We still might want to philosophize about how we treat these scumbagz, it might be helpful as group therapy.
I don't think its that difficult, and probably doesn't warrant a philosophical discussion.
If someone is an idiot in my house, they're no longer welcome in my house. Its not my role to rehabilitate him.
My moral compass is fine on this one. Ive told Mike via PM many times, under many different alias that if he simply was himself, a lowly wannabe micro grinder, people would accept him.
He didn't need to pretend to be someone he wasn't.
It appears his want to be a poker elite (which requires monies/skills he didnt have), led him to do something foolish.
Perhaps he was so disillusioned he thought it he could run the money up/pay it back with good intentions.
It is not true to say, he clearly had no chance here, it has been pointed out many times that both GTA and Mark have done their best to instigate and provoke him (and me, and others).
Here's the thing..
I've been a vocal anti-fed, and anti you. I don't think you should be here, and I don't think Fed should have been given the x'teenth chance he got. Mods disagreed, and I was vocal in my opinion on that call with them in PM's, posts, and IRL. But, I respect comp / bill and recognized I couldn't force them into anything.
However, I have, on more than one occasion, been chastised for / shamed if you will, not being very "Social work-y" in this regard (my field of employment is working with people who come into conflict with the law - by all means a "give them another chance" kinda guy). This seems like quite a "oh snap" comeback, but nobody seems to understand that someone like me also recognizes (and I'd like to think some of the other people in similar fields of teachers and such will agree) that there is a point where not only is a person not willing / able to make changes, but by giving chance after chance, you are enabling the negative behavior.
Did I "target" fed? In some people's eyes sure. But nobody saw me PMing him and Skype / FB chatting him trying to help him recognize when he was being "Fed-y" vs. being "Mike". I'm a dick, but only if you don't look hard enough.
For the TL: DR - I was sassed for being a social worker and not liking people, but it turns out I was right. Again.
Mark
P.S. Startles, I took a shot or two at you here.. but in all honesty, you're taking better care this time around. I appreciate that, and have said it twice now... but I think the worst advice in the world is "Forgive and Forget".
It appears his want to be a poker elite (which requires monies/skills he didnt have), led him to do something foolish.
Perhaps he was so disillusioned he thought it he could run the money up/pay it back with good intentions.
Pretty sure this is exactly it. He was never a scammer in the past, just a liar. AFAIK he always did end up paying back his debts. I think he just started believing his lies, and his dream world where he was a high stakes PLO regular and an accepted member of that community, he really thought he would turn that stake into a legit bankroll. Hard to do that ratholling his way up tho.
Is this forum, judge, jury and executioner of it's members, be they good or bad,
in your opinion ?
This Forum is a private entity run for the enjoyment of it's users. If one member violates the ToC of the site, then the owners, through their designated Moderators, have EVERY right to get rid of someone. Or vice versa . . . why do you think Mike was given so many chances?
I say again. GROW UP and remember the Latin saying " caveat emptor " translated
" LET THE BUYER BEWARE "
Why would anyone NOT have the right to judge someone based on their actions? It's a pretty important part of making it through a world filled with assholes.
If you steal from someone, I'm judging you as a piece of shit, and if you send 20K to someone online i'm judging you as either too rich, too stupid, or too trusting.
I don't think its that difficult, and probably doesn't warrant a philosophical discussion.
If someone is an idiot in my house, they're no longer welcome in my house. Its not my role to rehabilitate him.
My moral compass is fine on this one. Ive told Mike via PM many times, under many different alias that if he simply was himself, a lowly wannabe micro grinder, people would accept him.
He didn't need to pretend to be someone he wasn't.
It appears his want to be a poker elite (which requires monies/skills he didnt have), led him to do something foolish.
Perhaps he was so disillusioned he thought it he could run the money up/pay it back with good intentions.
Then wetts, you show yourself to be a person that absolves himself from the immoral of slavery because you do not participate, which is fine and logical, but you admit you would live amongst it peacefully while it was the status quo.
