😃
Starburger was nuked as a Tasha/Nathan sock.
link to original post
She swears to be on the sock puppet wagon for a very long time now, however, there are a few accounts on here that I suspect are her. She is reading and she will deny it, but she's denied and denied and denied and denied many times in the past, only to later confess.
link to original post
I swear that kind of thing is some sort of mental illness. Saw it back in the USENET days and the behaviors are still the same. Worse is to talk about a forum you were banned from on another forum. I cannot think of being a loser with no life that I would do that.
I don't think Boz does sock puppet accounts, at least not ones where you're just trying to make an account to participate on the Forum in secret.Quote: MDawgThe "usual suspects" when we have sock puppets are Buzz, Boz, KewlJ, Tasha/Nathan, ExpectedValue/WizardofNothing. Did I miss anyone?
link to original post
I believe if he had something to say, you would clearly know it was him.
I think it's been well-known for a long time that Tasha has a special condition. I believe it's some form of autism.Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: AxelWolfTasha/Nathan is still upset, angry dismayed, and still thinking daily about her nuke here.Quote: MDawgIs today, look up people who were suspended long ago and figure out why, day?
😃
Starburger was nuked as a Tasha/Nathan sock.
link to original post
She swears to be on the sock puppet wagon for a very long time now, however, there are a few accounts on here that I suspect are her. She is reading and she will deny it, but she's denied and denied and denied and denied many times in the past, only to later confess.
link to original post
I swear that kind of thing is some sort of mental illness. Saw it back in the USENET days and the behaviors are still the same. Worse is to talk about a forum you were banned from on another forum. I cannot think of being a loser with no life that I would do that.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolfI don't think Boz does sock puppet accounts, at least not ones where you're just trying to make an account to participate on the Forum in secret.Quote: MDawgThe "usual suspects" when we have sock puppets are Buzz, Boz, KewlJ, Tasha/Nathan, ExpectedValue/WizardofNothing. Did I miss anyone?
link to original post
I believe if he had something to say, you would clearly know it was him.
link to original post
Boz was nailed for a couple socks here 2021 - 2022.
And the "I only do it in a way where it's clear who I am" is a lame excuse some of them give, until they're caught for other sock puppets where they didn't make it clear.
The main issue is that someone has gotten so perturbed over something or other on an internet forum that he feels the need to make a guest appearance to comment on it, even long after he's no longer welcome. This sometimes goes hand in hand with making long dramatic goodbyes and then reappearing anyway.
Or feeling the need to let us know that he's leaving because of this or that reason instead of just leaving, or stopping posting.
Quote: MDawgQuote: AxelWolfI don't think Boz does sock puppet accounts, at least not ones where you're just trying to make an account to participate on the Forum in secret.Quote: MDawgThe "usual suspects" when we have sock puppets are Buzz, Boz, KewlJ, Tasha/Nathan, ExpectedValue/WizardofNothing. Did I miss anyone?
link to original post
I believe if he had something to say, you would clearly know it was him.
link to original post
Boz was nailed for a couple socks here 2021 - 2022.
And the "I only do it in a way where it's clear who I am" is a lame excuse some of them give, until they're caught for other sock puppets where they didn't make it clear.
The main issue is that someone has gotten so perturbed over something or other on an internet forum that he feels the need to make a guest appearance to comment on it, even long after he's no longer welcome. This sometimes goes hand in hand with making long dramatic goodbyes and then reappearing anyway.
Or feeling the need to let us know that he's leaving because of this or that reason instead of just leaving, or stopping posting.
link to original post
He’s not making a long dramatic goodbye. He started a thread about his plays/techniques for online casino advantage play. You and DarkOz have hijacked the thread, in clear violation of forum rules. A respected senior member of the forum (me!) has politely requested for the two of you to stop, or at least move it to the MDawg thread. A mod has chimed in and taken no action. I’m mildly interested in your challenge, and will happily chime in, in an appropriate thread. (My money is on MDawg…)
Quote: SOOPOO(My money is on MDawg…)
link to original post
Thanks!
What would the odds be? How much would I have to put down on MDawg to get back an even dollar?
P.S. The long dramatic goodbyes and then reappearing was more directed at KewlJ.
Quote: MDawgThe "usual suspects" when we have sock puppets are Buzz, Boz, KewlJ, Tasha/Nathan, ExpectedValue/WizardofNothing. Did I miss anyone?
link to original post
Going back Jerry Logan.
