Discussion about the Suspension List

Quote: JerryLogan

I agree 100%. Instead of all those long-winded, far-fetched, whiny face-saving attempts by mkl in the other thread, time and bandwidth could have been saved.

And we would have been rid of you, Jerry, far sooner than we will be (which is quite soon).

Quote: Wizard

You're one of many to say that. Maybe you're a faster learner than me, but day by day I'm getting closer to your position. I've often wondered if I were a real king, how would I rule? I'd like to think I would be a nice king, who loved his minions, and was quick to give the benefit of the doubt when discipline was in order. Imagine Mr. Rogers as king.

However, maybe such a king would lose respect and control. Maybe what we need here is a Saddam Hussein kind of toughness. An idea worth thinking about for 2011.

I think that the dividing line, if I were running a board like this, would be identifying those who are "trolling", and those who, however abrasive, are interested in carrying out real discussions. That would be my first triage. Then it would get a little fuzzier--I would have to balance others' reactions, and my own, as well as how substantive a contributor is otherwise, in deciding whether to suspend or ban a member. The ones who are simply name-calling and being abrasive without contributing anything would be next out the door (differentiating such persons, however, from those who are simply trying to incite arguments for their own sick pleasure).

I don't think Saddam Hussein was respected by anyone, even himself. Being an autocrat isn't the answer, although I can think of a couple of internet boards that were run exactly that way. For one thing, you lose the contributions of at least a certain number of people--if you had banned everyone who was nasty at one time or another on THIS board, there would only be two or three members remaining.

The one thing I think that you don't do, that you should have been doing, is to have a really short fuse regarding system hacks and those who simply don't want to acknowledge the math/the reality of how gambling works. Much of your websites' content is detailed explications and analyses of how gambling games work. Someone posting "info" on how they beat roulette or craps or video poker by sticking french fries up their nose, or dancing on one foot, or wearing their lucky purple thong, is basically contradicting all that information that you offer for free (which I appreciate very much BTW), and so should be given the bum's rush.

I am a minor poster at best, but I have to cast my vote in favor of running things with more discipline.

Take trolls like JerryLogan. His right to free speech doesn't mean you need to provide him a venue to insult people and air his outrageous racism. That has no place on a gambling website, it doesn't provide any benefit to anyone posting here. If he wants to post that sort of thing he can get a blog for free somewhere else. The big question is how many posters is he keeping away with the trolling? I would be worried that readers are leaving this website because they're looking for information, not one man's obsession with Chinese and bad breath.

Personally, I'm sure that Jerry gets much more satisfaction from trying to rile people up on this website than he gets from going to a casino. Regular posters shouldn't be spending the time and effort trying to respond to him, and I'd be surprised if his racism and personal attacks don't drive away lurkers who might one day be productive posters. The first thing I ever posted on this board was an innocent and earnest question. Jerry responded immediately by trashing my hotel plans, making fun of my bankroll, and later in the thread started getting racist. I ignored him because I'm used to trolls, and Jerry isn't doing anything new or inventive, but is that really the reception that we want new posters getting on this forum? Especially considering that this site draws a lot of people who might not be savvy enough to realize Jerry is, more likely than not, trolling for reactions.

I have a similar concern with the system sellers, especially all the recent discussion about Rob Singer. Like MKL noted, your sites are among the most highly thought of when it comes to understanding the mathematics of gambling. I owe almost everything I know to what was written here. This is important because most posters here are just beginning to understand how mathematics relate to casino gambling. When someone posts about a system, they are not posting because they have a genuine interest in discussing it. The Wizard knows this well considering the difficulty he has had with systems in the past. Every time you let someone post about their system outside of that particular forum it is a free advertisement. The only reason they are posting here is because they are hoping to catch the attention of someone who wants easy money. If you are uncomfortable with this forum being used as an advertising venue by the unscrupulous I would be extremely suspicious of anyone discussing systems. You help enable them to plant the seeds of doubt every time you entertain those discussions.

If it was up to me, I'd get rid of blatant racism/sexism/personal attacks and I'd ban individuals who posted about systems outside of the established forum (or delete the thread if they are doing it out of ignorance). A trash can is not a bad idea. Also MKL is on the mark when he says the main issue is trying to figure out who is earnestly posting and who is trolling. Giving the benefit of the doubt to an established poster is one thing, giving the benefit of the doubt to everyone who posts a contrary opinion is an open invitation for trouble. Even if it seems cruel, it is usually better to get rid of one bad poster if it gets everyone else talking about more constructive things.

Quote: touristlocal

Even if it seems cruel, it is usually better to get rid of one bad poster if it gets everyone else talking about more constructive things.

Great post. There is a very old saying that applies here. 'One rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel.' Think about it.

The best quote from my favorite documentary of all time, 'American Pimp':

'I don't have a heart like Hitler, but sometimes I have to pimp accordingly.'

Translation: PIMP ON WIZ! Smack these knuckleheads around!

I just thought of another reason I'm in favor of stricter forum controls, sorry to post again so soon. Thanks for the support Bob, I agree that what you said applies here.

This forum is free to view, everything being posted is available to anyone with access to a public computer. You really only have to register an account if you want to participate in discussions or ask questions. If someone is abusing that they don't loose much when you ban them. Everything that's being written is still there. The only people who would truly have to fear being banned are posters who are more interested in trolling and personal vendettas than the others topics being discussed on this site.

Granted there are community areas like the "free speech zone" which are more for entertainment than information, what I am saying might not apply there.

I think you merely have gone wrong in giving so many second chances.

You'll need to be able to check IP addresses and use that too.

Quote: Wizard

Maybe what we need here is a Saddam Hussein kind of toughness. An idea worth thinking about for 2011.

I am relatively new to this site as far as contributing. Back on July 8 I started a thread "Why is there so much hostility on this website? It received some interesting comments. What has changed from then to now to make you see the light regarding using a quick sword to rid this site of wastefull material?

I have very seldom seen two people agree to disagree on this site. Gamblers who stay on the right side of the bell curve make math geeks boil in anger. When someone comes on here to actually learn, insults abound but usually in a kind way like "you can't handle the truth!" So we have those who see everything in Black and White being mean to those with different visions. It is going to be difficult to weed out the true trolls from those who have high IQ's but effectively do the same work.

Quote: Wizard

You're one of many to say that. Maybe you're a faster learner than me, but day by day I'm getting closer to your position. I've often wondered if I were a real king, how would I rule? I'd like to think I would be a nice king, who loved his minions, and was quick to give the benefit of the doubt when discipline was in order. Imagine Mr. Rogers as king.

However, maybe such a king would lose respect and control. Maybe what we need here is a Saddam Hussein kind of toughness. An idea worth thinking about for 2011.

I think you would be a fair king, although the death penalty for running a 6:5 BJ game might be a bit harsh--10 years hard labor would be enough. roflmao


OK, jokes aside, the Saddam Hussein thing is a bit overboard. Instead, go with the model in "The Prince." For anyone out there who was never required to read it in school (count me in that group) there is one main part that makes the point. That is the question of if it is better to be liked or feared. As the book says, of course it would be best to be both, but that is rarely acheived on a large scale. And you must avoid getting to being hated and not feared or there will be revolution.

As a model leader, my suggestion is Col Potter from M*A*S*H. He was a fair leader and knew when to let nonsense go. But his people respected him and listened to him. Klinger had to pull KP or fill in potholes more than once when his antics went too far.

Oh, and thanks for the update board. Maybe suspensions could be migrated to an "announcements" section for those of us curious why a name is in brown when reading after a hard day at work.