This person is no longer back in your house, but do you get moral permission to curb stomp them? Are you in the clear if the buddy's you are partying with beat the shit out of him but you stay out of it?
What if this person can't stop coming back, and worse yet other people keep leading him back to your horse purposefully (or accidentally)?
"It's not my job to rehabilitate them", is not really an excuse for creating a society that treats individuals as lesser people I think, it seems rather and excuse for standing by while such injustice happens.
"It's not my job to rehabilitate them", is not really an excuse for creating a society that treats individuals as lesser people I think, it seems rather and excuse for standing by while such injustice happens.
Yes, I have no issues admitting to standing by while Mike gets the negative press he deserves at this point.
Im not really smart enough to link slavery to Mike stealing 20k from someone, so I'll just end this by saying, I really don't know what you're talking about.
Trying to stay out of this, as I consider Mike a friend irl.
But yeah I agree with the whole believing something he was not. In his defense, him and I sent small amounts (compared to this) back and forth for various reasons over the past few years. Never once did he do anything in those transactions that was shady imo. I have known him since high school, and he has never been known as a thief. I truly believe he had good intentions with this, and it went south.
I hope everything works out for him with school and eventually paying this debt back, even though we all know it will not be easy.
Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe stealing is wrong, whether this is a case of stealing, or a bad staking deal gone wrong, or whatever. This is/could be anyways, a case of he said/she said. At the end of the day, this is why I try to not stake ppl and never loan money....also helps that I have none to loan
The poker world needs to change its ways or stuff like this will continue to happen. Unfortunately, building everything on word of mouth and "trust" doesn't go very far these days. Esp when you don't know that person in real life.
I've been a vocal anti-fed, and anti you. I don't think you should be here, and I don't think Fed should have been given the x'teenth chance he got....
Yes we understand this, and I think we should be investigating the concept that certain individuals should be outcasted. Or how this group or any group came to the collective belief that outcasting individuals, stoning them, taring and feather, berating, throwing tomatoes...any of the sort is the correct thing to do.
Did I "target" fed? In some people's eyes sure. But nobody saw me PMing him and Skype / FB chatting him trying to help him recognize when he was being "Fed-y" vs. being "Mike". I'm a dick, but only if you don't look hard enough.
Its not in some peoples eyes, its clear, but the messed up part is that pm-ing and skyping him to you means that "targeting" him is ok.
For the TL: DR - I was sassed for being a social worker and not liking people, but it turns out I was right. Again.
No this is where the community could be helpful to point something out. You are not "right", you have a big hand in his demise, by both encouraging it and not helping him out each and every time he required it. And the wetts principle I outlined. You have not acted morally in this sense, you have clearly and simply acted in a way you feel you can justify to this community.
P.S. Startles, I took a shot or two at you here.. but in all honesty, you're taking better care this time around. I appreciate that, and have said it twice now... but I think the worst advice in the world is "Forgive and Forget".
We know this about you, which is another unfortunate thing, and unfortunate that you attempt to spread such a belief. More unfortunate that you attempt to sway the public opinion to the point that others are outcasted. Its the difference between me and you, I will fight for your rights to post here always...
We have a logical inconsistency on this forum, amongst this community...outcasting allegedly prejudice people.
I probably don't even know who we're talking about since everything on this site
is so cryptic. Who is Fed ? Is it OH ?
How is one supposed to know anything on this site if posts are deleted before
anyone has a chance to read them.
A question all of you should be asking yourselves is, why are you being censored.
What ever happened to " freedom of speech ".
Oh F*** Bill, you really don't have a clue do you, fed is "was" OH and several others on many sites. He has lied, cheated and scammed people out of money, is that so hard to understand. No one is being censored, posts are not being deleted haphazardly. This is NOT a freedom of speech situation.
If he had scammed you would you allow him to play at your place? Same thing imo.
Pretty sure this is exactly it. He was never a scammer in the past, just a liar.