Quote: AxelWolfI think it's been well-known for a long time that Tasha has a special condition. I believe it's some form of autism.
link to original post
I would not say Nathan had some kind of autism. I think it was more an attention-seeking personality disorder. I'm no shrink, but based on the number of threads she started and the number of thumb-tacked posts she had to be the center of attention. If that is on the spectrum though please someone correct me there.
Wait what?! They're talking about banned members from years ago making sock accts.Quote: SOOPOOHe’s not making a long dramatic goodbye. He started a thread about his plays/techniques for online casino advantage play. You and DarkOz have hijacked the thread, in clear violation of forum rules.
link to original post
How the heck did you misconstrue that to being Mental?!?
For this reason we have a "policy" of not allowing defamatory comments to be posted about members who have been nuked. It is not exactly a rule. Rule #16 does address banned members and forbids posts that quote the public or private comments of banned members -but that's not the same thing as forbidding comments that banned members are mentally ill or autistic. But we do have a 'policy' that has been stated in the past several times that we do not allow posts that insult or defame banned members.
Perhaps we should consider amending either Rule #16 or #1. In the meantime, let me ask all of the adults in this conversation to refrain from making public comments of a personal nature about Nathan, based on a sense of fair play.
Quote: SOOPOO
He’s not making a long dramatic goodbye. He started a thread about his plays/techniques for online casino advantage play. You and DarkOz have hijacked the thread, in clear violation of forum rules. A respected senior member of the forum (me!) has politely requested for the two of you to stop, or at least move it to the MDawg thread. A mod has chimed in and taken no action. I’m mildly interested in your challenge, and will happily chime in, in an appropriate thread. (My money is on MDawg…)
link to original post
If you're talking about me chiming inaction, I will get to it. The "IRL" world takes priority. Trying to sort it out when I don't have time to boot a laptop is a bad idea.
Hoping to have deadlines cleared by 10am pacific time tomorrow. I won't be upset if some other capable individual deprives me of the honors.
Quote: Randy PauschThe brick walls are there for a reason. The brick walls are not there to keep us out. The brick walls are there to give us a chance to show how badly we want something. Because the brick walls are there to stop the people who don’t want it badly enough. They’re there to stop the other people.
Hoping you can manage to read the interesting tidbits among the noise, -D
Quote: Dieter(trimmed)Quote: SOOPOO
He’s not making a long dramatic goodbye. He started a thread about his plays/techniques for online casino advantage play. You and DarkOz have hijacked the thread, in clear violation of forum rules. A respected senior member of the forum (me!) has politely requested for the two of you to stop, or at least move it to the MDawg thread. A mod has chimed in and taken no action. I’m mildly interested in your challenge, and will happily chime in, in an appropriate thread. (My money is on MDawg…)
link to original post
If you're talking about me chiming inaction, I will get to it. The "IRL" world takes priority. Trying to sort it out when I don't have time to boot a laptop is a bad idea.
Hoping to have deadlines cleared by 10am pacific time tomorrow. I won't be upset if some other capable individual deprives me of the honors.Quote: Randy PauschThe brick walls are there for a reason. The brick walls are not there to keep us out. The brick walls are there to give us a chance to show how badly we want something. Because the brick walls are there to stop the people who don’t want it badly enough. They’re there to stop the other people.
Hoping you can manage to read the interesting tidbits among the noise, -D
link to original post
Listen….. you are making the big bucks as a Greenie. No excuses tolerated. I suppose next you are going to tell us you had a medical condition like open heart surgery?
Teasing of course. Who would want your Green job?
Quote: SOOPOOWho would want your Green job?
Nathan would.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: Dieter(trimmed)Quote: SOOPOO
He’s not making a long dramatic goodbye. He started a thread about his plays/techniques for online casino advantage play. You and DarkOz have hijacked the thread, in clear violation of forum rules. A respected senior member of the forum (me!) has politely requested for the two of you to stop, or at least move it to the MDawg thread. A mod has chimed in and taken no action. I’m mildly interested in your challenge, and will happily chime in, in an appropriate thread. (My money is on MDawg…)
link to original post
If you're talking about me chiming inaction, I will get to it. The "IRL" world takes priority. Trying to sort it out when I don't have time to boot a laptop is a bad idea.
Hoping to have deadlines cleared by 10am pacific time tomorrow. I won't be upset if some other capable individual deprives me of the honors.Quote: Randy PauschThe brick walls are there for a reason. The brick walls are not there to keep us out. The brick walls are there to give us a chance to show how badly we want something. Because the brick walls are there to stop the people who don’t want it badly enough. They’re there to stop the other people.
