Requesting a review of the 'Singer' situation

On September 29,2017, Dan Druff took the following action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I have banned Rob Singer.

Maybe in the future he can return if he is willing to change his behavior, but I've had enough. The racist post he made on page 3 (which you can still see, with one word censored) was the final straw.

---

Six month later, Dan reversed course and reinstated Singer with the following announcement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'm going to reinstate him now, but he will be restricted to post only in this thread and the other recent Singer thread.

I will delete any posts of his anywhere else.

---

In my opinion, this reinstatement was not only ill-advised. I suspect Dan caved to lobbying from Alan, although Alan will deny this. I also suspect that site traffic being down, as folks tuning in only to see and participate in the drama stopped visiting, was a part of this decision, although Dan says it was not.

Ok, so while I personally think this was an ill-advised reinstatement, it is Dan's site and his right to do so. I hope the Alan Lobbying thing didn't play into it though. I am not against second chances so the only person lobbying that should have been considered is Singer himself, if he promised to behave better.....and if he did, that is a promise he broke.

The next post I wish to have considered would be Singer's very first post after re-instation. Particularly the first two lines of that very first post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'm cracking a smile right now but I'll wipe it off so some of you don't get too agitated. And to Dan, I'll follow your rules above. Also, aside from a post I made at the other forum that I'm copying and pasting below, I'm not gonna be responding to any of redietz' whacky foolishness.

---

Now I ask you:

1.) Has Singer followed the rules he agreed to? Posting only in one thread?

2.) Has he stopped responding to or attacking Redietz as he specifically agreed to in the first lines of that very first post?

3.) Has he stopped attacking anyone? Or has he continued with the same 'hateful attacks' that Dan said he had enough of?

4.) Does Singer contribute anything positive?

My contention is that nothing has changed. It is the exact same 'hateful' attacks on the same people. Singer hasn't kept his word of changing and following Dan's rules. So Now Dan Druff, I request of you to keep your word.

Yes, Dan said those things.

Yes, Dan is not following through.

The reality is that he has clearly changed his position on the issue, for whatever reason.

Were I a gamblin' man I'd bet your plea will fall upon deaf ears.

It almost seems as if Dan is to Singer as Trump is to Putin: we, the people, see the danger and urge him to swerve, but instead of heeding our advice he continues to drive headlong into the abyss.

Whatever, it don't mean nothin'.

Kewlj why don't you just avoid this forum and do your reading and posting over at WOV?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj why don't you just ... do your ... posting over at WOV?

---

Hello, McFly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj why don't you just avoid this forum and do your reading and posting over at WOV?

---

Hello, McFly?

---

Don't be gullible MrV. Alan is attempting to bury the original post of this thread, by hopefully changing the subject and have numerous posts on the new subjects, hoping maybe Dan won't see a rather compelling request. So Alan specifically picked a topic he though would get responses. This is a trick out of the troll playbook that Alan knows so well and yet another case of Alan trying to protect and enable Singer.

However, it is much harder to bury an initial post of the thread with the topic in the title. Plus, I will not let that happen. I will just keep periodically reposting. :cool:

Kewlj there is no way that my subsequent posts can bury this. Your post is first. You created the thread. I can't remove it or bury it.

Why don't you read and post at WOV where so many agree with you? That's what you want -- agreement. Any disagreement is an attack on APs, right?

alan, can you REALLY be this stupid?

KJ is BANNED from posting at WoV.

But of course you know this.

Christ on a crutch, man!

MisterV.... duh.

What then was the point of suggesting he post there?

That is currently no more possible than your having actually seen 18 yo's in a row.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Why don't you read and post at WOV where so many agree with you? That's what you want -- agreement. Any disagreement is an attack on APs, right?

---

No that is not correct Alan. I am fine with disagreement. Disagreement is part of a healthy discussion from which many can benefit. What I am not fine with is deceit, and dishonesty in distorting fact and alternative realities and intentionally misleading other players /members.

