Bad casino giveaways?
Quote: WizardofnothingFine then pm me your picture and if it's the same person I saw issue solved
WoN.. on a brighter note, are you still in AKAO?
-1Quote: RS+1
Quote: RS+1
-3
Quote: RSStrictly A hyPothetically, yes that would be quite interesting.
But WoN said something about feeling like he was getting tricked or falling into a trap.
Good one
Well, one, this is off topic and maybe I'll start another thread "Why people hiding behind aliases think its okay for someone else to reveal all" and MY point directed at the latest answer wasn't about that person specifically, just people in general.Quote: onenickelmiracleI think you're trying to oppress Nathan. Maybe this is feminism in your mind, but it's just controlling her to your beliefs. I'm not sure what Nathan has to lose, might even gain by being discovered and becoming a YouTube star. It's not ignorant at all, since her appearance became an issue. Wizard of nothing saw her, Nathan was not a man, and we're just curious what her face looks like. If she posts the same face Won saw, then we'll feel like we can trust her. Without her face, there will still be doubts it was just a royal con within a con within a con. I'm not interested in her name, she can keep that to herself.
I'm not going to waste any more of peoples time and thread space debating such a different and spacious topic.
And seriously, no one really believes it will be a real picture.
gl
Quote: WizardofnothingShe sent it and it 1000000 percent was. Not the person I saw
*hurls coffe, beats cat*
I'm fairly new here, so what is the forums sentiment concerning your credibility? Do you pay all your bets off quickly?Quote: WizardofnothingShe sent it and it 1000000 percent was. Not the person I saw
There's two people involved here, (behind aliases), are there credibility issues on both sides?
Just an observation.
There is always two sides to the stories.
And when you have 95% of the people with fake names and silly looking avatars, all this is ...
... is story-land.
And since I'm not adding anything constructive to the script, I'm just going to hang out behind the cameras at the cheese tables and watch the show.
gl all
Nobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.Quote: sammydvWell, one, this is off topic and maybe I'll start another thread "Why people hiding behind aliases think its okay for someone else to reveal all" and MY point directed at the latest answer wasn't about that person specifically, just people in general.
I'm not going to waste any more of peoples time and thread space debating such a different and spacious topic.
And seriously, no one really believes it will be a real picture.
gl
Not sure who you are (nor do I care who anyone, for the most part, is), Nathan, but talking strictly apout Florida and Gulfstream, this is all so great. Maybe Nathan got screwed over by somebody in a past life. o_O
Quote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Okay, this is the last time for me on this topic, or at least I'll try.
Guess what nickel? I don't believe either one of them for as far as I can throw them over a JoB 6-9 machine. Which also includes you and all of us storytellers. Which is the point you don't seem to be grasping.
Sorry if that little 2.1 Richter revelation shakes your jello.
But respectfully nothing personal.
gl
Quote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Bolded, above is clearly a personal insult. Nathan is not banned; however, the situation is such that I'm going to issue a warning to ONM rather than a suspension. This remains unresolved; the rules are still in place for all of us. Be careful how you discuss this, as this will be the only warning given. Thank you.
Quote: NathanI promise it was me that you saw at Gulfstream. Also in the picture I sent yoy, how old do I look?
You need to stop "promising" anything because you have no credibility left.
Quote: rsactuaryYou need to stop "promising" anything because you have no credibility left.
But he promised!
"Promise" the group that you'll be there, with rings on your fingers and bells in your bag.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Bolded, above is clearly a personal insult. Nathan is not banned; however, the situation is such that I'm going to issue a warning to ONM rather than a suspension. This remains unresolved; the rules are still in place for all of us. Be careful how you discuss this, as this will be the only warning given. Thank you.
So just to be clear it is fact that the rules of this forum are just the opinion of the highest ranking bar
member in the room, is it not?
Quote: onenickelmiracleThere are multiple realities clashing. Eventually one reality will prevail.
I think you already nailed it.
Quote: rainmanQuote: beachbumbabsQuote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Bolded, above is clearly a personal insult. Nathan is not banned; however, the situation is such that I'm going to issue a warning to ONM rather than a suspension. This remains unresolved; the rules are still in place for all of us. Be careful how you discuss this, as this will be the only warning given. Thank you.