Hoping you can manage to read the interesting tidbits among the noise, -D
link to original post
Listen….. you are making the big bucks as a Greenie. No excuses tolerated. I suppose next you are going to tell us you had a medical condition like open heart surgery?
Teasing of course. Who would want your Green job?
link to original post
What??!?
You think I should "work harder" just because they tripled the pay for the new year?
You get what you get, and you don't pitch a fit.
Quote: gordonm888If someone on this forum posts (publicly) that a banned member, such as Nathan, has autism then it might be argued that this forum has some kind of obligation to allow her to return briefly for the purpose of defending herself.
For this reason we have a "policy" of not allowing defamatory comments to be posted about members who have been nuked. It is not exactly a rule. Rule #16 does address banned members and forbids posts that quote the public or private comments of banned members -but that's not the same thing as forbidding comments that banned members are mentally ill or autistic. But we do have a 'policy' that has been stated in the past several times that we do not allow posts that insult or defame banned members.
Perhaps we should consider amending either Rule #16 or #1. In the meantime, let me ask all of the adults in this conversation to refrain from making public comments of a personal nature about Nathan, based on a sense of fair play.
link to original post
I agree with GordonM888, here. It has been a long standing 'unofficial' policy to sort of limit discussion of prior (banned) forum members, unless you have something positive to say. There have been a few major exceptions to that over the years, for one reason or another; generally speaking, Nathan never really did anything to anyone, so there's no good reason to trash Nathan on this forum.
Rob Singer, for example, is probably a partial exception as he used to write a gambling column, so could be discussed in that context, one would think.
It's also somewhat widely known that Nathan isn't hard to find if you want to address Nathan directly; if anyone wishes to PM me, then I will tell you where she might be found.
Messages from banned members: Do not quote anything, neither public nor private, a banned member has said. If we ban somebody it means we don't want to hear from them any longer.
This applies to anything the member has to say after being nuked - "we don't want to hear from them any longer," which is why posts made by sock puppets of banned members should be deleted in their entirety. As policy too this discourages sock puppetry because the nuked realize that whatever they post here under sock cover will disappear anyway.
And then as far as discussing or disparaging a nuked member, we may discuss their actions and content they left behind. Just probably shouldn't discuss anything new they might have done outside of this forum, although I suppose that too gets to the "imported drama" guideline, which seems to have become more of a guideline than rule since the post January 2021 "more lax WOV moderation," and is enforced more if real trolling drama is created versus simple mention of outside events.
As far as insulting them, I suppose that is just a general policy of not insulting any past or present WOV member. But it doesn't mean you can't discuss whatever content they left behind or actions they made while WOV members in good standing, same way you may discuss the actions and content of any WOV member, so long as you don't insult them. To ban discussion of a nuked member entirely would lead to absurd results - nuked members created content here and we are free to discuss it according to the Wizard.
Quote: billryanYou'd need to be a particular brand of scum to pick on someone you think has autism. Nathan was annoying, but at least she had a built-in excuse. I suspect several members here would test on the spectrum if everyone's cards were on the table.
link to original post
I am curious why some here think she was on the spectrum.
For the record, I believe this subject has even been discussed here previously, the discussion may have even included her. I'm certain that even she has acknowledged that its a possibility that she is on the spectrum. If not here, perhaps elsewhere. I don't think it's any secret that she's special. For the record, my comment was not meant to be defamatory. I will let you know if she indicates that she is offended by our comments here.Quote: gordonm888If someone on this forum posts (publicly) that a banned member, such as Nathan, has autism then it might be argued that this forum has some kind of obligation to allow her to return briefly for the purpose of defending herself.
For this reason we have a "policy" of not allowing defamatory comments to be posted about members who have been nuked. It is not exactly a rule. Rule #16 does address banned members and forbids posts that quote the public or private comments of banned members -but that's not the same thing as forbidding comments that banned members are mentally ill or autistic. But we do have a 'policy' that has been stated in the past several times that we do not allow posts that insult or defame banned members.
Perhaps we should consider amending either Rule #16 or #1. In the meantime, let me ask all of the adults in this conversation to refrain from making public comments of a personal nature about Nathan, based on a sense of fair play.
link to original post
I don't know when or why I got that feeling I believe it had to do with the combination of post and other things. Perhaps it was one of the videos that she posted that cemented it for me.Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: billryanYou'd need to be a particular brand of scum to pick on someone you think has autism. Nathan was annoying, but at least she had a built-in excuse. I suspect several members here would test on the spectrum if everyone's cards were on the table.
link to original post
I am curious why some here think she was on the spectrum.
link to original post
I haven't listened to it, but I believe she did a radio interview with Dan Druff/Todd on the Poker Fraud Alert Show.
