Debates between moderators and forum members

[brucake]

ahhhhhhhhhh, GreaseMOnkey. A popular poster, loved by many members detested by the mods.

Between this thread and the other that has spun off because of inet, Greasemonkey has made obvious and good points. He has been treated again very poorly as he usually seems to be regardless of the circumstances. Their is an obvious dislike of him by the mods. I happen to love his posts. I cringe everytime I see you people being "mean" to GM rather than embracing his thoughts and knowledge. Unless you have had past issues that I am unaware of then you have been grossly rude to gm for no apparent reason.

Why is he constantly told to be quiet or chill out or stop posting about a subject? Trying to silence him is not what many of us happen to desire. I happen to agree with him most often and would like him to post more often even as he is being shouted down by Bryan, nifty and a few others.

Why was he threatened with his membership for asking simple questions to inetbet that they have refused to answer in full?
Why was he warned to quit badgering when he simply asked for a direct and honest answer to finally determine who was and who was not being honest?
Why was this then squashed and lightly explained away?
Methinks THOU doth protesteth too much on inet's behalf. Those were good questions. inet is caught up in falsehoods. Shame on them. Don't protect them, shed the light on them.
What was meant by the bonus issue is moot?!!? It is surely not. They lied about it. Why do we accept their word for anything now? If the person was not using a bonus then she wasn't cheating the casino if her IDs are valid. This was a very poor way of handling that thread. Why in the world would anyone lock it if they are not trying to suppress information?
You warned gaydave for not being on topic then thanked inet for the same in the next thread. It is apparent that you are not being open minded or fair in your reactions.

It is apparent to level headed readers here, that something is wrong with the alicek situation and the handling of the thread. Also, that leads to questioning of the pab findings.

We all talk about multiple accounts when a fraudster is caught out. Or false ID or wrong age. Why is this being buried? Why arent basic questions answered?

this may very well be frustrating for bryan and max. it probably is. it is also very frustrating for readers trying to discern who is correct and who is wrong. it has become more difficult when threads are locked and questioners threatened. It is like an ancient tribunal. You are guilty and you just must believe, evidence be damned. yes, they lied but that is moot. ?

End Derail:

 

[Simmo!]

Moved this from derailing another thread and titled it myself FYI.

ahhhhhhhhhh, GreaseMOnkey. A popular poster, loved by many members detested by the mods.

My thoughts: i don't detest him at all. Far from it in fact - colourful characters are what a forum needs. In fact I don't detest any user here. What I do hate is posts that are confrontational or disrepectful. I honestly can't remember if GM has ever fallen into that category but if he has, it's the posts I hate, not the poster.

Sure I might lose some respect for people who rant and rave without consideration for others but I don't hate them for it. I even stop reading those people's posts if the record gets stuck but hey, everyone's different. It's what makes a forum interesting. Until it gets personal. Then the fun's over.

 

[The Dude]

ahhhhhhhhhh, GreaseMOnkey. A popular poster, loved by many members detested by the mods...

Actually, I take offense at this comment - and have given an infraction to Brucake for posting troll comments.

I detest no one in this forum. To make comments like this tempts me to escort you to the door.

Admin note: renamed thread from Greasemonkey to "Debates between moderators and forum members"

 

[chuchu59]

Actually, I take offense at this comment - and have given an infraction to Brucake for posting troll comments.

I detest no one in this forum. To make comments like this tempts me to escort you to the door.

I hope you wont do that Bryan. I have been here long enough to know the mods wont detest anyone but if there is a general feeling GM is disliked by the mods the best way would be to tolerate these views and let passage of time do the trick. GMmakes a lot of valid points but is sometimes confrontational in approach rendering his posts provocative in a way. However, in a sense, his strong sentiments do mean he cares for the forum hence his outbursts.

 

[gaydave]

I know I am a jerk when I am a jerk. I have done it and I know it. I just got back from a banning and I knew it was coming when I posted.

This is different though. I rarely catch GM being a jerk and it does appear that there is a different set of rules for his posts. Bryan has been sort of called out about being tough on him in the past. I thought it had been worked out but this whole inetbet issue resurfaced that tension. That whole scenario in the other thread was bizarre IMO. It didn't seem like an appropriate response to GM. I think GM is asking strong, pointed questions that deserved an answer. The response was, in fact, threatening towards him and he was basically told to shut up about it several times. Thats bull IMO. Then the thread was locked lol. Suppressing the whole issue further.

If anyone goes back and reads GMs posts, you will come away with the feeling that there is ill feeling about his posts from some mods. It is inescapable. Maybe CM doesn't dislike GM personally but he DOES get angry extremely often at his posts and lashes out with threats. That is from the political forums to the inetbet issue and going all the way back to the false accusation about GM's activities from Clubworld.
Regardless of what the truth may be, the appearance is a dislike of GM and I think it is unfair. I think he is treated unfairly often.

 

[Nifty29]

As Bryan said earlier, it is the same people protesting about the same things.

The same people always going into bat for those poor ol' fraudsters that never get a fair deal. (Not saying GM is a fraudster before anyone goes off)

Anyway, the whole suggestion that mods treat some posters differently is a load of horse manure.

 

[gaydave]

As Bryan said earlier, it is the same people protesting about the same things.

The same people always going into bat for those poor ol' fraudsters that never get a fair deal. (Not saying GM is a fraudster before anyone goes off)

Anyway, the whole suggestion that mods treat some posters differently is a load of horse manure.

I have to kinda' agree with Nifty. It is the same people that question things. It is also the same people that constantly jump to the side of the casino and rail against the players. ALWAYS the same people do the same thing.

I disagree strongly that there is not different treatment. There was just given several examples of it in this thread. Since you labled it horse manure can you give examples of your point of view to match the examples of the other points of view?

 

[Simmo!]