This is why some peoples opinions are valid and some are just being violent. He lies to himself and believes himself as well. And what most will not understand is that this 20k was likely part of a some bigger staking deal or something, I did not read the specifics because the person he owes is obviously a tool as well. But its not like he dreamed up some crazy plot. He just talked and someone believed him, much like many poker players do about their own image.
Bill, no offence, but do you have any clue whats going on here?
No he wouldn't, but that is what this is though, a bunch of people that created a like minded view point, and have used the view point to impose their will on others. How I got mixed up in it, was that I thought this was our National Poker Forum. The reason I comment now, is because I see many posts as very malicious.
And Yoda, as I outlined in my pm to you I fear you may be going down a similar path to what you did before. THIS is not a public place, there IS an owner and a certain decorum implied by that. You simply can not do and say anything you want. If you want to then create your own forum and see how many participants you get. Oh wait you did that didn't you?
We are way off topic anyhow, Mike is the one in question. He broke societies rules and now must pay the piper. Would you loan him money?
Oh F*** Bill, you really don't have a clue do you, fed is "was" OH and several others on many sites. He has lied, cheated and scammed people out of money, is that so hard to understand. No one is being censored, posts are not being deleted haphazardly. This is NOT a freedom of speech situation.
If he had scammed you would you allow him to play at your place? Same thing imo.
We all beleive its wrong, everyone supports a ban etc. but it should only go so far, public berating and tomato throwing is archaic especially when there was little attempt to help him by the general community.
[FONT=garamond, times new roman]On Crime & Punishment
[/FONT][FONT=garamond, times new roman] So the wrong-doer cannot do wrong without the hidden will of you all.
Like a procession you walk together towards your god-self.
You are the way and the wayfarers.
And when one of you falls down he falls for those behind him, a caution against the stumbling stone.
Ay, and he falls for those ahead of him, who though faster and surer of foot, yet removed not the stumbling stone.
And this also, though the word lie heavy upon your hearts:
The murdered is not unaccountable for his own murder,
And the robbed is not blameless in being robbed.
The righteous is not innocent of the deeds of the wicked,
And the white-handed is not clean in the doings of the felon. [/FONT]
This is why some peoples opinions are valid and some are just being violent. He lies to himself and believes himself as well. And what most will not understand is that this 20k was likely part of a some bigger staking deal or something, I did not read the specifics because the person he owes is obviously a tool as well. But its not like he dreamed up some crazy plot. He just talked and someone believed him, much like many poker players do about their own image.
So instead of going online, and stating the facts/clarifying the situation, he deletes his twitter and Facebook accounts, and says nothing?
I don't know what happened, and he always seemed like just a misguided dude, but he's failed to show the lead indicators of a situation that was an honest mistake.
And Yoda, as I outlined in my pm to you I fear you may be going down a similar path to what you did before. THIS is not a public place, there IS an owner and a certain decorum implied by that. You simply can not do and say anything you want. If you want to then create your own forum and see how many participants you get. Oh wait you did that didn't you?
I don't know specifically what you mean by "did before". I know that Mark and GTA lead a charge of racist and prejudice accusations against me. That I was essentially a racist and should be banned for ever. I lost my cool as the community started to believe such rumors. No one stuck up for me, but me, and I cause you continual trouble because you wouldn't police the issue. The issue remained while I was essentially voiceless with my hands tied.
No I am allowed back in the community but not to assume my identity, and to be not off the same class of posters (can only post in poker theory).
We are way off topic anyhow, Mike is the one in question. He broke societies rules and now must pay the piper. Would you loan him money?
No and this is what is important, no rational person would, without at least doing SOME homework. 20k is a ridiculous amount to pay for such a lesson. I befriended M a long time ago on this forum, because he was doing exactly this things, pm-ing people asking for bap's that he would likely have never paid out. It is the best thing to keep such a person present, like keeping your enemies closer.
Its not logical and it is violent to do the opposite.
So instead of going online, and stating the facts/clarifying the situation, he deletes his twitter and Facebook accounts, and says nothing?
I don't know what happened, and he always seemed like just a misguided dude, but he's failed to show the lead indicators of a situation that was an honest mistake.
