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.