So just to be clear it is fact that the rules of this forum are just the opinion of the highest ranking bar
member in the room, is it not?
No.
Not clear.
Not fact.
Show me where, besides strong circumstantial evidence that in itself is not yet conclusive, Nathan broke forum rules, and I'll ban them. As far as ONM, I believe he was provoked, and what he said could still be proven to be a statement of fact, so my warning short of suspension seemed the fairest course of action.
These things are not black and white.
1.) Demanding of Nathan to disclose a picture, ID that says, 'Karen,' 'Nathan,' 'Nathaniel,' or anything else is completely outside of the realm of what any Member on this board has the right to demand of any other Member.
2.) Nathan has not been proven to be Kentry, Dean or any other poster, so ALL accusations of Multiple Accounts need to cease and desist immediately. I know that has already been said, but I am reiterating it. If we (as Administrators) had any proof of same, Nathan would be gone and we would not be having this conversation.
3.) There should be no further accusing Nathan of being a Troll, a liar or of having no credibility. There are a few true statements, it strongly appears that Nathan misled the board about that one promotion and that Nathan misled the board, and WoN, as to her gender. It also appears that Nathan dodged answering as to his or her gender when WoN was there to meet her.
4.) WoN posted proof that he was at Gulfstream at the appointed time on the appointed day and Nathan did not. However, whether or not Nathan is a, 'Real person,' who was actually there is, at this point, inconclusive.
5.) There is the matter of the gift card, which I completely abstain from having anything to do with unless one or both parties directly ask me to mediate. However, if they do ask this, then I am going to propose a resolution to the entire matter that they may or may not like, provided they BOTH agree to my mediating it.
6. )Finally, if you think Nathan is a Troll or is not credible, then I would suggest that you use the, 'Ignore,' feature rather than keep this thread (and others) going by continuing to address someone you believe to not be credible.
What I want to see is this matter closed between WoN and Nathan which will be followed immediately by this thread being closed. I'm not going to stop anyone, but there is really little to no reason for anyone other than Nathan, WoN and any agreed upon appointed mediator to participate in this thread.
Not even that, actually, the mediation should be private, at this point, with only a result of, 'Resolved,' or 'Unresolved,' to be announced in this thread.
Quote: Mission146I'm going to jump in really quick with some things that are Black & White, just so we can ALL come to an agreement on a few fundamental things:
1.) Demanding of Nathan to disclose a picture, ID that says, 'Karen,' 'Nathan,' 'Nathaniel,' or anything else is completely outside of the realm of what any Member on this board has the right to demand of any other Member.
2.) Nathan has not been proven to be Kentry, Dean or any other poster, so ALL accusations of Multiple Accounts need to cease and desist immediately. I know that has already been said, but I am reiterating it. If we (as Administrators) had any proof of same, Nathan would be gone and we would not be having this conversation.
3.) There should be no further accusing Nathan of being a Troll, a liar or of having no credibility. There are a few true statements, it strongly appears that Nathan misled the board about that one promotion and that Nathan misled the board, and WoN, as to her gender. It also appears that Nathan dodged answering as to his or her gender when WoN was there to meet her.
4.) WoN posted proof that he was at Gulfstream at the appointed time on the appointed day and Nathan did not. However, whether or not Nathan is a, 'Real person,' who was actually there is, at this point, inconclusive.
5.) There is the matter of the gift card, which I completely abstain from having anything to do with unless one or both parties directly ask me to mediate. However, if they do ask this, then I am going to propose a resolution to the entire matter that they may or may not like, provided they BOTH agree to my mediating it.
6. )Finally, if you think Nathan is a Troll or is not credible, then I would suggest that you use the, 'Ignore,' feature rather than keep this thread (and others) going by continuing to address someone you believe to not be credible.
What I want to see is this matter closed between WoN and Nathan which will be followed immediately by this thread being closed. I'm not going to stop anyone, but there is really little to no reason for anyone other than Nathan, WoN and any agreed upon appointed mediator to participate in this thread.