Correct he has failed, and society has clearly failed to foster these weaknesses in him. I understand you want to lead a simple life, and only deal with the moral decisions presented before you. But you are too intelligent, too level headed, and have too much charisma and pull to simply just let others suffer at the hands of the masses and the will of the mob.
Correct he has failed, and society has clearly failed to foster these weaknesses in him. I understand you want to lead a simple life, and only deal with the moral decisions presented before you. But you are too intelligent, too level headed, and have too much charisma and pull to simply just let others suffer at the hands of the masses and the will of the mob.
Many of us made an honest effort to help this guy integrate into our community here. His last iteration, was perhaps his most honest portrayal of himself. A likeable forum troll.
At some point, individuals are responsible for their actions (and perception) to the masses. Its like being an employer, you can train, coach, and motivate as long as you want, but if the person fails to listen and / or receive feedback, you have to cut your losses.
Correct he has failed, and society has clearly failed to foster these weaknesses in him.
I will fully agree with this. Guys like Joe Ingram, who absolutely knew this guy had issues / was not a HS poker player in any capacity, invited him on podcasts and championed him.
In a sense, they helped to create a persona within someone who clearly has some kind of mental incapacity.
Sorry Startles or Yoda or whomever you want to be, you appear to be almost as misguided as Mike is, just in a different way. Being "different" is fine and I like and admire different people but only if they recognize others rights to believe differently. Got it? I know you have a difficult time expressing your opinion but you won't help yourself any by continually playing the "turn the other cheek" card. No one "ganged up on" or "stomped" on Mike, it's just another internet forum and while this sort of medium might be important to Mike and perhaps yourself, it is nothing but a very small % of the world.
FYI, usually I wouldn't have this much time to participate in this discussion but just watching Sunday football and relaxing after a tiring Saturday.
Yes we understand this, and I think we should be investigating the concept that certain individuals should be outcasted. Or how this group or any group came to the collective belief that outcasting individuals, stoning them, taring and feather, berating, throwing tomatoes...any of the sort is the correct thing to do.
When a person shows, on multiple occasions, that they are not willing to abide by a given set of rules, then the collective that DOES abide by those rules has every Right to take corrective action . . . up to and including the exile of that person.
Its not in some peoples eyes, its clear, but the messed up part is that pm-ing and skyping him to you means that "targeting" him is ok.
No this is where the community could be helpful to point something out. You are not "right", you have a big hand in his demise, by both encouraging it and not helping him out each and every time he required it. And the wetts principle I outlined. You have not acted morally in this sense, you have clearly and simply acted in a way you feel you can justify to this community.
Urm . . . Mark has continually called Mike out on his crap. He has equally worked privately with Mike to try and address those issues, so as to "guide" him towards acceptance (if you will). If anything, he should be applauded for his efforts. Mark and I agree on not much, but on this one he actually IS right.
We know this about you, which is another unfortunate thing, and unfortunate that you attempt to spread such a belief. More unfortunate that you attempt to sway the public opinion to the point that others are outcasted. Its the difference between me and you, I will fight for your rights to post here always...
As stated, this is a PRIVATE web site. As such NO ONE has a "Right" to post here. We are given a membership based on certain rules and, if those rules are violated, then one can expect punishment to be meted out. Not all will agree with that punishment, as Mark and GTA have indicated, but that is not their decision to make, and they have options of their own if they feel strongly enough about it.
We have a logical inconsistency on this forum, amongst this community...outcasting allegedly prejudice people.
It is hilarious to read the words "logical inconsistency" whenever they pop up in your comments.
It is hilarious to read the words "logical inconsistency" whenever they pop up in your comments.
Yes but frustrating for me, knowing that my logic is quite solid and the collective community fares poorly in this field. Most people here believe poker logic doesn't equate to intelligence or even logic in general. Most people here are horrible at logic, but simply enjoy jumping up together against one person or a weak argument. That isn't being logical either, it's just mob mentality.