If there is "different treatment" then it's subconscious. I also think it's kind of inevitable as some people help the forum and it's members while others don't. What I do know is that generally, as mods we try and apply the rules as evenly as possible. We miss some, we get some right, we get some wrong and some users get watched more closely than others when certain topics arise but that's no different to any forum with vocal posters.

Personally, if I was a member of a forum where I contributed and felt I was being singled out for ill treatment by the mods, I'd go somewhere else anyway so I'm sure those who are, do. Or maybe they are secretly masochists at heart

Edited to add: thinking about it more, I do tend to treat posters who are rude and disrepectful differently, so yes, you are right. But that isn't going to change

 

[Nifty29]

I have to kinda' agree with Nifty. It is the same people that question things. It is also the same people that constantly jump to the side of the casino and rail against the players. ALWAYS the same people do the same thing.

I disagree strongly that there is not different treatment. There was just given several examples of it in this thread. Since you labled it horse manure can you give examples of your point of view to match the examples of the other points of view?

I must have missed something GAydave.

What examples?

The only thing I have seen is someone making baseless allegations against Bryan and Max, who are about as even handed as you can get, and being called out on it.

Who are you referring to about "railing against players"? I don't see it anywhere. I do see the same people putting their reputation into question by staunchly defending proven fraudsters who they don't even know from a bowl of soup (or do they?). All I know is that most of these people have had smoke around them at various stages, and you know what they say about the existence of smoke....

Again, as CM said, some things become more and more obvious about these people as time goes on.

 

[jetset]

Greasemonkey may on occasion be an acerbic or even abrasive poster, but his arguments are generally well researched and he is always prepared to back them with facts and consider an alternative viewpoint. For that reason I personally consider him to be a worthwhile contributor whose views I respect, if not always agree with.

The notion that the mods here "pick on" GM is to my mind unlikely.

What mods do correctly look for is posting conduct that is unnecessarily discourteous, belligerent, abusive, insulting, trolling, de-railing, fraudulent, drearily repetitive or reminiscent of lynch mob behaviour. Regrettably that occasionally surfaces here, and has to be dealt with for the health of the forum as a whole, and I think our mods generally do that with a light touch.

This is not a court of law, it's a forum where people exchange news and views of mutual interest.

 

[The Dude]

Greasemonkey may on occasion be an acerbic or even abrasive poster, but his arguments are generally well researched and he is always prepared to back them with facts and consider an alternative viewpoint. For that reason I personally consider him to be a worthwhile contributor whose views I respect, if not always agree with.

The notion that the mods here "pick on" GM is to my mind unlikely.

What mods do correctly look for is posting conduct that is unnecessarily discourteous, belligerent, abusive, insulting, trolling, de-railing, fraudulent, drearily repetitive or reminiscent of lynch mob behaviour. Regrettably that occasionally surfaces here, and has to be dealt with for the health of the forum as a whole, and I think our mods generally do that with a light touch.

This is not a court of law, it's a forum where people exchange news and views of mutual interest.

Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Just to add -

We all talk about multiple accounts when a fraudster is caught out. Or false ID or wrong age. Why is this being buried? Why arent basic questions answered?

Maybe because the answers to those basic questions would enlighten those who are involved with the fraud ring on how they got caught - or what the casinos are looking at. It's a public forum - I know for a fact that the people who are involved in these fraud rings are watching these threads carefully, so I'm not going to divulge this info - period. I really don't think any casino rep would do the same either.

If this bothers you so much, well in my opinion - you're spending way too much time in front of the computer.

 

[Seventh777]

It`s a catch 22 situation, it may seem that the mods are on GM`s case with nigh on every post he makes, but, a high percent of his posts involve delicate situations etc, think of it like this, imagine a poster whose posts are always 100% whinging and moaning based (terribad loser), no sooner have they made a thread/post the mods are all over it waving their editing truncheons, this could be seen by some as `omg poor terribad has been censured once again, the mods really have it in for him`, which ofc is not the case, forum moderating is a thankless task, and the one saving grace I see is it has drove Bryan to drink .

You cannot please all the folks, all the time, no matter what the situation is.

 

[gaydave]

Just to add -


Maybe because the answers to those basic questions would enlighten those who are involved with the fraud ring on how they got caught - or what the casinos are looking at. It's a public forum - I know for a fact that the people who are involved in these fraud rings are watching these threads carefully, so I'm not going to divulge this info - period. I really don't think any casino rep would do the same either.

If this bothers you so much, well in my opinion - you're spending way too much time in front of the computer.

Well that is hard to understand. I don't think anyone is asking you HOW the fraudster gets caught. They are asking what the fraud charge is. A generic answer is fine but just saying "fraud" is not fine.
Was it mulitple accounts? Then the accused can respond. Was it bad documents? then the accused can respond. Just saying "fraud" is hard for critical thinking people to accept. Look, the fraudsters already know what they did. Saying "multiple accounts" for example is not going to give them any heads up. They already know it. Just don't tell them how it was found out. Regardless if you tell them what the charge is or not; a real fraudster knows what he did. Those that want to know what they did should be told. Not how it was found, just what the charge is.
A true pro fraudster will not stick around this forum arguing. They will be too busy going off to make try again. This is not worth it to them.

That is why the AlicK situtation is getting beaten to death on these boards and why many are unsatisfied with the answers (or non-answers) to the questions. She sent in her IDs. She didn't use a bonus. She couldn't have collaborated with others in the games. What was the fraud? Not HOW she was caught, but what was it?
Gambling grumbles agrees that it is not acceptable to keep her money.
Even if not one question about her charge is answered the other questions could have and should have been answered as they don't have anything to do with security.
Absolutely a solid definition of fraud needs to be in place. I would love to see what that term means to alicek as it is mindboggling at this point.