Not even that, actually, the mediation should be private, at this point, with only a result of, 'Resolved,' or 'Unresolved,' to be announced in this thread.
Well said. Thanks.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: rainmanQuote: beachbumbabsQuote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Bolded, above is clearly a personal insult. Nathan is not banned; however, the situation is such that I'm going to issue a warning to ONM rather than a suspension. This remains unresolved; the rules are still in place for all of us. Be careful how you discuss this, as this will be the only warning given. Thank you.
So just to be clear it is fact that the rules of this forum are just the opinion of the highest ranking bar
member in the room, is it not?
No.
Not clear.
Not fact.
Show me where, besides strong circumstantial evidence that in itself is not yet conclusive, Nathan broke forum rules, and I'll ban them. As far as ONM, I believe he was provoked, and what he said could still be proven to be a statement of fact, so my warning short of suspension seemed the fairest course of action.
These things are not black and white.
Please understand this is not personal I have no axe to grind with you or anyone else.
My issue is with authority.
ONM has clearly violated the rules making accusations & calling Nathan names ( "Thats black & White") you then proceeded
to justify this saying Nathan may be guilty of those accusations so its okay. So your opinion is Nathan is guilty until proven
innocent. I see you follow the way of the American judicial system. :)
Fact; you chose to make a very clear situation grey by interjecting your opinions.
When it comes to crime and punishment I only deal in facts.
Perhaps Nathan is and has done all those things accused but it has yet to be proven
so any and all transgressions against should be dealt with impartially with facts &
evidence not opinion.
Quote: rainmanQuote: beachbumbabsQuote: rainmanQuote: beachbumbabsQuote: onenickelmiracleNobody cares who you are or who I am. Nathan is a special case because of the story going on in this thread. There's really no way to solve the mystery of Nathan without something extraordinary. Nathan is pretty much a conartist lying troll. If Wizardofnothing would want, he could even have this person pretending to be Nathan arrested. It's very possible he or she was never at the casino and is trying to defraud him, for money. It would be fine if he/she was there, not illegal, but if he/she wasn't there, not fine.
Bolded, above is clearly a personal insult. Nathan is not banned; however, the situation is such that I'm going to issue a warning to ONM rather than a suspension. This remains unresolved; the rules are still in place for all of us. Be careful how you discuss this, as this will be the only warning given. Thank you.
So just to be clear it is fact that the rules of this forum are just the opinion of the highest ranking bar
member in the room, is it not?
No.
Not clear.
Not fact.
Show me where, besides strong circumstantial evidence that in itself is not yet conclusive, Nathan broke forum rules, and I'll ban them. As far as ONM, I believe he was provoked, and what he said could still be proven to be a statement of fact, so my warning short of suspension seemed the fairest course of action.
These things are not black and white.
Please understand this is not personal I have no axe to grind with you or anyone else.
My issue is with authority.
ONM has clearly violated the rules making accusations & calling Nathan names ( "Thats black & White") you then proceeded
to justify this saying Nathan may be guilty of those accusations so its okay. So your opinion is Nathan is guilty until proven
innocent. I see you follow the way of the American judicial system. :)
Fact; you chose to make a very clear situation grey by interjecting your opinions.
When it comes to crime and punishment I only deal in facts.
Perhaps Nathan is and has done all those things accused but it has yet to be proven
so any and all transgressions against should be dealt with impartially with facts &
evidence not opinion.
Your point is well taken. Thank you. I am standing by the decision I made. Any further insults, intended or not (ONM believed he was making a statement of fact, elucidated in his earlier posts and verified after mine), will result in suspension. Otherwise, please see what Mission said above.
Anyone want to talk about bad casino giveaways? The worst giveaway is "Get 12 pack of Pepsi for 25 points!" 25 points is equal to $125 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $125 for a $5 12 case of Pepsi? And I still think that one of the worst casino giveaways was the "Earn 10 points, get umbrella!" 10 points is equal to $50 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $50 for a $6 umbrella?
Quote: rsactuaryI have blocked Nathan.