When a person shows, on multiple occasions, that they are not willing to abide by a given set of rules, then the collective that DOES abide by those rules has every Right to take corrective action . . . up to and including the exile of that person.
I don't know where you get this "right", I understand it is a private forum, but I mean where do you get the belief it is morally correct to treat a person in a such a way? It is clearly an extension of Nazism, black slavery, and any other prejudicial roots. We do not want to outcast people ANYBODY. With such a tyrannically approach the collective community is likely to start bowing to individual agendas based on violence and not morality or good of the community.
Urm . . . Mark has continually called Mike out on his crap. He has equally worked privately with Mike to try and address those issues, so as to "guide" him towards acceptance (if you will). If anything, he should be applauded for his efforts. Mark and I agree on not much, but on this one he actually IS right.
Marks role is clear to everyone even you. He harassed him on this site, and talks about how he helped him privately as if the two could ever cancel each other out.
As stated, this is a PRIVATE web site. As such NO ONE has a "Right" to post here. We are given a membership based on certain rules and, if those rules are violated, then one can expect punishment to be meted out. Not all will agree with that punishment, as Mark and GTA have indicated, but that is not their decision to make, and they have options of their own if they feel strongly enough about it.
Yes but we also live in a real world that is reality, we live in a collective society. What you and the collective argument boils down to is that bullying online is ok because its online...and as some sick extension the collective and many individuals here spend their time berating people and arguing about what kind of punishments people deserve for being not you.
I will fully agree with this. Guys like Joe Ingram, who absolutely knew this guy had issues / was not a HS poker player in any capacity, invited him on podcasts and championed him.
In a sense, they helped to create a persona within someone who clearly has some kind of mental incapacity.
Yes and so its not about M is off the hook at all, but truly the communities are just as at fault, whether our fore fathers, or PFC or certain peoples, or podcasters, or HS players...by pinning it on a person, you take away the possibly solution..and that then is simply violence.
Sorry Startles or Yoda or whomever you want to be, you appear to be almost as misguided as Mike is, just in a different way. Being "different" is fine and I like and admire different people but only if they recognize others rights to believe differently. Got it?
I think I have always recognized others rights in this regard, I don't feel I was given the same respects by especially GTA and Mark and the extended community coming out from them. Misguided then cannot be the correct word.
I know you have a difficult time expressing your opinion but you won't help yourself any by continually playing the "turn the other cheek" card. No one "ganged up on" or "stomped" on Mike, it's just another internet forum and while this sort of medium might be important to Mike and perhaps yourself, it is nothing but a very small % of the world.
I've come to know that my opinion is generally always expressed quite well, but its contrary to what the collective wants to hear. We want the simple view that drug abusers are welfare bums and they are scum and should be cut off, or that other types of criminals are like us and simply make the choice to be the way they are.
This views fosters these types of peoples, clearly, and so the peoples that are trying to impose the harshest of sentences are really themselves just as much the true direct cause of such malicious acts.
You and others can easily collectively deflect my words but it looks silly in the face of such well established literature:
[FONT=garamond, times new roman]The murdered is not unaccountable for his own murder, [/FONT]
Perhaps we truly do not understand this author, and those such as the author of the Tao Te Ching? The art of War?
I'm not sure if I should weigh in on this debate of blame/praise in regard to Fed's actions. My views on this matter are not the norm and will probably cause more confusion than good to be honest.
Is this forum, judge, jury and executioner of it's members, be they good or bad,
in your opinion ?
I say again. GROW UP and remember the Latin saying " caveat emptor " translated
" LET THE BUYER BEWARE "
I actually said Caveat Emptor to either GTA or Mark on FB re: Fed's BAP thread a few weeks ago, but have now done a 180 because I realize that we can be talking about life-changing amounts of money.
Further, I really don't think we can make an effective caveat emptor case where there is no link to historical posting.
Startles should be directly linked to Darbday
Fed to Costanza to fedh8er etc
This forum's tolerance for name changes makes "due diligence" an unacceptable burden.
