Bad members

[The Dude]

Most of the membership in the forum consists of a really great bunch of people. We have members from all walks of life, from all parts of the globe, speaking many languages - but sharing one, and with as many points of view as anyone could imagine. Most members post interesting, well thought out posts - and others are just plain entertaining and quirky. The membership is supportive and tolerant (in most cases ) and this is why Casinomeister's forum is one of the best communities on the net.

Unfortunately, like with any forum, there is a darker element. These are members who participate only if it suits their self-serving greediness, some are fraudsters, some are contemptuous trolls. They never last long here for good reason.

If you are banned from this forum for bad behavior, don't come back - you'll be caught out and it can be embarrassing for you.

For instance:
reject726
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/members/
His last comment to participants in the thread was:

Whatever. You think Ill just shut up and let you abuse me? Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you useless cunt.

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/complaints-section.28432/

Good one . This was after he had lost some rep points from his fellow members. Needless to say, he was banned - and that was it. He posts elsewhere (you can google his user name and find out for yourself.) But maybe there is another reject726 posting in other gambling message boards

And then comes 3dfella who has been hanging out for a while:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/members/
He signs up with reject726's email address, so we're pretty sure it's the same guy.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!

There are other members who seem to be connected to this guy - we're just connecting the dots at the moment - it's not rocket science.

End note: I don't like busting people out in public, but with this situation I thought it was well deserving.

 

[kauphy]

sometimes i have prombles with the people on here and what they says but hey everyone has the right to say what they want as long as it does.nt cross the line between saying what you feel and being down right rude. there does seem to be some what of a click going on but hey you find that everywhere. i love this place and love reading the post and bryan and max i think you guys are great and the work you do helps some many people that would otherwise have no where to turn. SO A BIG THANK YOU TO BOTH OF YOU. keep up the good work and have a great weekend

 

[Dinahnana]

Good job Bryan. I know people get upset from time to time but there is no call for using foul language. I think sometimes use the internet to abuse other people because maybe they feel powerless in their own lives. Regardless it is good to show these people up and let them know we will not tolerate this behaviour from anybody. If somebody spoke to me like reject did then I think he would have earned himself quite a slap from me.

 

[Rusty]

There is such a difficult balance between keeping the forum free for all opinions to be expressed and back door censorship.
There has to be ground rules to keep things civil to allow all to feel free to post without the fear of being intimidated or ridiculed.
As such someone has to make the decision of what is and is not acceptable and even though much of this can be subjective I think Bryan and the mods here are as objective as they can be.
I consider this forum not only to be the best gambling forum but also amongst the best moderated public forums on the net.

Keep up the good work.

 

[rockycatt]

persons that use that vulgar language there's no excuse we got mixed company guys /gals and all ages especially the young and the older just pull there isp# in my opinion [its a snap call] as we poker players say

 

[littlebit]

There has to be ground rules to keep things civil to allow all to feel free to post without the fear of being intimidated or ridiculed.

A big AMEN.

 

[jetset]

There are some folks who actually delight in causing offence by using really foul language or in deliberately abusive and provocative behaviour on Internet message boards, and there are probably places on the Web where this is accepted and even applauded.

I'm glad Casinomeister has never been one of these places, and that habitual offenders ultimately find themselves barred in the interests of everyone else enjoying and benefitting from discussion and debate free of personal abuse.

From a posting perspective all it takes is a little personal discipline as a courtesy to other posters.

Perhaps there's some truth in what Osulle says above: "I think sometimes use the internet to abuse other people because maybe they feel powerless in their own lives."

 

[jra miller]

hi kauphy from arizona

sometimes i have prombles with the people on here and what they says but hey everyone has the right to say what they want as long as it does.nt cross the line between saying what you feel and being down right rude. there does seem to be some what of a click going on but hey you find that everywhere. i love this place and love reading the post and bryan and max i think you guys are great and the work you do helps some many people that would otherwise have no where to turn. SO A BIG THANK YOU TO BOTH OF YOU. keep up the good work and have a great weekend

i agree with all that you say dude. people who use swear words do not have anything constuctive to say . i joined this site recently. it is THE business . keep posting . regards jra miller from northern ireland

 

[Pinababy69]

I'll never understand the multiple usernames period. And that goes for everybody. There have been a ton of them on this forum.

I have had the same username for years and years, and yes I've been banned and/or suspended from places. I don't sign up a new username...I just don't go there anymore....or go as a guest.