Rather than add a few more to these 400 posts in an attempt to impose your will and take from others, you decided to solve the entirety of your problems yourself and pushed one button?
I've a sidebar, one of those curious questions that has little purpose, but that I can't let go...
WoN,
You're a self-professed AP who, by my interpretation, makes 6 figures bouncing across the country knocking over shops. Perhaps that's my ignorance, as I obviously don't know how many irons you got in the fire, but based on what you've offered, it seems a pretty lucrative gig for you.
Nathan, while perhaps posting false information, hasn't scammed nor attempted to scam people, failed to pay a debt, or otherwise caused any harm to any other member except the opinionated charge of "being annoying", at least as far as I can tell.
So why, in such a high profile site with plenty of admitted and who knows how many surreptitious casino employees on the rolls, would you declare exactly what casino, what time, and exact location of where you'd be? I can't think of a single AP here who doesn't go to some if not great length to maintain their anonymity and identity, yet you put out a beacon broadcast for anyone who'd care to positively identify you. All to prove..... an anonymous poster wasn't who they pretended to be, and a $100 offer that was too good to be true wasn't true?
It doesn't make much sense. Or any, if I'm honest. You of course don't have to answer, but the curiosity is quite nagging.
Quote: FaceRather than add a few more to these 400 posts in an attempt to impose your will and take from others, you decided to solve the entirety of your problems yourself and pushed one button?
I've a sidebar, one of those curious questions that has little purpose, but that I can't let go...
WoN,
You're a self-professed AP who, by my interpretation, makes 6 figures bouncing across the country knocking over shops. Perhaps that's my ignorance, as I obviously don't know how many irons you got in the fire, but based on what you've offered, it seems a pretty lucrative gig for you.
Nathan, while perhaps posting false information, hasn't scammed nor attempted to scam people, failed to pay a debt, or otherwise caused any harm to any other member except the opinionated charge of "being annoying", at least as far as I can tell.
So why, in such a high profile site with plenty of admitted and who knows how many surreptitious casino employees on the rolls, would you declare exactly what casino, what time, and exact location of where you'd be? I can't think of a single AP here who doesn't go to some if not great length to maintain their anonymity and identity, yet you put out a beacon broadcast for anyone who'd care to positively identify you. All to prove..... an anonymous poster wasn't who they pretended to be, and a $100 offer that was too good to be true wasn't true?
It doesn't make much sense. Or any, if I'm honest. You of course don't have to answer, but the curiosity is quite nagging.
First off face- you are assuming that I was there and by myself
Secondly I am. Not working as hard as I use to- I have others working. So yes I am primarily in Florida.
I don't card count, I play rated and most of my plays the casino allows and encourages so I'm really not trying to protect the way a known card counter would - but regardless I'm happy to discuss this with you via pm or textbit rather not put more out there - disclosing I was at gulfstream is not that big I a deal - but I don't put plays in the forum
Quote: NathanI personally think this thread needs a U-turn back into what it was meant to be in the first place. A place to talk about bad casino giveaways.
Anyone want to talk about bad casino giveaways? The worst giveaway is "Get 12 pack of Pepsi for 25 points!" 25 points is equal to $125 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $125 for a $5 12 case of Pepsi? And I still think that one of the worst casino giveaways was the "Earn 10 points, get umbrella!" 10 points is equal to $50 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $50 for a $6 umbrella?
Okay, so you make $125 in wagers and they give you something that retails for $3.99-$4.99 for free and you keep the points. Not a great promotion, not bad, it is something more than you are getting if the promotion didn't exist.
$5 is 4% of $125, normally I would take a person's recognition of that for granted, but you seem confused by the fact that 4% of a particular amount is better than nothing, so I thought I would state it. Based on your retail value of $5, the casino is giving you an item back worth 4% of your coin-in. It's only no good if you ascribe $0.00 value to the Pepsi, which I do, unless I can find someone that wants it.
Most people that go to the casino are going to cycle at least $125, anyway, so for them, it's really a question of whether or not they want to wait for the Pepsi.
$6 is more than 10% of $50. Same concept. Even better, unless the value of the umbrella is $0.00 to the person. It also depends on whether or not you want to wait in line for the umbrella.