I've come to know that my opinion is generally always expressed quite well,
Don't want to derail, but let me be the voice of the population to let you know that this is 100% inaccurate.
I was taught very early in my professional career to "speak to the audience".
This forum is filled with people who are the opposite of a Harvard philosophy class. Which is generally why people read what you write and say "wa?". Dumb down the message with the same principles.
You speak in riddles. constantly using metaphors and allegories to force us to decode how your messages apply to a given situation. What a waste of time.
Question for you though. How do you contribute to the betterment of man? Or woman? Love to know a little of your background and how you were brought up? What's your family situation, married? kids? What do you do for a living?
This forum's tolerance for name changes makes "due diligence" an unacceptable burden.
Hey not fair, you changed yours as well. Our moderator status only allows us some leeway in this matter. Once banned permanently a name cannot be resurrected as far as I understand it. Pretty common knowledge re both of them tho.
Comments
I don't think its that difficult, and probably doesn't warrant a philosophical discussion.
If someone is an idiot in my house, they're no longer welcome in my house. Its not my role to rehabilitate him.
My moral compass is fine on this one. Ive told Mike via PM many times, under many different alias that if he simply was himself, a lowly wannabe micro grinder, people would accept him.
He didn't need to pretend to be someone he wasn't.
It appears his want to be a poker elite (which requires monies/skills he didnt have), led him to do something foolish.
Perhaps he was so disillusioned he thought it he could run the money up/pay it back with good intentions.
How could I possibly know that?
It's not like someone started a whole thread aimed at me or nothing.
Mark
Here's the thing..
I've been a vocal anti-fed, and anti you. I don't think you should be here, and I don't think Fed should have been given the x'teenth chance he got. Mods disagreed, and I was vocal in my opinion on that call with them in PM's, posts, and IRL. But, I respect comp / bill and recognized I couldn't force them into anything.
However, I have, on more than one occasion, been chastised for / shamed if you will, not being very "Social work-y" in this regard (my field of employment is working with people who come into conflict with the law - by all means a "give them another chance" kinda guy). This seems like quite a "oh snap" comeback, but nobody seems to understand that someone like me also recognizes (and I'd like to think some of the other people in similar fields of teachers and such will agree) that there is a point where not only is a person not willing / able to make changes, but by giving chance after chance, you are enabling the negative behavior.
Did I "target" fed? In some people's eyes sure. But nobody saw me PMing him and Skype / FB chatting him trying to help him recognize when he was being "Fed-y" vs. being "Mike". I'm a dick, but only if you don't look hard enough.
For the TL: DR - I was sassed for being a social worker and not liking people, but it turns out I was right. Again.
Mark
P.S. Startles, I took a shot or two at you here.. but in all honesty, you're taking better care this time around. I appreciate that, and have said it twice now... but I think the worst advice in the world is "Forgive and Forget".
Ask yourself that ?
Is this forum, judge, jury and executioner of it's members, be they good or bad,
in your opinion ?
I say again. GROW UP and remember the Latin saying " caveat emptor " translated
" LET THE BUYER BEWARE "
Pretty sure this is exactly it. He was never a scammer in the past, just a liar. AFAIK he always did end up paying back his debts. I think he just started believing his lies, and his dream world where he was a high stakes PLO regular and an accepted member of that community, he really thought he would turn that stake into a legit bankroll. Hard to do that ratholling his way up tho.
Bill, no offence, but do you have any clue whats going on here?
Really? Caveat Emptor is the best you can do?
If you steal from someone, I'm judging you as a piece of shit, and if you send 20K to someone online i'm judging you as either too rich, too stupid, or too trusting.
This person is no longer back in your house, but do you get moral permission to curb stomp them? Are you in the clear if the buddy's you are partying with beat the shit out of him but you stay out of it?
What if this person can't stop coming back, and worse yet other people keep leading him back to your horse purposefully (or accidentally)?
"It's not my job to rehabilitate them", is not really an excuse for creating a society that treats individuals as lesser people I think, it seems rather and excuse for standing by while such injustice happens.