 

[Nifty29]

Well that is hard to understand. I don't think anyone is asking you HOW the fraudster gets caught. They are asking what the fraud charge is. A generic answer is fine but just saying "fraud" is not fine.
Was it mulitple accounts? Then the accused can respond. Was it bad documents? then the accused can respond. Just saying "fraud" is hard for critical thinking people to accept. Look, the fraudsters already know what they did. Saying "multiple accounts" for example is not going to give them any heads up. They already know it. Just don't tell them how it was found out. Regardless if you tell them what the charge is or not; a real fraudster knows what he did. Those that want to know what they did should be told. Not how it was found, just what the charge is.
A true pro fraudster will not stick around this forum arguing. They will be too busy going off to make try again. This is not worth it to them.

That is why the AlicK situtation is getting beaten to death on these boards and why many are unsatisfied with the answers (or non-answers) to the questions. She sent in her IDs. She didn't use a bonus. She couldn't have collaborated with others in the games. What was the fraud? Not HOW she was caught, but what was it?
Gambling grumbles agrees that it is not acceptable to keep her money.
Even if not one question about her charge is answered the other questions could have and should have been answered as they don't have anything to do with security.
Absolutely a solid definition of fraud needs to be in place. I would love to see what that term means to alicek as it is mindboggling at this point.

AFAIK there is always some reason given for someone being called a fraudster...at least at CM anyway. If the reason is "they are part of a fraud ring that uses several methods to cheat", then why do you have to know more than that? After all, you said the fraudster already knows what they did, they just want the casino to tell them how they caught them. The only reason I can see why anyone would want to know specifics of the case (besides the downright nosey) would be if they are involved in fraudulent activity themselves and want to know how to better prevent being discovered.

Gambling grumbles has their own agenda from what I've read...one of them being the attraction of players to the site. Just have a look at some of the sites they advertise:

Cool Cat
Prism
Cirrus
Palace of Chance

Getting the picture?

Casinomeisters PAB may not be 100% right 100% of the time, but they are 100% thorough and 100% honest. I'll take their judgement over rogue-promoters any day.

How do you know what a pro fraudster would do BTW? I wouldn't have the first clue myself.

 

[maxd]

... imagine a poster whose posts are always 100% whinging and moaning based (terribad loser), no sooner have they made a thread/post the mods are all over it waving their editing truncheons ....

I believe you are mistaken. We edit spam posts and (extremely occasionally) the most unconscionably vile abuse. I can't think of a single instance in the past four years (in other words since I started here at CM) where someone was edited simply because they were bitching and moaning.

In fact the only case I can think of where a post was edited for reasons other than spam or outrageous abuse was an edit I made on a post of Nifty's because I thought it would help keep the peace. I realised soon after that it was a BIG mistake to have done that and I do not expect to repeat it.

 

[LHofsdal]

Just My Opinion

I personally feel that the Mods here do treat all members the same until they become rude, abusive or just a plain old jerk. I do enjoy reading GM's posts, and I agree, they are well thought out. But sometimes because we are reading and not actually hearing in person what the poster is trying to say, their posts can be misinterpreted.

With that being said, I think the Mods here do a damn good job in trying to keep the peace. All to often posters are offended by something some has said and they feel like they have to retaliate and go (excuse the expression) "Ape Shit" over it. When in all reality, it wasn't that big of a deal.

I personally have the utmost respect for the Mods here, they are big enough to admit they have made a mistake when it happens, and man enough to offer an apology. To me that says alot. I think they are fair and unbiased, but sometimes posters don't see it that way. Being in the gaming industry, many members are not privy to see alot of things that go on behind the scenes, and because of that, the posters and readers aren't always in the "know". Many people will jump right in and call something foul without all the facts. What everyone must realize is that there is always 2 sides to the story. Often times it later comes to light that we, the readers, did not get the full story and sometimes have been duped by their story.

GM is pretty straightforward, and some people my not like that about him, but that is just the way he is. If you don't like it, there is an ignore feature that in my opinion, is not used enough. I feel if that feature was used, there would alot less bickering and mud slinging on this forum.

Like I said, just my opinion.

LH

 

[Seventh777]

I believe you are mistaken. We edit spam posts and (extremely occasionally) the most unconscionably vile abuse. I can't think of a single instance in the past four years (in other words since I started here at CM) where someone was edited simply because they were bitching and moaning.

In fact the only case I can think of where a post was edited for reasons other than spam or outrageous abuse was an edit I made on a post of Nifty's because I thought it would help keep the peace. I realised soon after that it was a BIG mistake to have done that and I do not expect to repeat it.

My bad I should have explained better, ie:- titles of threads that have been renamed due to <random casino is rogue because I didn`t get no free spins> type stuff, that`s what I meant .

 

[gaydave]

@LHofsdale,

I have to agree with you on one thing in particular. The mods are very "big" people when they mess up often times. It takes a certain personality to admit being errant and I have to agree that is a great quality that I see in them.

 

[felicie]

As long as greasemonkey remains a conservative, he will sooner or later be jacked up in every form of media he participates in and the smarter he is the worse it will be and that is the truth plain and simple.
And you are not a jerk gaydave.

Thank you brucake but you're already gone aren't you.

 

[maxd]

... titles of threads that have been renamed due to <random casino is rogue because I didn`t get no free spins> type stuff, that`s what I meant.

Ah yes, well, guilty as charged there. In the same way that a thread entitled "Seventh777 is a <nasty words here>", for example , would get edited so too will the occasional anti-casino rant thread title get edited down to something more acceptable. This usually happens where the thread title and contents are obviously intended to harass and bully the casino, such as your "random casino is rogue because I didn`t get no free spins" example, or are being used to blackmail the casino as in "Casino XYZ is Rogue!" and then the OP says something like "I'll update further here when they give my bonus/withdrawal/free gift/whatever." That's "personal agenda" stuff and has to be monitored pretty closely. But this is hardly "mods waving their editing truncheons", no?

Other than those two examples I can think of only one other instance where thread titles get edited: ALL CAPS. I will routinely and without apology knock an ALL CAPS thread title back to "Title Case". In other words "I HATE XYZ CASINO BECAUSE THEY SUCK!" will become "I Hate XYZ Casino Because They Suck" in a heartbeat. That said, something like "I HATE Casino Whatever" (typically) won't get touched.