Again, most people are not going to cycle less than $50 when they go to a casino, anyway.
These are the types of nonsensical posts that get you labeled as a, 'Troll,' which I admit, is a possibility. If you are not a Troll, then you clearly know almost nothing about gambling, but there's nothing wrong with that. I would suggest you read the sites and learn stuff, post when you have a question, and only then in threads that are already going.
Now, if anyone else wants to discuss bad promotions, feel free.
Why don't you just forfeit a claim to the gift cards? Bada bing, bada boom, done.Quote: NathanSorry Mission. I am just trying to get this highly derailed train back on track. :)
Quote: onenickelmiracleIWhy don't you just forfeit a claim to the gift cards? Bada bing, bada boom, done.
The matter is between Nathan and WoN and would be better discussed via PM, with Mediation by either myself, BBB or Face if there is agreement by the parties.
Quote: NathanI personally think this thread needs a U-turn back into what it was meant to be in the first place. A place to talk about bad casino giveaways.
Anyone want to talk about bad casino giveaways? The worst giveaway is "Get 12 pack of Pepsi for 25 points!" 25 points is equal to $125 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $125 for a $5 12 case of Pepsi? And I still think that one of the worst casino giveaways was the "Earn 10 points, get umbrella!" 10 points is equal to $50 coin in. Really? Who would want to cycle $50 for a $6 umbrella?
Oh great, now you're trolling me. Hahha, jk. For pepsi addicts like me that is an awesome promo
Obviously, I'm clearly not a player card person and not grasping this lingo about 'cycling' and 'coin in' so let me ask in my own way to help me understand things.Quote: Mission146Most people that go to the casino are going to cycle at least $125, anyway, so for them, it's really a question of whether or not they want to wait for the Pepsi.
I bring 125.00 to the casino, using a card, play all over the casino, insert at least the $125.00 minimum worth of plays and yet win 225, thus I think I'm up a 100 bucks, THEN I can still qualify for the pepsi or cigars or whatever?
Do I need to leave 125.00, as in LOSE that much in my session, in the casino, or just play up to 125.00 in pulls. Of course, I can win or lose any amount?
thanks.
It's kind of a dumb promotion as in a 12 pack of soda won't really draw anyone to the casino but will cost the casino a little bit to the 800 people that were already going to gamble that day anyway. They probably get soda dirt cheap if they have free soda machines already. But still sounds like rank amateurs on the marketing and promotions team.
Do the numbers make it more official? (-;Quote: Mission146I'm going to jump in really quick with some things that are Black & White, just so we can ALL come to an agreement on a few fundamental things:
1.) Demanding of Nathan to disclose a picture, ID that says, 'Karen,' 'Nathan,' 'Nathaniel,' or anything else is completely outside of the realm of what any Member on this board has the right to demand of any other Member.
2.) Nathan has not been proven to be Kentry, Dean or any other poster, so ALL accusations of Multiple Accounts need to cease and desist immediately. I know that has already been said, but I am reiterating it. If we (as Administrators) had any proof of same, Nathan would be gone and we would not be having this conversation.
3.) There should be no further accusing Nathan of being a Troll, a liar or of having no credibility. There are a few true statements, it strongly appears that Nathan misled the board about that one promotion and that Nathan misled the board, and WoN, as to her gender. It also appears that Nathan dodged answering as to his or her gender when WoN was there to meet her.
4.) WoN posted proof that he was at Gulfstream at the appointed time on the appointed day and Nathan did not. However, whether or not Nathan is a, 'Real person,' who was actually there is, at this point, inconclusive.
5.) There is the matter of the gift card, which I completely abstain from having anything to do with unless one or both parties directly ask me to mediate. However, if they do ask this, then I am going to propose a resolution to the entire matter that they may or may not like, provided they BOTH agree to my mediating it.
6. )Finally, if you think Nathan is a Troll or is not credible, then I would suggest that you use the, 'Ignore,' feature rather than keep this thread (and others) going by continuing to address someone you believe to not be credible.