Yes, I have no issues admitting to standing by while Mike gets the negative press he deserves at this point.
Im not really smart enough to link slavery to Mike stealing 20k from someone, so I'll just end this by saying, I really don't know what you're talking about.
Perhaps that makes me a lesser people.
I probably don't even know who we're talking about since everything on this site
is so cryptic. Who is Fed ? Is it OH ?
How is one supposed to know anything on this site if posts are deleted before
anyone has a chance to read them.
A question all of you should be asking yourselves is, why are you being censored.
What ever happened to " freedom of speech ".
But yeah I agree with the whole believing something he was not. In his defense, him and I sent small amounts (compared to this) back and forth for various reasons over the past few years. Never once did he do anything in those transactions that was shady imo. I have known him since high school, and he has never been known as a thief. I truly believe he had good intentions with this, and it went south.
I hope everything works out for him with school and eventually paying this debt back, even though we all know it will not be easy.
Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe stealing is wrong, whether this is a case of stealing, or a bad staking deal gone wrong, or whatever. This is/could be anyways, a case of he said/she said. At the end of the day, this is why I try to not stake ppl and never loan money....also helps that I have none to loan
The poker world needs to change its ways or stuff like this will continue to happen. Unfortunately, building everything on word of mouth and "trust" doesn't go very far these days. Esp when you don't know that person in real life.
Its not in some peoples eyes, its clear, but the messed up part is that pm-ing and skyping him to you means that "targeting" him is ok. No this is where the community could be helpful to point something out. You are not "right", you have a big hand in his demise, by both encouraging it and not helping him out each and every time he required it. And the wetts principle I outlined. You have not acted morally in this sense, you have clearly and simply acted in a way you feel you can justify to this community.
We know this about you, which is another unfortunate thing, and unfortunate that you attempt to spread such a belief. More unfortunate that you attempt to sway the public opinion to the point that others are outcasted. Its the difference between me and you, I will fight for your rights to post here always...
We have a logical inconsistency on this forum, amongst this community...outcasting allegedly prejudice people.
Oh F*** Bill, you really don't have a clue do you, fed is "was" OH and several others on many sites. He has lied, cheated and scammed people out of money, is that so hard to understand. No one is being censored, posts are not being deleted haphazardly. This is NOT a freedom of speech situation.
If he had scammed you would you allow him to play at your place? Same thing imo.
This is why some peoples opinions are valid and some are just being violent. He lies to himself and believes himself as well. And what most will not understand is that this 20k was likely part of a some bigger staking deal or something, I did not read the specifics because the person he owes is obviously a tool as well. But its not like he dreamed up some crazy plot. He just talked and someone believed him, much like many poker players do about their own image.
No he wouldn't, but that is what this is though, a bunch of people that created a like minded view point, and have used the view point to impose their will on others. How I got mixed up in it, was that I thought this was our National Poker Forum. The reason I comment now, is because I see many posts as very malicious.
We are way off topic anyhow, Mike is the one in question. He broke societies rules and now must pay the piper. Would you loan him money?
The PROPHET, by Kahlil Gibran
[FONT=garamond, times new roman][/FONT]
So instead of going online, and stating the facts/clarifying the situation, he deletes his twitter and Facebook accounts, and says nothing?
I don't know what happened, and he always seemed like just a misguided dude, but he's failed to show the lead indicators of a situation that was an honest mistake.
No I am allowed back in the community but not to assume my identity, and to be not off the same class of posters (can only post in poker theory).
No and this is what is important, no rational person would, without at least doing SOME homework. 20k is a ridiculous amount to pay for such a lesson. I befriended M a long time ago on this forum, because he was doing exactly this things, pm-ing people asking for bap's that he would likely have never paid out. It is the best thing to keep such a person present, like keeping your enemies closer.
Its not logical and it is violent to do the opposite.
Many of us made an honest effort to help this guy integrate into our community here. His last iteration, was perhaps his most honest portrayal of himself. A likeable forum troll.