 

[ksech]

Is this all really necessary? It's an us vs. them? Since when? Sheesh. YOU choose to come here amd post. You choose to gamble online. YOU choose which online casino to play at. YOU choose which bonus to use.

You are fortunate enough to have a place to come to to discuss with YOUR peers, your frustrations over payouts, game play, rogue casinos, good casinos. You have the PRIVILEDGE to have some extremely GENEROUS people who take THEIR time to go to bat for YOU when some casino decides you've broken some hinky T&C, you get tied up in some mess about unreadable verification documents, or whatever.

And what does it cost you when it comes time to PAB? Nada, nil, zilch, nothing, except for the few minutes it takes to read the rules for the PAB, and the few minutes it takes to fill out the PAB form. But for some of you I guess that just isn't enough. You're not always going to win every "battle" in life, and if you think you are you're very wrong. These little vindictive snipes against Bryan and Maxd make me sick and ashamed that you think they have it against certain people.

The constant derailment of threads, the kindergarten mentality of name calling and fingerpointing is tiresome, and the member bashing is just a turnoff. I used to look forward to coming here and reading threads, interacting, with what I thought were mature, rational adults, but not anymore.

There is very little learning, sharing and "good" debating about the online gambling industry here lately. I can go to any MSN or Yahoo forum and find the same kind of nonsense as is evolving here. This used to be a great place. You as members are the ones who can decide if it can go back to being that great place or if it will continue into the "National Enquirer" of the forum world...*just my opinion*

 

[maxd]

As long as greasemonkey remains a conservative, he will sooner or later be jacked up ....

You might want to have a closer look at the criticisms GM has received here at CM. Being a "conservative" is not among them, AFAIK, nor are any "conservative" policies or views he may hold.

The idea that "you punished that guy, that guy wears cowboy boots, you are picking on people who wear cowboy boots!" is (a) exceedingly weak logic and (b) is pointing you in a completely bogus direction if you are actually looking for the truth.

 

[Simmo!]

Is this all really necessary? It's an us vs. them? Since when? Sheesh. YOU choose to come here amd post. You choose to gamble online. YOU choose which online casino to play at. YOU choose which bonus to use.

You are fortunate enough to have a place to come to to discuss with YOUR peers, your frustrations over payouts, game play, rogue casinos, good casinos. You have the PRIVILEDGE to have some extremely GENEROUS people who take THEIR time to go to bat for YOU when some casino decides you've broken some hinky T&C, you get tied up in some mess about unreadable verification documents, or whatever.

And what does it cost you when it comes time to PAB? Nada, nil, zilch, nothing, except for the few minutes it takes to read the rules for the PAB, and the few minutes it takes to fill out the PAB form. But for some of you I guess that just isn't enough. You're not always going to win every "battle" in life, and if you think you are you're very wrong. These little vindictive snipes against Bryan and Maxd make me sick and ashamed that you think they have it against certain people.

The constant derailment of threads, the kindergarten mentality of name calling and fingerpointing is tiresome, and the member bashing is just a turnoff. I used to look forward to coming here and reading threads, interacting, with what I thought were mature, rational adults, but not anymore.

There is very little learning, sharing and "good" debating about the online gambling industry here lately. I can go to any MSN or Yahoo forum and find the same kind of nonsense as is evolving here. This used to be a great place. You as members are the ones who can decide if it can go back to being that great place or if it will continue into the "National Enquirer" of the forum world...*just my opinion*

Couldn't have put it better myself. Would be nice to just have sensible adult discussions on issues without all the jibes and agendas but I guess gambling is just too emotional a subject for that.

 

[brucake]

AFAIK there is always some reason given for someone being called a fraudster...at least at CM anyway. If the reason is "they are part of a fraud ring that uses several methods to cheat", then why do you have to know more than that? After all, you said the fraudster already knows what they did, they just want the casino to tell them how they caught them. The only reason I can see why anyone would want to know specifics of the case (besides the downright nosey) would be if they are involved in fraudulent activity themselves and want to know how to better prevent being discovered.

Gambling grumbles has their own agenda from what I've read...one of them being the attraction of players to the site. Just have a look at some of the sites they advertise:

Cool Cat
Prism
Cirrus
Palace of Chance

Getting the picture?

Casinomeisters PAB may not be 100% right 100% of the time, but they are 100% thorough and 100% honest. I'll take their judgement over rogue-promoters any day.

How do you know what a pro fraudster would do BTW? I wouldn't have the first clue myself.

firstly, calling gambling grumbles rogue is ignorant as to what that site is. Take a minute and read the articles. He gives both sides a chance to state their cases then he reports it. Almost word for word. How that is rogue or dishonest is beyond me. I think you spoke prior to informing yourself. They are way more transparent then here.

secondly, nobody is asking HOW they got caught. NOBODY so quit saying it. You all keep saying "not gonna tell them how they got caught". Well great. Don't do that. That would be foolish. Nobody here is suggesting that. What they are suggesting is to know what the charge is. and as has been stated just saying fraud is not good enough, especially when it makes no sense.

 

[Nifty29]

firstly, calling gambling grumbles rogue is ignorant as to what that site is. Take a minute and read the articles. He gives both sides a chance to state their cases then he reports it. Almost word for word. How that is rogue or dishonest is beyond me. I think you spoke prior to informing yourself. They are way more transparent then here.

secondly, nobody is asking HOW they got caught. NOBODY so quit saying it. You all keep saying "not gonna tell them how they got caught". Well great. Don't do that. That would be foolish. Nobody here is suggesting that. What they are suggesting is to know what the charge is. and as has been stated just saying fraud is not good enough, especially when it makes no sense.

Gambling grumbles promote I.e make money from ROGUE casinos who are well known as ripping off GENUINELY honest players. IMO their integrity is ZERO.