As to WoV: despite some issues with how the site is run and some things I don't like or approve of, I would return there in a second because it is far superior to the sites I have been reduced to, including this site, which IMO is nothing but a anti-AP hate site. At least at WoV, people who's only intent is to be disruptive are removed. Either that or given their own "corner". ;) That's in humor. I have no problem with Nathan. She doesn't post much of anything that is of interest to me, but I don't see the kind of personal attacks either.


There is a new little side story to my banning at WoV that probably only RS knows of (unless there are other crossover members I am not aware of). I don't know how much I can say here without getting into trouble, but...:rolleyes:, as many know, my banning at WoV involved a third party. A third party also a website owner that banned me from his own site prior to in my opinion, manipulating Mike into extending that ban to WoV.

So the new development: That third party and I have sort of reached an unconventional agreement, in which I am back on that third party's site, contributing positively as I always had. It is rather a shame that Mike is not, at least at this time, capable of finding some kind of remedy as well. But as my late partner used to say almost daily "it is what it is". :cool:

Alan, kew is unable to depart from this forum because he is ADDICTED to it....just as he is addicted to casino gambling! He thrives on conflict, which is why he throws out so many stupid and irrelevant topics and replies. Meaningless drama is his daddy, which is the exact reason for filling his posts with every personal family and social problem that his dysfunctional family has created for themselves. And to top it all off, he is a walking, talking, proven liar and bs'er.

Thus, threads like this appear that only an idiot like maxp could love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, kew is unable to depart from this forum because he is ADDICTED to it....just as he is addicted to casino gambling! He thrives on conflict, which is why he throws out so many stupid and irrelevant topics and replies. Meaningless drama is his daddy, which is the exact reason for filling his posts with every personal family and social problem that his dysfunctional family has created for themselves. And to top it all off, he is a walking, talking, proven liar and bs'er.

Thus, threads like this appear that only an idiot like maxp could love.

---

Crazy, ugly, delusional cousin Eddie. :rolleyes:

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish. Mendelson runs off to take blurry blackjack table photos to debunk partial counting of a second table claims. He doesn't measure the distances; he doesn't consult optometrists about clarity at the distances; he doesn't ask professional blackjack players. He just runs out and takes pictures and proclaims "gotcha." He was wrong. Then I mention getting "checks" -- I'll stick with the Americanized spelling (Argentino would prefer it, I'm sure) -- at the sports book, and Mendelson says "he never heard of it." When I tell him to keep calling, it dawns on him that he may be wrong (again) and he calls the NGC. You've gotta be kidding.

The problem isn't Mr. Mendelson playing Clouseau. The problem is that he plays Clouseau against perceived APs, and stays completely mum regarding others. Now normally, I'd say that's his prerogative. Gamblers who lose have issues with those who don't. It's a law of nature. What makes Mendelson different, however, is that he has a history as a professional consumer advocate and investigative journalist. So when he brings arguments to bear against some but not others, many readers assume he's fair, and that he knows what he's talking about gambling-wise. He isn't fair, however, and he doesn't know much. His earned high-quality reputation actually makes his rhetoric worse.

Now none of this would matter, except these are the two highest-volume-to-date posters on this forum, so the forum is, essentially, about them. If the two highest volume posters are either completely ignorant or making shit up, there's not much one can do, and there's really no hope for the forum. When a high profile, nationally recognized journalist with 15,000 posts decides my use of the word "checks" is worthy of a gotcha, but someone else's mystery system that's overcome negative EV to the tune of a million dollars isn't worth some hard origin questions (such as, "How did the IRS agree you had demonstrated a model that could generate profits after you'd lost the previous five years?"), what is one to do? When a high profile, nationally recognized investigative journalist with 15,000 posts calls the NGC to see if sports bets can be paid with chips, but doesn't call the NGC about a rigged video poker machine in an Arizona storage locker, what is one to do?

Fortunately, I think the tide turned a bit with more math-oriented people on the site. There's no question both Mr. Mendelson's cover and Argentino's schtick have lost most of their credibility. Mr. Mendelson's son blew his cachet, and Argentino's weird insistence that I texted him, but that he lost the texts, speaks for itself.