I just don't get the sneaking around, creating multiple id's, trying to pretend to be someone you're not......I honestly have better things to do with my time...and maybe some of these other people should look into more valuable ways to spend their spare time. And I say that to EVERYONE who does this, not just the ones who get banned here, who curse someone out, who get called out publicly...but everyone who feels the need to do this. Get a life....for real.

 

[The Dude]

And now the guy is emailing me wondering why he's been banned. What a dweeb.

Go ahead and sign back up and make an ass out of yourself again.

 

[JHV]

There is such a difficult balance between keeping the forum free for all opinions to be expressed and back door censorship.
There has to be ground rules to keep things civil to allow all to feel free to post without the fear of being intimidated or ridiculed.
As such someone has to make the decision of what is and is not acceptable and even though much of this can be subjective I think Bryan and the mods here are as objective as they can be.
I consider this forum not only to be the best gambling forum but also amongst the best moderated public forums on the net.

Keep up the good work.

Fast forward 1 month and you are posting a "Goodbye CasinoMeister post" - one has to wonder what has changed during that time....

 

[jetset]

And I have to wonder why you [JHV] appear to be stalking the Rusty issue by bringing it over to this thread?

You made your point in Rusty's farewell thread - why not leave it there?

 

[JHV]

And I have to wonder why you [JHV] appear to be stalking the Rusty issue by bringing it over to this thread?

You made your point in Rusty's farewell thread - why not leave it there?

Look at the times of the posts jetset.

This post was me actually wondering aloud....

Then I went back and read Rusty's goodbye thread and the answer was staring right at me in his post - he gave his reasons. I just pointed out the mystery that was perplexing me in this post as I was saying goodbye to Rusty.

Was there something about me directly quoting Rusty twice in the same post that annoyed you somehow? If so, please explain....

 

[JHV]

Could we instead focus less on attacks which have no merit - and focus more on what *I* believe Rusty was trying to say - so succinctly clarified by my direct quoting him twice in the same post?

There are so many potential conflict-of-interest issues at play here with so many affiliates posting with every post they make covered with affiliate links to casinos who are CLEARLY acting in unethical ways and have done so for a long period of time.

The main reason I respected Rusty and more likely to listen to what he has to say is that he didn't cover his posts with affiliate links. And it's the same reason I'd be more likely to respect your posts Jetset, as they are not covered with affiliate links either.

When I queried Rusty and another poster about how they could compliment InterCasino's handling of a player mistake in one thread, whilst my complaints against InterCasino fell on a number of disinterested ears, he responded with sense and logic and honesty in his post, and I thanked him publicly for it.

The other poster I queried? He ignored my polite question, and instead attacked me in another thread out of the blue. A blatant breach of forum rules that all the mods apparently missed. Could it possibly be that the other poster has InterCasino listed at number 3 and 4 as the "BEST CASINOS ON THE WHOLE INTERNET!" - could that possibly be the reason for his gross lack of objectivity as well as the reason for his ignoring of my polite question as well as the reason for his unprovoked flaming attempt attacking me in another unrelated thread?

No Joe, say it ain't so!

In my opinion, and I cannot speak for Rusty, but I personally believe in his opinion also, this whole board needs to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror, individually. And ask themselves are they really interested in fair online gaming or is the CM forum just a nice bazaar of casino players they can peddle their wares to?

Conflict-of-interest is a serious issue. How can someone who has a casino listed as one of the "BEST CASINOS ON THE WHOLE INTERNET!" be expected to have an objective view on a player report of misconduct against that casino?

How can a board genuinely interested in fair gaming be alerted twice (once by myself and once by thelawnet) that InterCasino is clearly INTENTIONALLY out to mislead and effectively 'trick' new Video Poker players with a horribly disfigured and incorrect Auto-Hold function - how can a board which is GENUINELY interested in fair gaming largely stay completely silent on the issue?

----------

Bryan and this forum is the last line of defence against an army of crooks and would-be crooks - I have no interest in attacking this forum. I want to IMPROVE it!

And the only way it can be improved is if I appeal to everyone's better selves, in the hope that a true desire for fair gaming becomes the primary motivation for posting here - rather than the chase for the almighty $ as fair gaming and ethics are sacrificed on the altar in the race for affiliate revenue.