At some point, individuals are responsible for their actions (and perception) to the masses. Its like being an employer, you can train, coach, and motivate as long as you want, but if the person fails to listen and / or receive feedback, you have to cut your losses.
I will fully agree with this. Guys like Joe Ingram, who absolutely knew this guy had issues / was not a HS poker player in any capacity, invited him on podcasts and championed him.
In a sense, they helped to create a persona within someone who clearly has some kind of mental incapacity.
FYI, usually I wouldn't have this much time to participate in this discussion but just watching Sunday football and relaxing after a tiring Saturday.
It is hilarious to read the words "logical inconsistency" whenever they pop up in your comments.
When a person shows, on multiple occasions, that they are not willing to abide by a given set of rules, then the collective that DOES abide by those rules has every Right to take corrective action . . . up to and including the exile of that person.
I don't know where you get this "right", I understand it is a private forum, but I mean where do you get the belief it is morally correct to treat a person in a such a way? It is clearly an extension of Nazism, black slavery, and any other prejudicial roots. We do not want to outcast people ANYBODY. With such a tyrannically approach the collective community is likely to start bowing to individual agendas based on violence and not morality or good of the community.
Urm . . . Mark has continually called Mike out on his crap. He has equally worked privately with Mike to try and address those issues, so as to "guide" him towards acceptance (if you will). If anything, he should be applauded for his efforts. Mark and I agree on not much, but on this one he actually IS right.
Marks role is clear to everyone even you. He harassed him on this site, and talks about how he helped him privately as if the two could ever cancel each other out.
As stated, this is a PRIVATE web site. As such NO ONE has a "Right" to post here. We are given a membership based on certain rules and, if those rules are violated, then one can expect punishment to be meted out. Not all will agree with that punishment, as Mark and GTA have indicated, but that is not their decision to make, and they have options of their own if they feel strongly enough about it.
Yes but we also live in a real world that is reality, we live in a collective society. What you and the collective argument boils down to is that bullying online is ok because its online...and as some sick extension the collective and many individuals here spend their time berating people and arguing about what kind of punishments people deserve for being not you.
Yes and so its not about M is off the hook at all, but truly the communities are just as at fault, whether our fore fathers, or PFC or certain peoples, or podcasters, or HS players...by pinning it on a person, you take away the possibly solution..and that then is simply violence.
I think I have always recognized others rights in this regard, I don't feel I was given the same respects by especially GTA and Mark and the extended community coming out from them. Misguided then cannot be the correct word. I've come to know that my opinion is generally always expressed quite well, but its contrary to what the collective wants to hear. We want the simple view that drug abusers are welfare bums and they are scum and should be cut off, or that other types of criminals are like us and simply make the choice to be the way they are.
This views fosters these types of peoples, clearly, and so the peoples that are trying to impose the harshest of sentences are really themselves just as much the true direct cause of such malicious acts.
You and others can easily collectively deflect my words but it looks silly in the face of such well established literature:
Perhaps we truly do not understand this author, and those such as the author of the Tao Te Ching? The art of War?
I'm to waiting to hear.
I actually said Caveat Emptor to either GTA or Mark on FB re: Fed's BAP thread a few weeks ago, but have now done a 180 because I realize that we can be talking about life-changing amounts of money.
Further, I really don't think we can make an effective caveat emptor case where there is no link to historical posting.
Startles should be directly linked to Darbday
Fed to Costanza to fedh8er etc
This forum's tolerance for name changes makes "due diligence" an unacceptable burden.
Don't want to derail, but let me be the voice of the population to let you know that this is 100% inaccurate.
I was taught very early in my professional career to "speak to the audience".
This forum is filled with people who are the opposite of a Harvard philosophy class. Which is generally why people read what you write and say "wa?". Dumb down the message with the same principles.
Take this feedback fwiw, we may now proceed.
Question for you though. How do you contribute to the betterment of man? Or woman? Love to know a little of your background and how you were brought up? What's your family situation, married? kids? What do you do for a living?