The service they provide is an advertising tool designed to attract players to their ROGUE links. It's blood money plain and simple.

Casinomeister does NOT promote rogue casinos and will NOT advertise casinos that do the wrong thing.

I'll take CM every day, and twice on Sundays, over rogue-peddlers.

You know, this whole alicek thing seems almost personal to you....hmmm...

 

[baldyj]

Gambling grumbles promote I.e make money from ROGUE casinos who are well known as ripping off GENUINELY honest players. IMO their integrity is ZERO.

The service they provide is an advertising tool designed to attract players to their ROGUE links. It's blood money plain and simple.

Casinomeister does NOT promote rogue casinos and will NOT advertise casinos that do the wrong thing.

I'll take CM every day, and twice on Sundays, over rogue-peddlers.

You know, this whole alicek thing seems almost personal to you....hmmm...

inetbet is Rogue. CM just opts not to call it that and protect them.

They were caught in several lies and then the thread is suddenly locked and buried while CM tried to divert attention. Luckily places like gambling grumbles have the morals to take them on honestly.

I know that you are super in love with this site but you should open your eyes just a bit, eh?
Why was the casino not made to verify their statements which were proved to be lies?
Why was cm trying to divert and minimize the lies?
why was the thread locked?
why was alicek locked out so that she couldn't tell her story here like was done at GG?
How can alicek in the complaint from GG be guilty of fraud since she used no bonus on her win and turned in her docs?
Why are you not curious about the lies but you are curious every time a player has a complaint as to find if they are lying?

It is quite obvious that something really stinks about the whole episode. Of course, CM doesn't wish to discuss it so we should just believe it without so much as a question. inetbet has several complaints against them at several sites. GG is one of the sites that have a bunch of complaints in against them.

 

[The Dude]

inetbet is Rogue. CM just opts not to call it that and protect them.

They were caught in several lies and then the thread is suddenly locked and buried while CM tried to divert attention. Luckily places like gambling grumbles have the morals to take them on honestly.

I know that you are super in love with this site but you should open your eyes just a bit, eh?
Why was the casino not made to verify their statements which were proved to be lies?
Why was cm trying to divert and minimize the lies?
why was the thread locked?
why was alicek locked out so that she couldn't tell her story here like was done at GG?
How can alicek in the complaint from GG be guilty of fraud since she used no bonus on her win and turned in her docs?
Why are you not curious about the lies but you are curious every time a player has a complaint as to find if they are lying?

It is quite obvious that something really stinks about the whole episode. Of course, CM doesn't wish to discuss it so we should just believe it without so much as a question. inetbet has several complaints against them at several sites. GG is one of the sites that have a bunch of complaints in against them.

Since you seem to have a pretty big chip on your shoulder - I'd would be willing to put a wager on you being connected to the PA fraud group - the one that hit up the EH group, Lock casino, Main Street, etc. Don't worry, I have a ton of notes I can go through and connect the dots. I'm not going to make any accusations here, but you clearly fit the profile of some banned members from PA. It's a Saturday, and I have better things to do than respond to trolls. But here I go...

The thread you are referring to was ChuChu's thread about whether or not he received some emails. It was a nine page slugfest that was derailed several times - all on the account of this alicek complaint. I closed it because it was going nowhere.

Alicek submitted a PAB here and we determined that she is connected to a fraud ring operating out of the UK. If you submit a fraudulent PAB, you are booted from the forum. We have strict rules about this. If she was so badly wronged I'm sure she would have emailed us by now. But since then (it's been a few weeks), not a peep.

Unfortunately, there is a small group of members (estimated in the single digits), that have a hair up their ass about this. This is the third thread that has been derailed - and moderating these amateurish juvenile outbursts is becoming tiresome.

Do it some more and see what happens

 

[LHofsdal]

I guess the key word here is "DEBATE".

In a debate there is not really the right answer, there are just opinions. Some of these opinions people believe so strongly, they think they are right. And because of this belief being so stong, they don't see the other side. Or maybe they DON'T want to see the other side. I guess in all reality, that is their right, but doesn't mean they are right.

If members here don't like the way things are run, by all means leave. This is a site that is voluntary, not mandatory. It is by free will that members post here. Because of this being a site that open, of course we are going to get shills, spammers and fraudsters. Nothing we can do about it, they only ones that can do something is the mods and owner to weed them out. Personally, I think they do a terrific job at doing so.

As for this site being "biased" to certain casinos, that is rubbish. If they were "biased" in any way, do you think this site would be here for over a decade? And be respected enough for casinos who have done wrong to ask to be taken of the rogue list? C'mon people think about it.

This thread was started because someone didn't like the way another member was treated, and that is fine, he had an opinion about the mods and owner not liking another member. He obviously felt that way and wanted to let us know why. Does it make him wrong? Does it make him right?

That is where the word "DEBATE" comes into play. The OP stated his opinion, and so did the mods and owner. Then other members stated their opinions and the OP had a chance to rebut it and so did the mods. How this turned into a slug fest about Inetbet and other casinos is beyond me. Everything other than the treatment of GM should not be discussed here.

Do I like Greasemonkey, yes I do. I think he has some valid points that he brings up, do I think he was mistreated? No. We are all adults here and honestly, if Greasemonkey can dish it out, he has to take it too. What really gets under my skin is people posting a "cover up". We all know that there are things behind the scenes that casinos can not let us see, why on earth would the mods and owner let us see this stuff? If they did breach the trust of any casino this site would have been gone a long time ago. We can sit here and debate casinos and the way this site is run until the end of time, but it comes down to trust and fairness of the mods. If they were not trust worthy or fair about members, disputes and everything else, this site would have vanished faster than some processors.

With all that being said, it is of my free will I am going to stop here, my blood is boiling and ask anyone that knows me, you really don't want me to blow a gasket.