I don't think there is a solution. Dan seems to treat Mr. Mendelson a little equal-er, to paraphrase Orwell. Mendelson and Argentino are the two dominant posters. They haven't been held to any standards of consistency or evidence. Argentino just makes shit up, fires it out there, and then waits to see if he's been banned. The irony in all this is that Dan runs the pokerfraudalert site which shoots down fraudsters and does good, and Dan has contributed to uncovering classic and famous cheating scandals. But he also has this site, with the two most prolific posters pushing a ton of hokum.

I have the rights to some site names that I'll be getting up and running in the months ahead, including TheSkepticalGambler.com. I had no intention of having forums on the sites, as I have no interest in generating income with the sites or being frat boy president, but maybe I can attach a forum after football season and go from there. As in fifth grade, however, if you make a claim on that forum, you'll have to show the math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish.

---

It is a 2 part process. Basically they want to promote their won "MIC's"....that's mathematically impossible claims. Things like longterm winning playing -EV games, 18 y.o.'s in a row, stop limits, and a whole host of other 'voodoo' MIC's. To do so they must first tear down the math that says their claims and positions are impossible. AND they must then tear down those that that defend the math and successfully use the math to play with an advantage and make money.

So they do everything in their power to tear down, distract, distort, manipulate and that includes personal attacks when they have no other answers.

As I sit in the bleachers, I am not surprised how the initial posts have "played out" I was one of the first individuals to view the post. My scorecard was being filled out before anyone came to the plate.

For myself, one of four individuals were going to reply with something off the wall, not pertaining to the subject matter. Since two of these individuals are "followers" that left two candidates. Since one is involved in the post itself, and cannot refute 100 percent of the comments, that left one individual. For the record, my scorecard was done in ink, in advance. I was not disappointed.

OK, after the initial mudslinging, at some point individuals should address the issue itself.

I will try to bring the train back on the tracks. Again, most know I am independent to the factions on the forum. Here are the key five options (there could be more):

1) Enforce the rules dictated by the forum owner.

2) Give a warning to the "banned" poster (double secret probation?), but limit him to the agreed two threads.

3) Give full immunity.

4) Narrow the poster to one thread.

5) The forum owner takes a secret ballot via email from a limited number of forum posters. Let the forum community decide.

Time for the seventh inning stretch.

I repeat: I can't fathom why Rob or Alan would even WANT to be here! The thread on the player's stats screen spoke volumes and was dissed off as inconsequential. When these two are gone, it turns into a vile name calling war- not any better than when they're present.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish. Mendelson runs off to take blurry blackjack table photos to debunk partial counting of a second table claims. He doesn't measure the distances; he doesn't consult optometrists about clarity at the distances; he doesn't ask professional blackjack players. He just runs out and takes pictures and proclaims "gotcha." He was wrong. Then I mention getting "checks" -- I'll stick with the Americanized spelling (Argentino would prefer it, I'm sure) -- at the sports book, and Mendelson says "he never heard of it." When I tell him to keep calling, it dawns on him that he may be wrong (again) and he calls the NGC. You've gotta be kidding.

The problem isn't Mr. Mendelson playing Clouseau. The problem is that he plays Clouseau against perceived APs, and stays completely mum regarding others. Now normally, I'd say that's his prerogative. Gamblers who lose have issues with those who don't. It's a law of nature. What makes Mendelson different, however, is that he has a history as a professional consumer advocate and investigative journalist. So when he brings arguments to bear against some but not others, many readers assume he's fair, and that he knows what he's talking about gambling-wise. He isn't fair, however, and he doesn't know much. His earned high-quality reputation actually makes his rhetoric worse.

Now none of this would matter, except these are the two highest-volume-to-date posters on this forum, so the forum is, essentially, about them. If the two highest volume posters are either completely ignorant or making shit up, there's not much one can do, and there's really no hope for the forum. When a high profile, nationally recognized journalist with 15,000 posts decides my use of the word "checks" is worthy of a gotcha, but someone else's mystery system that's overcome negative EV to the tune of a million dollars isn't worth some hard origin questions (such as, "How did the IRS agree you had demonstrated a model that could generate profits after you'd lost the previous five years?"), what is one to do? When a high profile, nationally recognized investigative journalist with 15,000 posts calls the NGC to see if sports bets can be paid with chips, but doesn't call the NGC about a rigged video poker machine in an Arizona storage locker, what is one to do?