I might be banned for this. The $ is a very powerful motivator. But I still believe there are enough posters on this forum who ARE genuinely interested in fair gaming, and I call on them to join me in putting pressure on those who prove themselves to be more interested in marketing and earning $$.

 

[The Dude]

...
I might be banned for this. The $ is a very powerful motivator...

Oh please - give me a freaking break.

This is a members' board - in other words it's the members who control the gist of the topics and the direction it takes. I couldn't care less about the $$ since this forum is about providing information - reread the mission statement in case you've forgotten this. I and the mods manage the board. I don't tell people what to say - I don't dictate or ban people for expressing their opinions. We have a set of rules that we expect people to abide by, that's all. You don't call people motherfuckers, cunts or assholes. You don't cross post or post spam. You want to get banned? Break those rules and find out what happens.

Managing the forum: I don not read every thread - that's a truth that you and every member needs to accept. Do you have a complaint? It's stated in a number of places if you want something done about it then submit a PAB. Why? because it will receive our direct attention. Do you want your complaint to be set aside or be turned into a conversation? Then post a posting that rivals War and Peace like the Intercasino one. Do you want me to do something about it? Then PAB a software complaint and I'll go directly to Cryptologic - not a problem. I do not have the time to pick through a twenty page thread to get to the gist of things. Use Westland Bowl's Heroes casino complaint as an example.

Back to the "members' board" thingy. It's up to members to police one another when it comes to "hey, I think you're shilling" or man, I wish there were more members like me. Feel free to recruit all your player buddies and tear apart the RNG of whatever software provider. No one is going to say no to that. In fact that's what makes this board resilient and powerful. People read and listen to what is said here. This is your forum - it's your sounding board - this is a tool for you to use.

edited to add:
If you feel that something needs to change - please feel free to PM me or even start a thread in this forum under suggestions.

 

[JHV]

I hope it's ok to respond to your post here, Bryan - and then I'd like to, if I may, start a new thread about my personal opinions on the conflict-of-interest issues that I believe are common-place.

As you know, I run my own forums and we both know that moderators set the tone. The first time I was temp-banned, it was for a breach of forum rules that pales in comparison to the direct flaming attacks I've been subjected to by other posters, who have received no such attention from mods.

Rusty also pointed out the mods setting the tone issue, when he was commending you and your mod team - but he did bring up the term "backdoor censorship". I'm not saying I was censored, and the fact that you are allowing me to continue to post right now is proof that blanket censorship is not your style. And I understand that you can't be expected to read through my Tolstoy-long ramblings and I respect that - I didn't actually post that thread with a PAB in mind, I was actually genuinely interested in hearing what others thought about it.

Yet, and I didn't put the dots together at the time (they had to be pointed out to me by other posters who have emailed me), very soon after I posted that InterCasino thread, Max jumped ALL OVER ME for my tone used in response to Rome lies which I was aghast at and furious about - lies which have now been proven to be lies and the offenders fired (according to Noah from Rome) since.

When another poster (not even I) suggested I had a case for a PAB in the InterCasino thread, Max ridiculed the idea instantly - and you also dismissed the PAB option in that same thread. When I responded to Max in a jovial, cheeky manner - boom, I got banned. Even Rusty pointed out that I was completely baited by Max. That's potentially an example of backdoor censorship (imo).

So please understand I didn't know (at the time) if I had a case for a PAB, which is why I was gathering others' opinions. Before I even had a chance to realise that I'd been played and lied to multiple times by InterCasino, Max had already ridiculed the idea of a PAB and I'd been temp-banned for giving him cheek.

At the time, I was CERTAIN (incorrectly) that Max was protecting Josh Cantu (obviously I couldn't have been more wrong in my suspicion there). But now, I'm wondering why exactly Max has been on my case from the start? If it was just a tone issue when I was frustrated at Rome lies, surely now those lies have been proven lies, my tone can be forgiven some. Yet the baiting and the unprovoked attacks on me continue - allowed by the mods. If I respond in like manner, I'm then facing temp or permanent ban.

So whilst both Max and you have dismissed the PAB option, you now suggest I make one and I will - and thank you in advance for whatever action / response you are able to garner from InterCasino from it.

---------

Finally, I apologise for the language I used on my forum - but 3 issues:

1. I was emotional and angry that Rusty was leaving for those stated reasons. I have since edited those descriptions to less emotive words.