LH

 

[greasemonkey]

slight derail... if that is still possible on this thread

If she was so badly wronged I'm sure she would have emailed us by now. But since then (it's been a few weeks), not a peep.

I have seen this said on a few occasions and it makes me curious. Why would you assume that someone would contact you via email after you have kicked them out of the forum and told them you don't believe them?
I personally would not bother contacting or ever coming here again if I was innocent and those things happened to me. I would guess most people are the same. Unless there was correspondence that we were unaware of or something of that nature.

 

[jetset]

I'd would be willing to put a wager on you being connected to the PA fraud group - the one that hit up the EH group, Lock casino, Main Street, etc. Don't worry, I have a ton of notes I can go through and connect the dots

Run for cover, I think someone may be about to be exposed

 

[baldyj]

Since you seem to have a pretty big chip on your shoulder - I'd would be willing to put a wager on you being connected to the PA fraud group - the one that hit up the EH group, Lock casino, Main Street, etc. Don't worry, I have a ton of notes I can go through and connect the dots. I'm not going to make any accusations here, but you clearly fit the profile of some banned members from PA.

Oh do I fit a profile do I? Wow. I realize that you noted you would not make an allegation yet until you could look over your notes but you are trying to discredit my argument with some stuff that is irrellevant. Not only that but it is VERY wrong. so you just muddied the waters and diverted attention away from the inetbet issue, whether on purpose or not. Still have not addressed inetbet lying either. I would be interested in your opinion on them lying about things on that thread.

I hope that in your investigations you are not so apt to assume someone is in a fraud group before you actually look into it. I know that you have this one dead wrong. Painfully wrong. methinks the same thing happened in the alicek situation.

 

[The Dude]

Oh do I fit a profile do I? Wow. I realize that you noted you would not make an allegation yet until you could look over your notes but you are trying to discredit my argument with some stuff that is irrellevant. Not only that but it is VERY wrong. so you just muddied the waters and diverted attention away from the inetbet issue, whether on purpose or not. Still have not addressed inetbet lying either. I would be interested in your opinion on them lying about things on that thread.

I hope that in your investigations you are not so apt to assume someone is in a fraud group before you actually look into it. I know that you have this one dead wrong. Painfully wrong. methinks the same thing happened in the alicek situation.

Bye-bye troll.

 

[Diane]

I have seen this said on a few occasions and it makes me curious. Why would you assume that someone would contact you via email after you have kicked them out of the forum and told them you don't believe them?
I personally would not bother contacting or ever coming here again if I was innocent and those things happened to me. I would guess most people are the same. Unless there was correspondence that we were unaware of or something of that nature.

I disagree. Most people would keep trying to prove their innocence. It's the silence and giving up that seems to reinforce that they were guilty.

If I was innocent, wrongly accused, and kicked out of CM -- you better believe that I would be emailing and protesting the situation to high heaven. I would keep going until it was clear that any further action wouldn't work. All we have is our good name -- I wouldn't slink away if I felt I was accused unfairly. Not by a long shot.

Diane

 

[greasemonkey]

I disagree. Most people would keep trying to prove their innocence. It's the silence and giving up that seems to reinforce that they were guilty.

If I was innocent, wrongly accused, and kicked out of CM -- you better believe that I would be emailing and protesting the situation to high heaven. I would keep going until it was clear that any further action wouldn't work. All we have is our good name -- I wouldn't slink away if I felt I was accused unfairly. Not by a long shot.

Diane

Whoa. That seems crazy from the way I think.

I wouldn't slink away at all either. I would actually go somewhere that I thought would help me though . Obviously if you are kicked out of the forum and cannot log in and you are told that CM will not help you, then you would be best served to go somewhere that actually would help you.
Why would you keep asking someone that is calling you a liar if you know that you are not? You would be wasting your time and you should go somewhere else for that help.

 

[jod5413]

Thank goodness we do not all think the same way, huh?

 

[bryand]

Gotta keep the singleness of purpose here

@greasemonkey - when you first started posting here I should have sent you a PM with a little insight about this forum based on my experience. But I'll share it here in hopes that it may help someone else down the road.

First I'll say that this site is far and away the best, most ethical and most respected of any online player's advocacy site. I have seen countless miracles regarding player disputes, not to mention calling out and weeding out corrupt players.

But you will get little or no love or respect on this board if the mods do not share your position on any given topic. You've been warned.

 

[jod5413]

@greasemonkey - when you first started posting here I should have sent you a PM with a little insight about this forum based on my experience. But I'll share it here in hopes that it may help someone else down the road.

First I'll say that this site is far and away the best, most ethical and most respected of any online player's advocacy site. I have seen countless miracles regarding player disputes, not to mention calling out and weeding out corrupt players.

But you will get little or no love or respect on this board if the mods do not share your position on any given topic. You've been warned.

Although the first part of your post is quite correct, Bryand, the last paragraph is a bit dramatic and not quite true. I have, and I am sure others will chime in, seen on many occasions where a different viewpoint was well received, even with no endorsement by "the mods"! GASP!! And many here are respected for their insights, not how they please or appease the mods. In fact, the mods jobs are simply to "keep things on an even keel", so to speak.

Just my opinion.

 

[jetset]

Although the first part of your post is quite correct, Bryand, the last paragraph is a bit dramatic and not quite true. I have, and I am sure others will chime in, seen on many occasions where a different viewpoint was well received, even with no endorsement by "the mods"! GASP!! And many here are respected for their insights, not how they please or appease the mods. In fact, the mods jobs are simply to "keep things on an even keel", so to speak.

Just my opinion.

I couldn't agree more...and I'm surprised that a respected and together member like Bryand would believe that agreement with the mods is a prerequisite here for a peaceful and productive posting life. I have personally seen many interesting exchanges where members and mods differ in perspective and opinion...without unpleasant consequences.

If I may offer my own perspective, I would suggest that the real trick here is to be reasonable and civil in discussing issues, even when you may have a conflicting view on a topic.

