Discussion about the Suspension List
Quote: rxwineYou're caught up in some altercation with another member? Amazing. Wonder why that happens? Nobody can figure it out? Just another mystery.
Nope, it's a perceived altercation, not a real one. And you obviously didn't read my previous posts in this thread. (As usual)
Quote: miplet1. click on their name.
2. change the word member to block in url.
Ingenious! Thank you.
Ummm, let's see, gotta unblock Miplet now [g]
LOL....I was just busting your balls.Quote: Beethoven9thI didn't run him off though. In fact, he was almost begging to meet me (multiple times!) only just a few weeks ago. Here's a sample:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/blackjack/16164-viva-ace-vega/4/#post300043
And here was my initial reply from earlier:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/3853-discussion-about-the-suspension-list/194/#post311911
Read my post concerning this, obviously he has some issues.
BTW the links you provided were far from begging. perhaps I missed some prior posts.
OK, cool.....I misunderstood. (Sorry)Quote: AxelWolfLOL....I was just busting your balls.
Read my post concerning this, obviously he has some issues.
I only linked to one of his posts, but he did ask me multiple times to meet up with him even though I kept telling him no. (I didn't feel like sifting through all of his messages to find them. I figured one would be enough to show that he did a complete 180 over the past few weeks.)Quote: AxelWolfBTW the links you provided were far from begging. perhaps I missed some prior posts.
Quote: Beethoven9thI figured one would be enough to show that he did a complete 180 over the past few weeks.)
Not so much for those they stay out of the politic stuff. But if he asked you to meet multiple times leading up the nuggets challenge, it is odd. Because unless you were on the fence about going for the challenge, it's pretty moot. As for myself, I'd liked to have went, but I knew I wasn't going to make it.
This should be your first clue there is something wrong with your viewpoint. If you must always be putting labels on people calling them liberals, you're covering for your insecurities trying to avoid your weaknesses. Avoid this.Quote: chickenmanToo much drama with this guy. Gr8hoven9th smacks every lib about their nonsensical and unsupportable positions. They gotta have thicker skin than that to stand up for themselves on the Internet. Or, as was mentioned, block the individuals and/or threads that bother you and go on with life...
People come to reality. You have to live your beliefs and not make excuses and exceptions. In politics, Republicans have preached tax cuts and bumped spending, but when a Democrat is In charge, they're innocent and it's dirty liberals spending the credit card to blame. The point is to play these games played here and everywhere else, you need to ignore the facts to win these pretend battles of good versus evil. These arguments on politics are not much better than a Jerry Springer brawl and are as just as fake. Simplicity of the ideas you see is just an illusion most of the time. It's why people don't just respond with you're right and I'm wrong.
Personally I think the arguments wind up being one side miscategorizing the facts the same as saying one bird plus three eggs equals four birds then each side does the same saying no three birds plus an egg equals four birds. Say, you're not a moron watching pro wrestling into your twenties and beyond, but you do with the politics still. I've been everywhere with the political spectrum and can say the only view which is correct is reality. Reality is this politics of red versus blue is a total sham and is the same but pulled off better than wrestling with disagreements perfectly chosen to keep people distracted.
Instead of calling people a liberal, next time ask yourself, is it possible I'm really whom the idiot is?
Quote: onenickelmiracleInstead of calling people a liberal, next time ask yourself, is it possible I'm really whom the idiot is?
The quitter labeled himself as a 'liberal'.
Quote: tringlomaneBut if he asked you to meet multiple times leading up the nuggets challenge, it is odd.
I agree. It was very odd considering that I made it clear I wasn't going. It's also very strange how he was so eager to meet me one day, and then a few weeks later, I'm Attila the Hun. Oh well, no loss at all.
Quote: onenickelmiracleThis should be your first clue there is something wrong with your viewpoint. If you must always be putting labels on people calling them liberals, you're covering for your insecurities trying to avoid your weaknesses. Avoid this.
Instead of calling people a liberal, next time ask yourself, is it possible I'm really whom the idiot is?
Oh, thanx sooooo much for the homily. I'll try to improve...;-)
But a couple of points since you obviously missed them:
1. Was just stating what should be held as a fact by even the most cursory readings, 9th busts the chops of every lib poster on the board. Ed wimped out dramatically rather than manning up.
2. People's viewpoints label them, not I. Plus, he explicitly held hisownself out as a lib.
Ask yourself the question as I am not an idiot so I don't appreciate that backhanded attack here. BTW, "whom" is not used correctly in your post :P
Quote: mickeycrimmI had broken a promise made to myself after my first suspension. I promised myself I would not go around my laptop when drinking. I've taken two months off through the holidays and slipped into drinking more than I should, and making internet posts while drunk. I broke my promise to myself. If you can dish it out you have to be able to take it. I don't blame anyone else but myself for my suspensions. I deserved what I got. I'm a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde type. I suffer from "ten foot tall and bullet proof" syndrome when I get drunk. My middle of the night posts do not contribute anything to the furtherance of gambling knowledge, strategy. They are nothing but the ignorant blabberings of a drunken egotistical maniac. I apologize to anyone I may have offended. All I can do is start over and see if I can keep this promise to myself.