2. Poker players and poker forums are coarse - 'rude' words are flung around loosely - very different from the polite, cordial tone here. And this is an issue I've struggled with from the start in my own tone / language usage. I beg people to understand that a word used in that environment is frivolous there, and lacks the shock impact it might have on a reader not used to it. As this is your forum and your rules, I'm not asking to be allowed to speak that way - I will modify my tone and language to adjust to this forum's style.

3. However, respectfully, it is one of my forums where those words were used - so when I feel it is appropriate, I will use what words there I like. They will have a different value there than here due to being read by a different audience.

-------

I will now address issues I feel strongly about regarding conflict-of-interest in a new thread, as per your suggestion.

 

[suzecat]

Bryan and this forum is the last line of defence against an army of crooks and would-be crooks - I have no interest in attacking this forum. I want to IMPROVE it!

And the only way it can be improved is if I appeal to everyone's better selves, in the hope that a true desire for fair gaming becomes the primary motivation for posting here - rather than the chase for the almighty $ as fair gaming and ethics are sacrificed on the altar in the race for affiliate revenue.

I might be banned for this. The $ is a very powerful motivator. But I still believe there are enough posters on this forum who ARE genuinely interested in fair gaming, and I call on them to join me in putting pressure on those who prove themselves to be more interested in marketing and earning $$.

Hiya JHV

Just a suggestion for you to consider as everyone does have the right to their opinion. When you read posts with affiliate links consider all you have thought about the poster's real purpose and then decide whether you want to click a link, or just go on with your life. We are all adults here and responsible for our decisions.

BTW your post about Rusty came across as trolling IMO. And I have never seen Jet post a 411 that was ill conceived or unnecessary.

 

[JHV]

Hiya JHV

Just a suggestion for you to consider as everyone does have the right to their opinion. When you read posts with affiliate links consider all you have thought about the poster's real purpose and then decide whether you want to click a link, or just go on with your life. We are all adults here and responsible for our decisions.

BTW your post about Rusty came across as trolling IMO. And I have never seen Jet post a 411 that was ill conceived or unnecessary.

The post made half an hour before I realised why Rusty was leaving? I could have come back and deleted this post above but I'm not the deleting type. Having read this thread before, and after quickly skimming through Rusty's "Goodbye" thread, I was immediately confused.

I then re-read Rusty's "Goodbye" post and thought it extremely pertinent to compare the two quotes together - although he and I may be referring to different kinds of shills, I strongly agreed with what he said regarding apathy, and gave my opinion.

My response to Jetset was respectful, merely pointing out that this post above was made some time before I posted in Rusty's Goodbye thread. I didn't come back here to this thread to post - that would clearly be trolling.

-------

I strongly disagree with your opinion that simply not clicking on a shill's affiliate links is an adequate reaction. I strongly believe affiliates who are here doing marketing work who praise their partner casinos only and never criticise them when they're in the wrong - I believe these shills should be outed publicly and hounded out of business.

But I can't do it alone. If others don't agree with me, obviously I have 0% chance of success. I have to try and convince people of my views. If I can't do it, I can't do it. But I'm going to try.....

 

[The Dude]

Just a quick note on the Intercasino PAB - your thread concerned not being given a goodwill gesture so a PAB wouldn't have been much use, but you emailed me last night about something completely different (the autohold not giving a 99.5% return). That's PAB territory.

Max told you to "forget it!". Wanting a goodwill gesture is not PAB material. You seemed to overreact with your response (my bolding):

https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...at-is-your-opinion-warning-really-long.31765/

Are we to then imply that Pitch-a-Bitch *was* accidentally given that moniker? Or is it just the incessant moaning that belongs in this forum?

You're just a bucket of delight sprinkling sunshine all over this forum, aren't you Maxy?
You make me feel warm and fuzzy and part of a real close-knit community.

One day, if an online casino ever does something to me you consider worthy of a PAB (I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess they'd have to send ninjas to burn my house down and steal my innocence), I would want YOU on the case if you'd accept me as a client.

Max is paid to deal with the complaints - he's not paid to deal with frivolous complaints (which that was IMO). If you have a problem with this then direct your criticisms toward me, not Max, because I'm the bossman.

... Poker players and poker forums are coarse - 'rude' words are flung around loosely - very different from the polite, cordial tone here. And this is an issue I've struggled with from the start in my own tone / language usage. I beg people to understand that a word used in that environment is frivolous there, and lacks the shock impact it might have on a reader not used to it. As this is your forum and your rules, I'm not asking to be allowed to speak that way - I will modify my tone and language to adjust to this forum's style...