Fortunately, I think the tide turned a bit with more math-oriented people on the site. There's no question both Mr. Mendelson's cover and Argentino's schtick have lost most of their credibility. Mr. Mendelson's son blew his cachet, and Argentino's weird insistence that I texted him, but that he lost the texts, speaks for itself.

I don't think there is a solution. Dan seems to treat Mr. Mendelson a little equal-er, to paraphrase Orwell. Mendelson and Argentino are the two dominant posters. They haven't been held to any standards of consistency or evidence. Argentino just makes shit up, fires it out there, and then waits to see if he's been banned. The irony in all this is that Dan runs the pokerfraudalert site which shoots down fraudsters and does good, and Dan has contributed to uncovering classic and famous cheating scandals. But he also has this site, with the two most prolific posters pushing a ton of hokum.

I have the rights to some site names that I'll be getting up and running in the months ahead, including TheSkepticalGambler.com. I had no intention of having forums on the sites, as I have no interest in generating income with the sites or being frat boy president, but maybe I can attach a forum after football season and go from there. As in fifth grade, however, if you make a claim on that forum, you'll have to show the math.

---

You're steadily decreasing "credibility" just took another hit with a foolish, meaningless rap like that. Keep it up and anyone who's been stupid enuf to pay for your silly picks will be long gone in short order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish.

---

It is a 2 part process. Basically they want to promote their won "MIC's"....that's mathematically impossible claims. Things like longterm winning playing -EV games, 18 y.o.'s in a row, stop limits, and a whole host of other 'voodoo' MIC's. To do so they must first tear down the math that says their claims and positions are impossible. AND they must then tear down those that that defend the math and successfully use the math to play with an advantage and make money.

So they do everything in their power to tear down, distract, distort, manipulate and that includes personal attacks when they have no other answers.

---

I'd say you're two parts nonsense and three parts dunce.

No person formally educated in math would ever say something so blatantly stupid as "it's mathematically impossible for 18 yo's in a row to ever happen".

If you ever paid attention you'd see where I have never disputed math. After all, based on education levels and the moronic things you say and claim, you're clearly the math incompetent here. And maybe....just maybe....you can introduce us to one or two of redietz' "university math professors" who says accomplishing what I have the way I've been able to do it, is "mathematically impossible".

The more you post about these things, the clearer it gets that you're nothing but an angry, hateful, "look at me!" needy minority in a world filled with normal human beings. (and can you just IMAGINE the heat level under eddie's soaking wet collar right about now!) :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Yes, Dan said those things.

Yes, Dan is not following through.

The reality is that he has clearly changed his position on the issue, for whatever reason.

Were I a gamblin' man I'd bet your plea will fall upon deaf ears.

It almost seems as if Dan is to Singer as Trump is to Putin: we, the people, see the danger and urge him to swerve, but instead of heeding our advice he continues to drive headlong into the abyss.

Whatever, it don't mean nothin'.

---

Now, you've turned it into a political thread. Trump has more negotiating experience than all previous presidents combined. No one has gotten the best of him and no one is going to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, kew is unable to depart from this forum because he is ADDICTED to it....just as he is addicted to casino gambling! He thrives on conflict, which is why he throws out so many stupid and irrelevant topics and replies. Meaningless drama is his daddy, which is the exact reason for filling his posts with every personal family and social problem that his dysfunctional family has created for themselves. And to top it all off, he is a walking, talking, proven liar and bs'er.

Thus, threads like this appear that only an idiot like maxp could love.

---

Says the idiot that has over 100,000 posts in the internet gambling forums that are full of hocus pocus, smoke and mirrors, and endless derogatory comments about others. Rob has a mirror behind his lap top to look into and get ideas for posts. He's really talking about his loathesome self.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

I repeat: I can't fathom why Rob or Alan would even WANT to be here! The thread on the player's stats screen spoke volumes and was dissed off as inconsequential. When these two are gone, it turns into a vile name calling war- not any better than when they're present.