Mickey - Welcome back. No need to apologize to me, I didn't see any harm in what you wrote. I'm looking forward to reading more about your life experiences, I find them both entertaining and educational.
Godless swine, can you even comprehend it doesn't matter? Do you read my sarcasm? These ideologies aren't sold on what's best, it's based on what people will BUY.Quote: Beethoven9thThe quitter labeled himself as a 'liberal'.
Quote: EvenBobThe pic is already posted elsewhere on the forum, should
I take it down also? Give me a break.
That's not even close to what I wrote. Give me a break.
The picture that was posted occurred when he was an active member of the forum, and it happened at an event where other forum members were present. The photo had a positive connotation associated with it. If he wanted the photo pulled then, all he had to do was ask.
Contrast that to the same photo you republished in this thread. The conversation here was in a negative context, and he is no longer a member here. So he would not have a reasonable chance to request that it be taken down. And what purpose did it serve to republish the picture here? Perhaps a scarlet letter?
Quote: onenickelmiracleGodless swine, can you even comprehend it doesn't matter? Do you read my sarcasm?
Oh, then you're not very good at sarcasm. lol
Quote: Beethoven9thOh, then you're not very good at sarcasm. lol
+1000
Total bull. We both know liberal is a derogatory word. If you have the high ground, you don't need to stoop so low and it should be beneath you. As far as who or whom, I felt the use of whom was appropriate because "I" was the subject. It's so easy to screw up so you might be right. The real rule should be use who all the time and most will never know. I normally stay out of political discussions because it's just masterbatory, but you guys waste on it if you want. As seen on TV is almost always junk including the political theater.Quote: chickenmanOh, thanx sooooo much for the homily. I'll try to improve...;-)
But a couple of points since you obviously missed them:
1. Was just stating what should be held as a fact by even the most cursory readings, 9th busts the chops of every lib poster on the board. Ed wimped out dramatically rather than manning up.
2. People's viewpoints label them, not I. Plus, he explicitly held hisownself out as a lib.
Ask yourself the question as I am not an idiot so I don't appreciate that backhanded attack here. BTW, "whom" is not used correctly in your post :P
Quote: onenickelmiracleTotal bull. We both know liberal is a derogatory word. If you have the high ground, you don't need to stoop so low and it should be beneath you. As far as who or whom, I felt the use of whom was appropriate because "I" was the subject. It's so easy to screw up so you might be right. The real rule should be use who all the time and most will never know. I normally stay out of political discussions because it's just masterbatory, but you guys waste on it if you want. As seen on TV is almost always junk including the political theater.
Still missing the point but some do forever.
Actually, you ARE right about using "who" always because most don't know the usage and "whom" has to to be one of the usages most get wrong and it really sticks out when an objective pronoun is used in a subjective case.
Now, enough grammar: back to bashing the socialists...:-)
Quote: RaleighCrapsThat's not even close to what I wrote. Give me a break.
The picture that was posted occurred when he was an active member of the forum, and it happened at an event where other forum members were present. The photo had a positive connotation associated with it. If he wanted the photo pulled then, all he had to do was ask.
Contrast that to the same photo you republished in this thread. The conversation here was in a negative context, and he is no longer a member here. So he would not have a reasonable chance to request that it be taken down. And what purpose did it serve to republish the picture here? Perhaps a scarlet letter?
I believe terapined is still considered a member and therefore cannot be insulted without consequences. Be careful guys. I don't want to see anyone else leave.
Quote: onenickelmiracleTotal bull. We both know liberal is a derogatory word.
Only when used as such. Liberal is a fine word in many other contexts.
He's sensitive it seems and I do feel bad for him after realizing whom it was when Bob shared his pic.Quote: 1BBI believe terapined is still considered a member and therefore cannot be insulted without consequences. Be careful guys. I don't want to see anyone else leave.
Now, THATS funnyQuote: mickeycrimmI had broken a promise made to myself after my first suspension. I promised myself I would not go around my laptop when drinking. I've taken two months off through the holidays and slipped into drinking more than I should, and making internet posts while drunk. I broke my promise to myself. If you can dish it out you have to be able to take it. I don't blame anyone else but myself for my suspensions. I deserved what I got. I'm a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde type. I suffer from "ten foot tall and bullet proof" syndrome when I get drunk. My middle of the night posts do not contribute anything to the furtherance of gambling knowledge, strategy. They are nothing but the ignorant blabberings of a drunken egotistical maniac. I apologize to anyone I may have offended. All I can do is start over and see if I can keep this promise to myself.