Poker players are no different than the members here - so that's a poor excuse. And this board is not all that cordial 100% of the time. It's been running for over a decade and I've seen my share of meltdowns. The thing is - the majority of the members won't tolerate it. And yeah, it's a difficult thing to manage since people get defensive and riled up and start sputtering insults. Sad but true, but I have faith in the members here to hold their emotions in check when debating heated issues. No moderator or myself should have to tell people to be mellow.

 

[JHV]

Just a quick note on the Intercasino PAB - your thread concerned not being given a goodwill gesture so a PAB wouldn't have been much use, but you emailed me last night about something completely different (the autohold not giving a 99.5% return). That's PAB territory.

Ah! Quick apology for getting the two InterCasino issues confused!

[Quick Edit: It's just that it's my opinion that to put in a PAB over the Auto-Hold issue, even if InterCasino corrects it as a result...is not an adequate response to what I (and sadly, only a handful of others it would seem) feel is a gross violation of player trust. There is 0% chance their Auto-Hold rules are an accidental mistake. But new players who trust InterCasino enough to deposit are going to trust them enough to follow the gross Auto-Hold suggestions. It's just blatant, almost arrogant, unethical misconduct - which is in line with my personal experiences at InterCasino - and unless a PAB can result in them being Rogue-listed for it, I don't (personally) see the point in wasting yours or Max's time just to get them to correct it months after I've complained about it, during which time they've done nothing to correct it.]

 

[JHV]

My response to Max when he slammed the door on another player's suggestion to PAB was VERY VERY cheeky, obviously. But it was definitely made in a jovial spirit, and in a spirit I thought was humourous without being insulting - my previous few pages of posts were all very jovial, laughing with other members. I totally see how it could read as disrespectful, and I respected and accepted the temp ban for it.

On the forums I mod, I personally don't ban people for giving me cheek, but I'm respectful enough to accept everyone has different moderation styles.

But if anyone can read WagerWitch's succinct summary of the entire saga, which is almost perfectly spot on (only missing the part where they lied to me saying they'd raise my w/d limits if I sent in IDs, which I did, and they didn't, and when I called they promised to fix, and they didn't...) - and feels that InterCasino have no case to answer after reading that summary....well I'm lost and stunned.

And if the majority of the forum feels that way, I'll pack up and join Rusty on the sidelines and stop beating a dead horse.

------

Poker players on every forum are just about as rude and offensive as you can imagine people can possibly be, but it's largely in good spirits. On BorisPoker, most posters call the owner of the site (username neverstop) n_____stop - yes, that n-word. It's just status quo. He even signs off his posts using that moniker at times.

There are things posted on that site that horrify even me, and I've been posting for a decade on dozens of forums. Feel free to search that word above and there'll be hundreds or thousands of search results - there are pictures posted routinely that would render 99% (guess obv) of posters here stunned and speechless. I cannot even describe what they are. Describing them would be worse than anything I've been banned for.

Respectfully, poker players are nothing like the posters here. We devalue hate words intentionally, causing the words themselves to be meaningless and therefore unable to be used in insult.

CAUTION: Do NOT check out my story if you are easily offended. I'm offended on there at least once a day, and it takes something pretty out-of-this-world to offend me.

 

[suzecat]

I strongly disagree with your opinion that simply not clicking on a shill's affiliate links is an adequate reaction. I strongly believe affiliates who are here doing marketing work who praise their partner casinos only and never criticise them when they're in the wrong - I believe these shills should be outed publicly and hounded out of business.

But I can't do it alone. If others don't agree with me, obviously I have 0% chance of success. I have to try and convince people of my views. If I can't do it, I can't do it. But I'm going to try.....

As long as affiliates are lawful in their activities then no one has the right IMO to dictate how they earn a living, as distasteful as that may seem. Just move on to something you believe in and leave whatever else to those who find it appealing.

 

[JHV]

As long as affiliates are lawful in their activities then no one has the right IMO to dictate how they earn a living, as distasteful as that may seem. Just move on to something you believe in and leave whatever else to those who find it appealing.

100% your opinion is a valid one. I just disagree with it. I'm an idealist - what I believe in is pointing out unethical online casinos and affiliates who promote them without objectivity.