---

You learned a lot in the Singer school of mudslinging. Rob taught you well. Every game had a small sample space. About 200,000 coin-in would be about one royal cycle. Two of the games the house lost money. But the stats pretty much are inconsequential because the sample spaces are too damn small, period. There is no disrespect in that conclusion. However, Rob's loser protege felt it necessary to say the stats were disrespected. Get the fuck out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish. Mendelson runs off to take blurry blackjack table photos to debunk partial counting of a second table claims. He doesn't measure the distances; he doesn't consult optometrists about clarity at the distances; he doesn't ask professional blackjack players. He just runs out and takes pictures and proclaims "gotcha." He was wrong. Then I mention getting "checks" -- I'll stick with the Americanized spelling (Argentino would prefer it, I'm sure) -- at the sports book, and Mendelson says "he never heard of it." When I tell him to keep calling, it dawns on him that he may be wrong (again) and he calls the NGC. You've gotta be kidding.

The problem isn't Mr. Mendelson playing Clouseau. The problem is that he plays Clouseau against perceived APs, and stays completely mum regarding others. Now normally, I'd say that's his prerogative. Gamblers who lose have issues with those who don't. It's a law of nature. What makes Mendelson different, however, is that he has a history as a professional consumer advocate and investigative journalist. So when he brings arguments to bear against some but not others, many readers assume he's fair, and that he knows what he's talking about gambling-wise. He isn't fair, however, and he doesn't know much. His earned high-quality reputation actually makes his rhetoric worse.

Now none of this would matter, except these are the two highest-volume-to-date posters on this forum, so the forum is, essentially, about them. If the two highest volume posters are either completely ignorant or making shit up, there's not much one can do, and there's really no hope for the forum. When a high profile, nationally recognized journalist with 15,000 posts decides my use of the word "checks" is worthy of a gotcha, but someone else's mystery system that's overcome negative EV to the tune of a million dollars isn't worth some hard origin questions (such as, "How did the IRS agree you had demonstrated a model that could generate profits after you'd lost the previous five years?"), what is one to do? When a high profile, nationally recognized investigative journalist with 15,000 posts calls the NGC to see if sports bets can be paid with chips, but doesn't call the NGC about a rigged video poker machine in an Arizona storage locker, what is one to do?

Fortunately, I think the tide turned a bit with more math-oriented people on the site. There's no question both Mr. Mendelson's cover and Argentino's schtick have lost most of their credibility. Mr. Mendelson's son blew his cachet, and Argentino's weird insistence that I texted him, but that he lost the texts, speaks for itself.

I don't think there is a solution. Dan seems to treat Mr. Mendelson a little equal-er, to paraphrase Orwell. Mendelson and Argentino are the two dominant posters. They haven't been held to any standards of consistency or evidence. Argentino just makes shit up, fires it out there, and then waits to see if he's been banned. The irony in all this is that Dan runs the pokerfraudalert site which shoots down fraudsters and does good, and Dan has contributed to uncovering classic and famous cheating scandals. But he also has this site, with the two most prolific posters pushing a ton of hokum.

I have the rights to some site names that I'll be getting up and running in the months ahead, including TheSkepticalGambler.com. I had no intention of having forums on the sites, as I have no interest in generating income with the sites or being frat boy president, but maybe I can attach a forum after football season and go from there. As in fifth grade, however, if you make a claim on that forum, you'll have to show the math.

---

You're steadily decreasing "credibility" just took another hit with a foolish, meaningless rap like that. Keep it up and anyone who's been stupid enuf to pay for your silly picks will be long gone in short order.

