OK, Dave - we can at least agree that ALL portalmasters do NOT fall within these generalisations that gambling webmasters are evil and unprincipled!! Nevertheless, attacking them detracts from the main debate and is not really productive. And as Spear points out an unprincipled approach to business in the present does nothing to enhance that which is possible in the future.
We also agree on the need for more expert comment, although I would suggest to you that the reason for the lack of comment is rather that they are unconvinced at this time and do not want to mislead the public in either direction.
I would be surprised (and not a little disappointed) if guys like the Wiz and the Gamemaster were not pursuing this matter because it is one of gravity and they realise that their independent opinions are followed and respected. Hopefully we will hear more from these guys and maybe other credible "third parties" in the not too distant future.
I agree with your comment on Michael that "Even the MGS paid for his vacation, I don't think that he will continue to support them if he has solid evidence of a gaffed game. He is above that." However, at the same time I challenge your use of the phrase "paid for his vacation" again (as I did last year because I was on the same 4 day Major Millions winner verification trip.) I think you are deliberately using this wording to suggest that this sort of business junket can cheaply "buy" those who are invited (with no strings attached) and call for their support in possible future disputes such as this. Nothing could be further from the truth, and MGS has at no time implied that there should be any quid pro quo other than honestly reporting our unsupervised interviews with the lucky winner.
The point on your post that I strongly disagree with is that which you make regarding online media reportage.
I very much doubt that even Microgaming, or for that matter the other providers who have been named but apparently ignored by you has the sort of clout you imply that could silence the many online media (some owned by competitors)
I definitely do not accept your proposition that some sort of general censorship is going around, and that this is why the TG issue is not being reported. That is simply implausible.
And by the way both Casinomeister, Bet2Gamble Newsletter and InfoPowa have reported this story in a sufficiently balanced way as to attract criticism from BOTH sides!
It occurs to me that the reason may be that the media are far more vulnerable to litigation than individuals exchanging personal views on message boards. Especially if the editors' view is that a conclusive case has not been presented and a cautious approach is therefore warranted. And that perhaps they, too are as yet unconvinced and await a more complete and proven understanding of what TG and his supporters are trying to say.
It is beginning to look as if everyone who does not support TG's work is being condemned as immoral and without principle, and that is patently unacceptable.
We also agree on the need for more expert comment, although I would suggest to you that the reason for the lack of comment is rather that they are unconvinced at this time and do not want to mislead the public in either direction.
I would be surprised (and not a little disappointed) if guys like the Wiz and the Gamemaster were not pursuing this matter because it is one of gravity and they realise that their independent opinions are followed and respected. Hopefully we will hear more from these guys and maybe other credible "third parties" in the not too distant future.
I agree with your comment on Michael that "Even the MGS paid for his vacation, I don't think that he will continue to support them if he has solid evidence of a gaffed game. He is above that." However, at the same time I challenge your use of the phrase "paid for his vacation" again (as I did last year because I was on the same 4 day Major Millions winner verification trip.) I think you are deliberately using this wording to suggest that this sort of business junket can cheaply "buy" those who are invited (with no strings attached) and call for their support in possible future disputes such as this. Nothing could be further from the truth, and MGS has at no time implied that there should be any quid pro quo other than honestly reporting our unsupervised interviews with the lucky winner.
The point on your post that I strongly disagree with is that which you make regarding online media reportage.
I very much doubt that even Microgaming, or for that matter the other providers who have been named but apparently ignored by you has the sort of clout you imply that could silence the many online media (some owned by competitors)
I definitely do not accept your proposition that some sort of general censorship is going around, and that this is why the TG issue is not being reported. That is simply implausible.
And by the way both Casinomeister, Bet2Gamble Newsletter and InfoPowa have reported this story in a sufficiently balanced way as to attract criticism from BOTH sides!
It occurs to me that the reason may be that the media are far more vulnerable to litigation than individuals exchanging personal views on message boards. Especially if the editors' view is that a conclusive case has not been presented and a cautious approach is therefore warranted. And that perhaps they, too are as yet unconvinced and await a more complete and proven understanding of what TG and his supporters are trying to say.
It is beginning to look as if everyone who does not support TG's work is being condemned as immoral and without principle, and that is patently unacceptable.
}