What I want to see is this matter closed between WoN and Nathan which will be followed immediately by this thread being closed. I'm not going to stop anyone, but there is really little to no reason for anyone other than Nathan, WoN and any agreed upon appointed mediator to participate in this thread.
Not even that, actually, the mediation should be private, at this point, with only a result of, 'Resolved,' or 'Unresolved,' to be announced in this thread.
I hope the criticisms and discussion on that other WOV outcast forum isn't affecting any decision making or what anyone does or says here.
1.) We as members of this forum can demand anything we want from him/her. He/she doesn't have to comply. He/she would have to do something in order to redeem his/herself in the eyes of the many forum members. OK, not really, It's not like there is/was really anything to redeem. No one really cares, well maybe WON does(he's just pissed it was NOT a big strong man (-; ).
The only reason why anyone ever paid attention to "guys" like Nathan, Kentry, Dean etc, was purely for the comedy and entertainment of how dumb someone could act (I still laugh at the haircut ass kicking saga, it was priceless). Half the fun was trying to figure out if this person was for real or just a troll, finding little hints indicating that they were all the same people and then pointing them out.
2.) 99.99% proof isn't enough? IIRC even BBB said the evidence was very strong. IIRC when Face banned some of B79's aliases there was not 100% proof, he just had enough good evidence regarding general locations and whatnot. I can only imagine you mods can see some fairy convincing evidence that go beyond any reasonable doubt. Obviously this has not risen to the b79 level. I'm not even rallying for his/her banning. I would just prefer he/she have only one account and keep most of her/his posts in one or two threads. I suggest he/she gets a blog here and that would solve a bunch of issues.
3.) As long as Nathan keeps making new threads and posting as if nothing happened, people are never going to completely let it go, they will just hide their insults better. If you start moderating innuendos, it's going to get very messy.
4.) Unless bots have come along way, of course Nathan IS a real person. The question is.... how many accounts has he/she made, and is she/he just making everything up, or is he/she really that_________? I'm not buying the innocent act she/he is putting on. He/she is up to something, what it is, I dont know. Perhaps she/he is just looking for a man who enjoys slotting.
5.) WON should Just pay it. If Nathan accepts the gift card for himself I will highly suspect he/she is some low level scum bucket slime ball scammer who needs it. Since she/he went out her/his way to deceive everyone she/he should do just that.
6.) Why do you want to close this tread? Why does this need to be negotiated in private? There is nothing really to be negotiated. Its a $100 Gift card for FK sake. Either he/she gets it to do as she/he pleases or not. If she/he needs it that bad just give it out of pity. Nathan said it was the principal of it? How f!#/ed up is that for her/him to say?
(Mod note. Axel, you made it to the last sentence, and then....must be your auto correct, right? Lol...masked.
Fwiw, this has been mostly on me, though I'm glad to see Face and Mission in the thread. Both parties have asked me for help, and I'm willing to moderate if it's necessary, though I don't think it is. They're both right there in Miami area. Pass the card on and be done with it. BBB )
I see, thanks. So basically a promotion is to in some respects depending on how simple the mind, 'encourage' a person to try and bet more than they would normally.Quote: GWAEIf you play a slot for $1 a spin you have to spin 125 times. Your results are meaningless. After your 125 spins you go get your pop.
I also see some of the reasoning of the original posters points, if one loses 25.00 while running the spins, and you get the $5 pop, it's fairly logical to think you just paid 25 bucks for a six pack of pop. Obviously, the casino is taking the loss risk on the pop, hoping you are in the losing bracket.
But you may or may not have played that much in the first place. I just wanted to be sure the casino was not asking you to LOSE 125.00 up front before giving you the promotion. It's getting clearer now.
The casinos are very much like the old green stamps, where one had to buy 10,000 dollars worth of groceries just to turn in the stamps for a garlic press.
Thank you BT, I read that after I posted, that also helps.Quote: BTLWIWin or lose, $125 in pulls is what you need - also called coin in.
It's kind of a dumb promotion as in a 12 pack of soda won't really draw anyone to the casino but will cost the casino a little bit to the 800 people that were already going to gamble that day anyway. They probably get soda dirt cheap if they have free soda machines already. But still sounds like rank amateurs on the marketing and promotions team.