I respect your opinion, I just cannot stay silent whilst they intentionally deceive others. There are no laws regulating these operators (not effectively, in any case) - most of these online casinos are smart enough not to put themselves in locations where rule-of-law exists. CasinoMeister is the last line of defence. So many people know of it, know of Bryan and the work he does - there's no forces held in reserve after this forum - this IS the reserve division.

Whilst your opinion is valid, it is my opinion that you are proposing the very apathy that I believe Rusty spoke of when he said "Goodbye".

 

[The Dude]

...There are things posted on that site that horrify even me, and I've been posting for a decade on dozens of forums. Feel free to search that word above and there'll be hundreds or thousands of search results - there are pictures posted routinely that would render 99% (guess obv) of posters here stunned and speechless. I cannot even describe what they are. Describing them would be worse than anything I've been banned for...

And this is probably why you'll never see that forum referred to by MSNBC, US News & World Report, LA Times, or any other main stream news publication like this one has. I'll chose my way - not a juvenile approach to shock and awe

/derail

 

[JHV]

And this is probably why you'll never see that forum referred to by MSNBC, US News & World Report, LA Times, or any other main stream news publication like this one has. I'll chose my way - not a juvenile approach to shock and awe

/derail

Good lord. No one sane or in their right mind would take us in that forum seriously. It's (barely) controlled organised insanity.

 

[suzecat]

Whilst your opinion is valid, it is my opinion that you are proposing the very apathy that I believe Rusty spoke of when he said "Goodbye".

Dang that Rusty! He really started it didn't he?

Seriously, what you see as apathy, I see as free will (and I didn't develop that concept).

 

[Pinababy69]

Dang that Rusty! He really started it didn't he?

Seriously, what you see as apathy, I see as free will (and I didn't develop that concept).

He sure did...then he takes off, lol.

Isn't that funny Suzecat? That JHV (and myself actually) see it as apathy, and yet you (and probably many others) don't view it like that at all. I guess perception really is everthing isn't it?

 

[jetset]

And this is probably why you'll never see that forum referred to by MSNBC, US News & World Report, LA Times, or any other main stream news publication like this one has. I'll chose my way - not a juvenile approach to shock and awe

/derail

And one of the reasons that Casinomeister is as influential as it is, although I have to say that although I am a strong supporter of this site I think JHV is somewhat overstating the case by asserting rather melodramatically that Casinomeister is the 'last line of defence' in a relatively large industry.

The essence of Casinomeister has always been the diversity of its membership and the more balanced approach to issues that this generates.

Sometimes it provokes accusations of siding with one sector or group or another - or of being mercenary - and at times it slides into personal attack, but a culture of extending the courtesy of self-discipline to the other members has developed strongly here, and I think that's a good thing - whether you're a pokerhead or not.

When you believe strongly in an issue or concept and you are adamant about what should be done about it, it can understandably be frustrating if you meet apathy or opposing views, but that comes with the territory if you elect to set up your soapbox on a message board such as this, where there is a range of informed opinion on just about everything.

Regarding the rather negative commentary on moderation. IMO Max does a great job on both the PAB and moderator front here, and he's clearly a busy guy.

Despite this he retains a great sense of humour....but he can be very direct when he feels it is justified.

In the nine years that I have known him as a skilled industry writer and fair moderator I have rarely seen him go the directly critical route without good reason - and on the few occasions where he has been wrong he is always the first to step forward and redress the issue.

This forum is fortunate to have a moderator of his experience and balance.

Should membership of Casinomeister be confined only to players? In my opinion we would be the worse for it (and btw I am not an affiliate). We need that interaction with other perspectives and the concrete solutions that a mixed membership can bring to bear on problems.

Doing something as petty as banning signatures will irritate those few posters who abuse Bryan's hospitality for their own advantage, either through bad judgement on where to draw the line or a 'the-hell-with-it" attitude. But these are very much in the minority here imo.

Bottom line is that we are hopefully all responsible adults - the need for active and frequent moderator interventions should therefore be correspondingly low.

And the reactions and opinions of other members deserve to be respected, even if they don't always sit well.

 

[JHV]

I think JHV is somewhat overstating the case by asserting rather melodramatically that Casinomeister is the 'last line of defence' in a relatively large industry.

100% genuine question: If someone didn't find the redress they felt they deserved here, to whom / where would they turn?

In the nine years that I have known [Max] as a skilled industry writer and fair moderator I have rarely seen him go the directly critical route without good reason - and on the few occasions where he has been wrong he is always the first to step forward and redress the issue.