 

[Simmo!]

But you will get little or no love or respect on this board if the mods do not share your position on any given topic. You've been warned.

Let me rephrase that for you...

But you will get little or no love or respect on this board if the mods think you deliver your opinin on any given topic in a disrespectful, antagonistic or confrontational way. You've been warned.

Or put another way: behave respectfully, get treated respectfully.

IMO too many forum posters (on every forum, not just here) think that, because they are 'anonymous' or 'out of reach', they can treat other people and their opinions like shit with no repercussions. That's the real problem.

You can pretty much say what you want (within the forum rules!) as long as you say it politely, with a little humility or while showing respect for the opinions of those you are responding to. The minute you get aggressive, arsey, pissy, arrogant or obnoxious then BryanD is absolutely 100% correct.

-----

Bottom line is I go to a forum to learn, share, have interesting conversations and generally enjoy myself. I don't want to read a bunch of whiney, pissy, aggressive posts from people with agendas, points to prove, chips (sic) on their shoulder or grudges.

 

[maxd]

But you will get little or no love or respect on this board if the mods do not share your position on any given topic. You've been warned.

I think you are confusing "the mods position" with the Forum Rules. Even a casual tour of the forums would turn up a whole variety of circumstances and instances where the mods hold a different position on things than the forum members. In fact there are so many obvious instances of this that your statement beggars belief.

Anyway, as I say, if it the Forum Rules you're talking about then yes, falling afoul of them (especially if you do it intentionally) is good way to catch some stick. Other than that your claim is long on trollish hand-waving and short on facts, IMO.

 

[gaydave]

Guys, with all due respect, every single criticism here is met with dismissal and minimization. I really don't think some of you are taking what is being said at all seriously but it is how many feel. You can't just say "no your wrong" every time someone has an issue with the way things are handled can you? Not and be taken seriously can you?
obviously I like things about the site. I am still here and I still check in. That being said, I agree whole heartedly with bryand. Certainly people are treated differently here. Certainly it has much to do with how agreeable with max and bryan that they are. Some can be rude and crass while defending bryan/max and still be well received here. Others state opposition to something regardless of how calm they state it and are jumped on, silenced, threatened....etc.
Whether you think you are doing it or not isn't important. It is the perception of others and that is that you ARE doing it. Perhaps some could step back and take a harder look. It has been said enough that it must have some merit, right? Obviously many think it is fact, right? Perhaps just saying it isn't happening isn't the way to go. Maybe some looking at it from other's perspective is what is needed.

 

[Simmo!]

Whether you think you are doing it or not isn't important. It is the perception of others

A reasonable point in overall a reasonable post. I think though some people are going to get treated differently whether we want to, realise it or not, simply because you build up opinions of people and react accordingly. We all do it, mods included, because we are human and that's our nature.

I'd reiterate that for me personally, most of the issues faced are with how people post rather than what they post. As pointed out elsewhere, a good post often won't get fully appreciated if it's posted in a way that riles other people.

I just wish more posters would read back their own posts as if they were the recipient of the comments and see how they would react to it. They'd perhaps realise how it is going to rile/upset/antagonise and annoy people, not to mention damaging their own rep with those that just don't care about petty squables and bruised egos.

 

[Nifty29]

A reasonable point in overall a reasonable post. I think though some people are going to get treated differently whether we want to, realise it or not, simply because you build up opinions of people and react accordingly. We all do it, mods included, because we are human and that's our nature.

I'd reiterate that for me personally, most of the issues faced are with how people post rather than what they post. As pointed out elsewhere, a good post often won't get fully appreciated if it's posted in a way that riles other people.

I just wish more posters would read back their own posts as if they were the recipient of the comments and see how they would react to it. They'd perhaps realise how it is going to rile/upset/antagonise and annoy people, not to mention damaging their own rep with those that just don't care about petty squables and bruised egos.

I disagree.

It's not reasonable at all....its just another "I'm a hapless victim" whinge with some snide comments thrown in.

I don't hear any of these 'victims' offering to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

If Gaydave feels he is being treated with less respect than others, perhaps he should go back over his posting history, where his lack of respect for the forum and its staff are very obvious. No, its not a personal attack or libel etc.....because its on the record and it is true.

 

[Simmo!]

I disagree.

It's not reasonable at all....its just another "I'm a hapless victim" whinge with some snide comments thrown in.

I don't hear any of these 'victims' offering to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

If GAYdave feels he is being treated with less respect than others, perhaps he should go back over his posting history, where his lack of respect for the forum and its staff are very obvious. No, its not a personal attack or libel etc.....because its on the record and it is true.

I was responding to the sentiment behind the post, not the content. Of course I disagree with things like "every single criticism here is met with dismissal and minimization" and of course lines like "Not and be taken seriously can you" could be seen as "snide". But I have my opinions on stuff like that and I choose to keep it to myself. Plus those weren't the points I wanted to make something of.

Can you also be careful with referencing people's usernames Nifty - I'd hate for there to be an unfortunate misunderstanding.

 

[gaydave]

I disagree.

It's not reasonable at all....its just another "I'm a hapless victim" whinge with some snide comments thrown in.

I don't hear any of these 'victims' offering to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

If GAYdave feels he is being treated with less respect than others, perhaps he should go back over his posting history, where his lack of respect for the forum and its staff are very obvious. No, its not a personal attack or libel etc.....because its on the record and it is true.

I believe that this post helps to illustrate a few of my points as well as some of the others. Thank you for that.

 

[jetset]

Like most things, surely it comes down to a matter of opinion?

Although GayDave and one or two others may feel aggrieved, and that it is wrong for other members to refute their claims of mod partisanship, it is imo absolutely in order for those other members to voice a different opinion that may be just as strongly held e.g. that the mods do not "pick on" some individuals.

All we can do as members is form and post a personal point of view, preferably in a polite and reasonable manner...we don't have to agree with other views critical of our hosts here. And we are imo right to say so.