Maybe I should check for promotions before I go from now on. I like pepsi.
Quote: Wizardofnothing
First off face- you are assuming that I was there and by myself
Secondly I am. Not working as hard as I use to- I have others working. So yes I am primarily in Florida.
I don't card count, I play rated and most of my plays the casino allows and encourages so I'm really not trying to protect the way a known card counter would - but regardless I'm happy to discuss this with you via pm or textbit rather not put more out there - disclosing I was at gulfstream is not that big I a deal - but I don't put plays in the forum
No, no, not asking for details that could reveal plays. I was more curious as to the motives that would allow for identifying yourself to casino personnel.
And you're right, I pretty much assumed you were wandering around the bank yourself, face buried in a cell phone. That's why it struck me as odd, and planted the curiosity.
Over the years there have been lots of Pepsi give-a-ways(some where it was extremely easy to get). I always wondered if Pepsi just gave the casino all the that free soda knowing(or with an agreement) the casino would heavily advertise the promotion, in turn that would help advertise Pepsi. Pepsi gets free marketing and advertising at a much lower cost.Quote: BTLWIWin or lose, $125 in pulls is what you need - also called coin in.
It's kind of a dumb promotion as in a 12 pack of soda won't really draw anyone to the casino but will cost the casino a little bit to the 800 people that were already going to gamble that day anyway. They probably get soda dirt cheap if they have free soda machines already. But still sounds like rank amateurs on the marketing and promotions team.
Quote: MaxPen
Nope, hang in there
Quote: AxelWolfD
I hope the criticisms and discussion on that other WOV outcast forum isn't affecting any decision making or what anyone does or says here.
I'm not at all concerned about the other Forum. My point is that all of this is between WoN and Nathan, and a Mediator (f they so choose) at this point. There was a certain $100 Macy's Gift Card that WoN offered to give Nathan if Nathan could prove she was a real person by meeting him at the casino at an appointed date and an appointed time. WoN was definitely at said casino and has plenty of documented proof of same, Nathan was...quite possibly, perhaps probably...at the casino, but has no proof.
While still at the casino WoN asked Nathan for Nathan's gender, and Nathan did not answer said question until after WoN had already left the casino, as I understand it. Also, as I understand it, if Nathan had posted back and said, 'Female,' WoN would have approached Nathan. Presumably, the gift card would have been given with no issues.
Quote:1.) We as members of this forum can demand anything we want from him/her. He/she doesn't have to comply. He/she would have to do something in order to redeem his/herself in the eyes of the many forum members. OK, not really, It's not like there is/was really anything to redeem. No one really cares, well maybe WON does(he's just pissed it was NOT a big strong man (-; ).
The only reason why anyone ever paid attention to "guys" like Nathan, Kentry, Dean etc, was purely for the comedy and entertainment of how dumb someone could act (I still laugh at the haircut ass kicking saga, it was priceless). Half the fun was trying to figure out if this person was for real or just a troll, finding little hints indicating that they were all the same people and then pointing them out.
I suppose anyone can technically demand whatever they want, but whether or not they can do it reasonably is another matter. I'm not going to demand a person put a picture of himself/herself up on here unless I have done the same, and not even then.
I don't think there is any, 'Fun,' in making 17,245 posts about someone being a Troll or Sock when it cannot be proven to the satisfaction of the Administrators of the Board (myself included) that the person is either of those things. If such an accusation must be made, then it should be made by PM to the Administrators in the first place lest it constitute Personal Insult.
The reason why is because it essentially (at least in terms of Socks) demands that the person prove a negative. How could Nathan prove that she is not Kentry? How could you prove you are not Kentry? How could I prove I am not Kentry?
The answer is that nobody can prove that they are not Kentry and, when it comes to banning for multi-accounting, circumstantial evidence (subject matter, writing styles) in and of itself does not cut the mustard.
For instance, Krava has also been accused of being Nathan and Kentry and I am as close to 100% sure as anyone could ever be that Krava is neither of those people. However, it still cannot be proven.