Then I must be in the wrong, or my memory of the development of events is flawed. Can I outline them as I remember them, and corrected by Max / Bryan / anyone else where I'm wrong?

1. Max assists me with converting my username back to JHV for which I was grateful.

2. Next interaction I remember, Max has locked the Rome thread when I'm aghast and furious at the blatant lies being flung at me by Rome representative Josh Cantu (which have since been proven to be lies - however, I accept Max and no one else could have known this for certain at the time). I react in shock at the locking of the thread (I was thinking to myself at the time: "This guy must be personal friends with Josh and is protecting him!" - obviously I was totally wrong there, but I couldn't understand locking the thread at that point, when the Rome rep was just inventing lies so laughable, I could expose some of them instantly if required).

The reason given later I *think* was my tone used? Which I understood, for all an objective spectator knew, I could have a fraudster as Josh was claiming, although it was pretty obvious Josh's information was littered with contradictions and errors for any savvy reader who'd read the whole thread.

I tried to calm down, but I'm a drama queen - I've never come across that before on a forum (someone just ruthlessly writing fiction sentence after sentence accusing me of this, that and the other).

It was only later, via private email, it was suggested that it was my InterCasino thread posting which caused Max's adverse reaction towards me, rather than my tone requiring the locking of the Rome thread. Note: this was merely suggested by others, I am still clueless (in before Alicia Silverstone jokes...).

3. I didn't pay those suggestions much heed and was laughing and joking in a jovial manner with other posters in the InterCasino thread when a player suggested I submit a PAB - Max was in there quick as a flash ridiculing the PAB idea - which I didn't mind, and I held no animosity towards him as I made (what I thought - obv fail) was a humourous post about Ninjas stealing my virginity or god knows what. I think I also cheekily used a play on words regarding something Max said about PAB not being a place for bitching and moaning - I was mucking around and it VERY CHEEKY at best and bordering on disrespectful at worst, but I meant no harm by it.

4. I was then temp banned and apologised and accepted the ban.

5. And I don't think Max and I have interacted since except when I went on an anti-organised religion rant (as I am liable to do occasionally, which usually offends a lot of people who are religious) - and I think Max gave me a month for that. I actually genuinely somehow misread "The Attic" to be like an "Anything Goes", even though it *clearly* states (as Bryan pointed out) "this is NOT a place to go apeshit". Reading comprehension: FAIL

6. However, and I don't want to get into a big deal about it, but I mean guys threatened me with violence in that thread - were they banned? And whilst I was obviously incredibly insulting to posters in that thread, I firmly believe I targeted not one single poster who didn't attack me first - if I'm wrong, please point out so. I gave a little better than I got, but if someone can find an example of me attacking someone randomly out of the blue, I'd be interested in assessing it - I'm simply not a troll and that would be trollish behaviour. I feel very strongly about serious issues that are controversial like religion, but I'm not trolling with those posts, I'm giving my viewpoints in an inappropriate tone (for this forum).

7. So I guess, whilst I obviously got off on the wrong foot with Max - maybe I'm just blind - but I'm not totally sure why. I could understand his dislike for me after my cheeky ninja post, but he clearly had very anti-JHV views before then - and it's there where I'm *lost*, I guess (perhaps stupidly so).

Am I missing the forest for the trees here? Have I left something obvious out? Please correct me if so - because as the current situation stands, I can count 10 attacks EASILY (all unprovoked) against me which have sailed through the goal-keeper - but I'm walking on eggshells here! And, frankly, I'm getting older and not as nimble as I used to be....

And the reactions and opinions of other members deserve to be respected, even if they don't always sit well.

I hear this a lot, and I know it's coming from a good place when Bryan and you say it - but I guess my issue is: What if it's the reactions and opinions of other members which I believe are unethical? How can I respect their opinion when I so strongly disagree with it, but where to disagree would be to say "I think, mate, you're acting in an unethical manner here" or "You're clearly showing a lack of objectivity by supporting this yet staying silent on that, and I suspect it's due to your reliance on affiliate revenue from xxx casino" or a statement like that?

It seems like a paradox to me.

 

[The Dude]

I think it's time to get over the "they banned me but not them" thing. It reminds me of the story of a guy speeding on the freeway, along with everybody else, when he gets pulled over. The cop writes him a ticket. The guy accepts this and as the cop begins to walk away the guy asks, "Say, why me? Why'd you pull me over and not the others?" The cop says, "Do you ever go fishing?" They guy replies, "Yes." The cop says, "Do you ever catch all the fish?"