Both sides are entitled to their opinions, which appear unlikely to change any time soon, and for that matter continued membership.

 

[The Dude]

Guys, with all due respect, every single criticism here is met with dismissal and minimization. I really don't think some of you are taking what is being said at all seriously but it is how many feel. You can't just say "no your wrong" every time someone has an issue with the way things are handled can you? Not and be taken seriously can you?

Actually, I welcome criticism; I don't dismiss criticism at all. Bear in mind there is a difference in how criticism is presented. A crass "you are all crooks and help people steal money" is not criticism. Questioning the validity of a rogue listing or accredited casino is. Much of the criticism over the years has been integrated into the site and has actually improved Casinomeister.

Certainly people are treated differently here. Certainly it has much to do with how agreeable with max and bryan that they are. Some can be rude and crass while defending bryan/max and still be well received here. Others state opposition to something regardless of how calm they state it and are jumped on, silenced, threatened....etc.

There are three moderators (Max, Simmo!, Webzcas) and one administrator (moi). This is not the bryan/max show; it's a forum with a load of members and four people who try to maintain the peace. You can agree with everything I say, make my coffee, and wash my car, but if you become troublesome and start wrecking the peace, then all that energy has gone to waste.

Whether you think you are doing it or not isn't important. It is the perception of others and that is that you ARE doing it. Perhaps some could step back and take a harder look. It has been said enough that it must have some merit, right? Obviously many think it is fact, right? Perhaps just saying it isn't happening isn't the way to go. Maybe some looking at it from other's perspective is what is needed.

Noted.

If GAYdave feels he is being treated with less respect than others...

That was really uncool. Please don't do that again.

 

[The Dude]

I have seen this said on a few occasions and it makes me curious. Why would you assume that someone would contact you via email after you have kicked them out of the forum and told them you don't believe them?
I personally would not bother contacting or ever coming here again if I was innocent and those things happened to me. I would guess most people are the same. Unless there was correspondence that we were unaware of or something of that nature.

I need to clear up a misconception here. When you submit a complaint via the PAB process, communication between Max and the person is strictly by email; the forum has nothing to do with it. When we deal with fraudulent complaints, we normally get zilch responses from the player when she or he is informed: "the casino has reason to believe fraud has been committed".

Wouldn't you fire back a response like "they are mistaken!" "they lie!" "I did no such thing!"? I know I would. 95% of the time we get nada - as in the case of AliceK. We never heard a word back from her, and we closed her account. Closing one's account does not forbid one from emailing us. They are always free to debate their issue via email.

 

[LHofsdal]

Or put another way: behave respectfully, get treated respectfully.

IMO too many forum posters (on every forum, not just here) think that, because they are 'anonymous' or 'out of reach', they can treat other people and their opinions like shit with no repercussions. That's the real problem.

You can pretty much say what you want (within the forum rules!) as long as you say it politely, with a little humility or while showing respect for the opinions of those you are responding to. The minute you get aggressive, arsey, pissy, arrogant or obnoxious then BryanD is absolutely 100% correct.

-----

Bottom line is I go to a forum to learn, share, have interesting conversations and generally enjoy myself. I don't want to read a bunch of whiney, pissy, aggressive posts from people with agendas, points to prove, chips (sic) on their shoulder or grudges.

I think Simmo hit the nail on the head here. That old saying "Treat people the way you would like to be treated" is so NOT used enough. Before I retired, I worked for a major retail chain for 21 years, and let me tell you, if I was nice to a customer and they came at me with an attitude, I gave it back. I did this for a few years, then thought to myself, there has to be a better way to let these idiots know they are idiots without being a "biatch". I came up with 51 ways to politely tell people they were idiots without ever saying the words "Your a damn idiot". Trust me they knew exaactly what I was saying too.

Even though we are reading what people are typing, the disrespect sometimes makes my mouth fall wide open. It is true that these forums can be a fantastic source of information, and a way to vent some frustration. It is also true we all have a right to have our own opinion. Why must it come down to a slug fest to be able to voice it? It is another thing to voice your opinion and why you feel that way and have someone right there to give you "smack" about your opinion.

Let me give you my opinion, if you like that is great, you don't move on,it is my opinion. But here is my opinion anyway...

This thread was started by Brucake, voicing here opinion on GreaseMonkeys treatment by the mods. He stated his opinion and then the mods stated theirs, nothing to harsh going yet. Then KABOOM some members came in with a not so polite jabs against casinos that really had nothing to do with the reason why this thread was started.

Members talking about threads being locked because the site is "biased" or trying to cover up crap. What the hell does that have to do with the way Greasemonkey was treated. Please someone fill me in on this one, because this highly educated women still can't figure it out.

When Simmo stated treat people respectfully, and that is the way you will be treated, he was 100% correct. Take any thread, I don't care what one it is, but look through it, and noticed if the post was polite, and not in a mean tone, the mods and administrator replied in the same manor. Hell, even when the thread turns ugly with member bashing member, they mods and administrator would chime in with something polite like "Hey lets keep this on topic and be cool about it" of something of that nature. (Good thing they have patience, because if it were me and I had to repeat myself, it would not be pretty.)

Greasemonkey is a big boy and I am sure he can look out for himself, but there is nothing wrong with asking why he was mistreated if you felt strongly about it. He still posts, and asks questions and I still continue to enjoy reading his posts, but the attacks on the mods, admistrator and other members is getting very tiresome. Unless someone comes on here and says something like "ALL YOU MEMBERS HERE ARE SUCH F'N IDIOTS TO BELIEVE ANYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN ON THIS SITE", then I can see people coming back at them like a raging bull, but when someone stats there opinion let it be, if you reply do it with repect and be polite about it. There is no sarcasism needed.

Get the drift of what I am saying here?

LH

 

[Simmo!]

Get the drift of what I am saying here?

Yup, it's...

Treat other people how you want to be treated yourself

Bang on