So, some people might have fun with the whole thing and that's all well and fine, but it's not fair to the person being accused and it is outright annoying to most of us, including us Administrators who have to try to enforce the Rules of the Board including those being broken by openly accusing someone of Trolling or being a Sock.
In fact, actions such as those also make it more difficult to Nuke someone because it then looks like we are Nuking on demand, which is certainly not the goal. That would mean that any number of Members could merely accuse anyone new of being a sock and then the expectation would be we Nuke them, but I don't want to do that (obviously) I want to have a welcoming atmosphere for new Members. Dragging crap like this out, in general, and especially into multiple threads, doesn't do that. It makes it an unwelcoming atmosphere for anyone.
Quote:2.) 99.99% proof isn't enough? IIRC even BBB said the evidence was very strong. IIRC when Face banned some of B79's aliases there was not 100% proof, he just had enough good evidence regarding general locations and whatnot. I can only imagine you mods can see some fairy convincing evidence that go beyond any reasonable doubt. Obviously this has not risen to the b79 level. I'm not even rallying for his/her banning. I would just prefer he/she have only one account and keep most of her/his posts in one or two threads. I suggest he/she gets a blog here and that would solve a bunch of issues.
I have not found any evidence, in this case, that goes 100% beyond a reasonable doubt. If I had, then I would have Nuked Nathan already.
I think we all agree that Nathan has created threads of varying quality, and I recently Locked a non-gambling thread of Nathan's due to the fact that there are two existing threads that would have been appropriate for the subject matter. When it comes to gambling-related posts, then that's going to be a pretty high standard to Nuke a gambling-related post, especially if there are no active threads that obviously consist of the subject matter of the post.
Quote:3.) As long as Nathan keeps making new threads and posting as if nothing happened, people are never going to completely let it go, they will just hide their insults better. If you start moderating innuendos, it's going to get very messy.
Nathan has been Suspended, previously, one week for Trolling. The next Suspension, for most reasons, would likely be two weeks. That would be followed by a month, then either ninety days or a Nuke. There are some offenses that would result in an immediate Nuke.
Beyond that, Nathan should have the same protection of the Rules that any other poster enjoys. If it gets messy beyond that, then it gets messy.
Quote:4.) Unless bots have come along way, of course Nathan IS a real person. The question is.... how many accounts has he/she made, and is she/he just making everything up, or is he/she really that_________? I'm not buying the innocent act she/he is putting on. He/she is up to something, what it is, I dont know. Perhaps she/he is just looking for a man who enjoys slotting.
The question is one of, "Who was actually there," as in, at GulfStream that day. Other than that, it's a very simple equation, either Nathan violates a Rule or Nathan does not.
Quote:5.) WON should Just pay it. If Nathan accepts the gift card for himself I will highly suspect he/she is some low level scum bucket slime ball scammer who needs it. Since she/he went out her/his way to deceive everyone she/he should do just that.
Tough to say, Nathan would already have the gift card had she made herself known as a female before WoN left the casino.
Quote:6.) Why do you want to close this tread? Why does this need to be negotiated in private? There is nothing really to be negotiated. Its a $100 Gift card for FK sake. Either he/she gets it to do as she/he pleases or not. If she/he needs it that bad just give it out of pity. Nathan said it was the principal of it? How fucked up is that for her/him to say?
I want an agreement to be reached as to the gift card and I want us to move on (as a Forum) from this subject matter and to something that could possibly be mistaken for being gambling-related. It should be negotiated in private because it is now Nathan and WoN's business and any potential Mediator.
This whole thing has also publicly jumped the shark, anyway, with demands for people to produce pictures of themselves and everything else. None of these things have anything to do with the goals or purpose of this Forum.
Quote: AxelWolfOver the years there have been lots of Pepsi give-a-ways(some where it was extremely easy to get). I always wondered if Pepsi just gave the casino all the that free soda knowing(or with an agreement) the casino would heavily advertise the promotion, in turn that would help advertise Pepsi. Pepsi gets free marketing and advertising at a much lower cost.
That wouldn't surprise me. Typically not twelve-packs, but at several events and venues soda companies have given away smaller units of their product freely.