So sorry we didn't ban everyone in the thread that responded to your response. Apparently, you stood out more than the others - like the guy speeding. But again, like I've stated before, your suspension was lifted - no problem. So let's move on and quit worrying about it, okay? Thanks!

 

[catrina m]

I have read both threads dealing with this issue.

Rusty was indeed a valuable member. Not just for his insights but his involvement. ( sheep quiz was time consuming I would imagine). There can be no replacement for him.

JHV, You have stated you want to be considered as a valuable member, and indeed you are.

Infighting and insinuations should not be a part of this community. I am guilty myself of taking defense if I do not feel the post's take my side.


I am but one of many that make this the BEST message board on the internet. Good or bad.

Bryan is the reason it is here and deserves respect for dedicating a great deal of his life to this. The mods here also deserve the same respect.

Members come and members go but this message board will always be here until the casinomeister says goodbye.

 

[JHV]

I think it's time to get over the "they banned me but not them" thing. It reminds me of the story of a guy speeding on the freeway, along with everybody else, when he gets pulled over. The cop writes him a ticket. The guy accepts this and as the cop begins to walk away the guy asks, "Say, why me? Why'd you pull me over and not the others?" The cop says, "Do you ever go fishing?" They guy replies, "Yes." The cop says, "Do you ever catch all the fish?"

So sorry we didn't ban everyone in the thread that responded to your response. Apparently, you stood out more than the others - like the guy speeding. But again, like I've stated before, your suspension was lifted - no problem. So let's move on and quit worrying about it, okay? Thanks!

Point taken.

Genuinely wasn't trying to stir the pot, more look for where I went wrong. But point taken and great analogy...!

-------

I try to get my friends to ask occasional policemen if he's "that guy from the Village People" but haven't found a friend foolish enough yet. Am not giving up hope though...


(Edit: I try often to Multi-Quote and never able to - yet somehow fluke it that time unintentionally.)

 

[KasinoKing]

(Edit: I try often to Multi-Quote and never able to - yet somehow fluke it that time unintentionally.)

I suspect I know what the problem is there;
Say you want to "Multi-Quote" 4 posts - what you have to do is hit the "Multi-Quote" button on the first 3, and then the "Quote" button on the last one.

KK

 

[maxd]

[ot]
Selecting the posts via "Multi-Quote" and then hitting the "Post Reply" button works too. I think that's the way I usually do it.
[/ot]

 

[jetset]

JHV - my perception - and I could obviously be quite wrong - is that you tend to play the victim to some extent in your exchanges and occasional jokey back-offs, whereas I know Max personally as a pretty grounded character.

Anyway, that's all water under the bridge and here you are posting again - testimony to the reasonable approach taken by the guys running the show here.

Regarding alternative routes, I have productively (not always so, I admit) used direct interaction with the operator; communicating with reputable affiliates associated with the operator; 'some' of the better licensing jurisdictions; media pressure and discussion with the better software providers.

All can be successful avenues in attempting to solve individual player disputes without the complexities of expensive litigation or public chest thumping.

Trying to change corporate practices and cultures for the better is definitely commendable but probably a longer term project requiring considerably more coordination, participation and effort than voluminous posts on forums and berating other members for not sharing your activism.

The influence of this site and the direct and personal intervention of its respected webmaster alone has probably solved more issues than you are likely to encounter.

There is almost certainly common purpose with your ideals, but perhaps other members have reasons for staying within their own comfort zones and handling their own issues....and they have that personal right as members here.

I believe that people visit forums in pursuit of knowledge, social contact, perhaps to seek revenge or air a grievance, or find advice and assistance relevant to what is for most a leisure activity, and that may be why you perceive different viewpoints or a lack of response as 'apathy'.

Forums are valuable vehicles and can make a difference, and there is no doubt that timely warnings at sites like this have alerted many a player about the bad buggers in this industry and hopefully steered them away from same. That in itself is a major attribute.

But members are here voluntarily and have the right to make their own decisions and decide their own courses of action based on the information which other members and the site provides.

Persuasion often works better than zealotry.

Regarding your dilemma with upbraiding other members you perceive to be acting unethically, as a first step there is always the PM system, but a polite debate is not impossible even on such thorny issues - it's the way you present your argument that counts.