I don't know what was said, but some people were discussing some of the Oddball stuff, so perhaps that can give you some insight if you are interested at all.
I think I'd be willing to wager and give odds that she has an abnormal condition. I don't know where they draw the line at officially being on the Spectrum.
Quote: AxelWolf
I haven't listened to it, but I believe she did a radio interview with Dan Druff/Todd on the Poker Fraud Alert Show.
I don't know what was said, but some people were discussing some of the Oddball stuff, so perhaps that can give you some insight if you are interested at all.
link to original post
It's a half hour of my life I won't be getting back.
The things I learned were not things I felt I needed to know.
Maybe you can learn more, but I doubt you can recoup the half hour, either.
Quote: mwalz9I feel like Im on a real life game of survivor.
In all honesty, I like to joke around, have fun, and be sarcastic, and I have had my share of suspensions, but issuing threats because of an online forum is way beyond the scope of things I'd ever do. Nothing here is that serious.
link to original post
One lovely member here called my HR Department where I worked once because I disagreed with him too much here. The HR Director and I had a good laugh together. There are some really strange people in this world.
ZCore13!
Quote: AxelWolfI don't know when or why I got that feeling I believe it had to do with the combination of post and other things. Perhaps it was one of the videos that she posted that cemented it for me.Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: billryanYou'd need to be a particular brand of scum to pick on someone you think has autism. Nathan was annoying, but at least she had a built-in excuse. I suspect several members here would test on the spectrum if everyone's cards were on the table.
link to original post
I am curious why some here think she was on the spectrum.
link to original post
I haven't listened to it, but I believe she did a radio interview with Dan Druff/Todd on the Poker Fraud Alert Show.
I don't know what was said, but some people were discussing some of the Oddball stuff, so perhaps that can give you some insight if you are interested at all.
I think I'd be willing to wager and give odds that she has an abnormal condition. I don't know where they draw the line at officially being on the Spectrum.
link to original post
I am surprised she was on any kind of show (no, don't bother with the link) as I do not remember her discussing much about gaming and that being one reason Wiz sent her over to DT. The main "condition" I saw was someone in over their head conversation wise and did not have the education and experience level of most of the group here. Her interests seemed different as well, which is why she started so many threads that nobody paid attention to.
I'm no expert but that is my take. Might be a condition of some sort, I just do not see autism there.
Quote: Zcore13
One lovely member here called my HR Department where I worked once because I disagreed with him too much here. The HR Director and I had a good laugh together. There are some really strange people in this world.
ZCore13!
That is incredible. I am just shocked that anyone would care enough about what others write in this forum. I am also shocked when I hear that adult members here go complaining to management about posts. Who cares?
Quote: DRichQuote: Zcore13
One lovely member here called my HR Department where I worked once because I disagreed with him too much here. The HR Director and I had a good laugh together. There are some really strange people in this world.
ZCore13!
That is incredible. I am just shocked that anyone would care enough about what others write in this forum. I am also shocked when I hear that adult members here go complaining to management about posts. Who cares?
link to original post
Yep. At some point, you just have to stop arguing and let the other person be wrong.
1 day credit has been noted.
Quote: gordonm888If someone on this forum posts (publicly) that a banned member, such as Nathan, has autism then it might be argued that this forum has some kind of obligation to allow her to return briefly for the purpose of defending herself.
For this reason we have a "policy" of not allowing defamatory comments to be posted about members who have been nuked. It is not exactly a rule. Rule #16 does address banned members and forbids posts that quote the public or private comments of banned members -but that's not the same thing as forbidding comments that banned members are mentally ill or autistic. But we do have a 'policy' that has been stated in the past several times that we do not allow posts that insult or defame banned members.
Perhaps we should consider amending either Rule #16 or #1. In the meantime, let me ask all of the adults in this conversation to refrain from making public comments of a personal nature about Nathan, based on a sense of fair play.
link to original post
The thing has happened! (And I don't mean a scoundrel backing out of an betrothal in a Henry James novel.) Tasha/Nathan has appointed me as her representative and requests the opportunity to defend or at least present herself at WOV, either directly or through a plenipotentiary.