When I disappear, they start advertising on milk cartons looking for me. Still when I stop posting I Don't make an announcement but some people do so others don't wonder. I guess it's really just part of the compulsion being unable to not post until they post about it.Quote: hook3670If you want to quit the forum and it is not a gambling addiction issue, you can just leave and never come back. I don't understand this falling on my sword please suspend me stuff. There are times I take a one-two week break without holding a press conference and I am sure nobody notices or really cares.
Quote: chickenman
1. Was just stating what should be held as a fact by even the most cursory readings, 9th busts the chops of every lib poster on the board.
bust (someone's) chops
1. To scold or insult someone.
Freudian. His defender could have used a word or phrase to indicate someone who only wins debates or argues well, not insults people and thus no other possible meaning. But could he hide what he was really thinking? Could he?
[...]
bust (someone's) chops
1. To scold or insult someone.
2. To disappoint or defeat someone.
3. To hold a building contractor to the letter of an agreement.
Source: The Free Dictionary
Quote: Beethoven9thLOL! Someone needs to read further down the list AND make non-lame links.
bust (someone's) chops
1. To scold or insult someone.
2. To disappoint or defeat someone.
3. To hold a building contractor to the letter of an agreement.
Source: The Free Dictionary
Yup, I said he could have picked a non-ambiguous choice. Just a Freudian slip probably on his part.
Number 2 choice is laughable, unless bobbing and weaving is defeating. Although you disappoint.
Quote: rxwineNumber 2 choice is laughable
Sorry, I'll take The Free Dictionary's word over yours.
Quote: Beethoven9thSorry, I'll take The Free Dictionary's word over yours.
Oh you'll be in one of those "non-altercations" again and again. Just a matter of time. And of course, it will be someone else's fault. lol.
Maybe I should facepalm too like a kiddie garter.
Am I trolling properly?
Quote: rxwineOh you'll be in one of those "non-altercations" again and again.
Yeah, probably with YOU. lol
Quote: GWAEthe varmenti and gr8 drama was so much more entertaining than this drama.
Where is Varmenti, anyway. He's never around when you
need him. Such clarity, such vision, and we forced him away.
Quote: Tim1492Could be a little more gracious instead of self righteous pricks.
doesn't rise to my definition of profanity. I think most folks 21 or over would say "prick" is a tame term. PG movies allow limited profanity, violence, and nudity.
http://www.mpaa.org/ratings/what-each-rating-means
Does anyone else have an opinion. I am glad to take this as free advice to watch my tone, but that seems a bit overly sensitive.
Upon reflection Tim 1492 might agree that he was given very valuable advice .
Quote: endermikeI think most folks 21 or over would say "prick" is a tame term.
It may not be as severe as an F-bomb, but I don't think it's "tame" either. Also, he directed his ire specifically at forum members, something which has gotten other members suspended as well.
That night at dinner, my dad was carrying on at me about something, and I said, "Quit being a prick."
And that is the reason I still remember it.
However my issue was with deeming it profanity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system#Language
I think it was not profanity, particularly in light this being a 21+ forum. Otherwise, rule #6 should be changed to "G level."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."
I think Tim was afraid he would misspell asswholes.
Quote: endermikeI'm not a prolific poster, so feel free to put me in my place, but I think Tim1492 may have caught a bit of a bum rap. 5 days seems steep to me. It may be that I'm just a crude person but
doesn't rise to my definition of profanity. I think most folks 21 or over would say "prick" is a tame term. PG movies allow limited profanity, violence, and nudity.
http://www.mpaa.org/ratings/what-each-rating-means
Does anyone else have an opinion. I am glad to take this as free advice to watch my tone, but that seems a bit overly sensitive.
Some members get away with much worse. That's a fact not an opinion. My opinion is that a guy who takes the time to join the forum and ask a question shouldn't end up suspended on his first day.
Quote: 1BBMy opinion is that a guy who takes the time to join the forum and ask a question shouldn't end up suspended on his first day.
If he breaks the rules, he should be.
Quote: sodawaterThe guy posted a negative-progression betting system as his first post. The forum rules say keep betting systems in the betting systems forum. Not only that, but then he reacts negatively and calls the people who took the time to tell him why he is wrong "pricks." If it were up to me, I'd ban him for life. What are the chances this type of poster becomes a valuable contributor? Next to none.
Agreed. There is no rule against betting system players posting but I wish they would take their business over to John Patrick's forum.
Quote: WizardJohn Patrick's forum.
Holy crap. I have never seen such a concentration of "thought."
I am now speechless...
Quote: endermikeHoly crap. I have never seen such a concentration of "thought."
..
Patrick's board has never been accused of thinking
before, they're flattered.
But that might include some of your VIP's. I don't really even know who JP is, other then people tossing around his nameQuote: WizardAgreed. There is no rule against betting system players posting but I wish they would take their business over to John Patrick's forum.