Isn't there some forum /Mike rule about not doing that?Quote: MDawgQuote: gordonm888If someone on this forum posts (publicly) that a banned member, such as Nathan, has autism then it might be argued that this forum has some kind of obligation to allow her to return briefly for the purpose of defending herself.
For this reason we have a "policy" of not allowing defamatory comments to be posted about members who have been nuked. It is not exactly a rule. Rule #16 does address banned members and forbids posts that quote the public or private comments of banned members -but that's not the same thing as forbidding comments that banned members are mentally ill or autistic. But we do have a 'policy' that has been stated in the past several times that we do not allow posts that insult or defame banned members.
Perhaps we should consider amending either Rule #16 or #1. In the meantime, let me ask all of the adults in this conversation to refrain from making public comments of a personal nature about Nathan, based on a sense of fair play.
link to original post
The thing has happened! (And I don't mean a scoundrel backing out of an betrothal in a Henry James novel.) Tasha/Nathan has appointed me as her representative and requests the opportunity to defend or at least present herself at WOV, either directly or through a plenipotentiary.
link to original post
Either way, it's probably a moot point, I can't imagine that it's going to continue as a hot topic.
I don't know whether she is or should be allowed to speak or not, I am merely saying that she appointed me as her representative in this matter.
I'm not sure if I relayed any messages from her, but it's certainly possible since I don't always care to follow the rules.Quote: MDawgYou already talked here about things that happened outside WOV with Tasha/Nathan after she was nuked, what I have done is stated that she wishes to have input on what was said about her here in the past few days.
I don't know whether she is or should be allowed to speak or not, I am merely saying that she appointed me as her representative in this matter.
link to original post
Quote: MDawg
I don't know whether she is or should be allowed to speak or not, I am merely saying that she appointed me as her representative in this matter.
link to original post
I think that would set a bad precedent. Don't get nuked and you can defend yourself all you want.
ZCore13
And that's a violation of Mikes policy/rules.Quote: MDawgYou already talked here about things that happened outside WOV with Tasha/Nathan after she was nuked, what I have done is stated that she wishes to have input on what was said about her here in the past few days.
I don't know whether she is or should be allowed to speak or not, I am merely saying that she appointed me as her representative in this matter.
link to original post
You (and a few others) said things of Tasha/Nathan here including things that had to do with her actions after leaving this forum.
She asked me to represent her in this matter, and to that end I responded to Gordo's musings here.
Quote: gordonm888If someone on this forum posts (publicly) that a banned member, such as Nathan, has autism then it might be argued that this forum has some kind of obligation to allow her to return briefly for the purpose of defending herself.
link to original post
Wizard is gone for a short while, I don't know if in his absence his mods have the authority to rule on this sort of thing. Obviously if it is allowed, it has to be allowed with forum admin consent.
We certainly have precedent where it has been allowed. There was a nuked member from whom Wizard relayed a post in the past.
Quote: rsactuaryLet's leave it up to BBB to decide if a one time exception should be made.
Let's not.
Rule 16: "Messages from banned members: Do not quote anything, neither public nor private, a banned member has said. If we ban somebody it means we don't want to hear from them any longer."
The "moiuthpiece" or the "representative" of the damned be damned.
Quote: MrVQuote: rsactuaryLet's leave it up to BBB to decide if a one time exception should be made.
Let's not.
Rule 16: "Messages from banned members: Do not quote anything, neither public nor private, a banned member has said. If we ban somebody it means we don't want to hear from them any longer."
The "moiuthpiece" or the "representative" of the damned be damned.
link to original post
Unless I hear a compelling reason from another mod, this is already my default position.
Wizard's Prerogative, should he choose to exercise it, would be a compelling reason.
If trees may have standing, why not Nathan?
Regarding MDawg's statement that he is Nathan's representative:
MDawg:
1. Please make your statements and requests/ pleas to Wizard by PM. Wizard is gone for approximately one week; but simply "file your brief" with him on the Personal Message system.
2. If you continue to make public statements representing Nathan on this forum I will immediately suspend you for violation of Rule #16. Statements that represent Nathan should be made privately to Wizard, not publicly on this forum.
Warning to All Members
Until Wizard returns, any member making any further posts containing statements about Nathan and the autistic spectrum or any defamatory statement about Nathan at all will be immediately suspended.
Quote: MDawg
If trees may have standing, why not Nathan?
link to original post
If a tree violated the forum rules regarding multiple accounts, I'm unaware of it.