---

At least he has credibility to decrease. You ran out of the cred years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The basic problem with this site is that the two most prolific posters, Mr. Mendelson and Argentino, have demonstrated a real need to debunk any AP claims with both impulse-driven gotchas and lying that has become transparent and cartoonish. Mendelson runs off to take blurry blackjack table photos to debunk partial counting of a second table claims. He doesn't measure the distances; he doesn't consult optometrists about clarity at the distances; he doesn't ask professional blackjack players. He just runs out and takes pictures and proclaims "gotcha." He was wrong. Then I mention getting "checks" -- I'll stick with the Americanized spelling (Argentino would prefer it, I'm sure) -- at the sports book, and Mendelson says "he never heard of it." When I tell him to keep calling, it dawns on him that he may be wrong (again) and he calls the NGC. You've gotta be kidding.

The problem isn't Mr. Mendelson playing Clouseau. The problem is that he plays Clouseau against perceived APs, and stays completely mum regarding others. Now normally, I'd say that's his prerogative. Gamblers who lose have issues with those who don't. It's a law of nature. What makes Mendelson different, however, is that he has a history as a professional consumer advocate and investigative journalist. So when he brings arguments to bear against some but not others, many readers assume he's fair, and that he knows what he's talking about gambling-wise. He isn't fair, however, and he doesn't know much. His earned high-quality reputation actually makes his rhetoric worse.

Now none of this would matter, except these are the two highest-volume-to-date posters on this forum, so the forum is, essentially, about them. If the two highest volume posters are either completely ignorant or making shit up, there's not much one can do, and there's really no hope for the forum. When a high profile, nationally recognized journalist with 15,000 posts decides my use of the word "checks" is worthy of a gotcha, but someone else's mystery system that's overcome negative EV to the tune of a million dollars isn't worth some hard origin questions (such as, "How did the IRS agree you had demonstrated a model that could generate profits after you'd lost the previous five years?"), what is one to do? When a high profile, nationally recognized investigative journalist with 15,000 posts calls the NGC to see if sports bets can be paid with chips, but doesn't call the NGC about a rigged video poker machine in an Arizona storage locker, what is one to do?

Fortunately, I think the tide turned a bit with more math-oriented people on the site. There's no question both Mr. Mendelson's cover and Argentino's schtick have lost most of their credibility. Mr. Mendelson's son blew his cachet, and Argentino's weird insistence that I texted him, but that he lost the texts, speaks for itself.

I don't think there is a solution. Dan seems to treat Mr. Mendelson a little equal-er, to paraphrase Orwell. Mendelson and Argentino are the two dominant posters. They haven't been held to any standards of consistency or evidence. Argentino just makes shit up, fires it out there, and then waits to see if he's been banned. The irony in all this is that Dan runs the pokerfraudalert site which shoots down fraudsters and does good, and Dan has contributed to uncovering classic and famous cheating scandals. But he also has this site, with the two most prolific posters pushing a ton of hokum.

I have the rights to some site names that I'll be getting up and running in the months ahead, including TheSkepticalGambler.com. I had no intention of having forums on the sites, as I have no interest in generating income with the sites or being frat boy president, but maybe I can attach a forum after football season and go from there. As in fifth grade, however, if you make a claim on that forum, you'll have to show the math.

---

You're steadily decreasing "credibility" just took another hit with a foolish, meaningless rap like that. Keep it up and anyone who's been stupid enuf to pay for your silly picks will be long gone in short order.

---

You ran out of the cred years ago.

---

Not true Mickey. Rob has NEVER had any credibility!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Yes, Dan said those things.

Yes, Dan is not following through.

The reality is that he has clearly changed his position on the issue, for whatever reason.

Were I a gamblin' man I'd bet your plea will fall upon deaf ears.

It almost seems as if Dan is to Singer as Trump is to Putin: we, the people, see the danger and urge him to swerve, but instead of heeding our advice he continues to drive headlong into the abyss.

Whatever, it don't mean nothin'.

---

Now, you've turned it into a political thread. Trump has more negotiating experience than all previous presidents combined. No one has gotten the best of him and no one is going to.

---

Yes. That was rich.
Did we the people see how evil Russia and Putin were under Obama when he told Medvedev to tell Putin “I’ll have more flexibility after the election”? Or Hillary carrying that ridiculous red button around Russia. Or Hillary and Obama agreeing to sell 20% of our uranium to Rosatom’s uranium one. Or when under his watch, finding out about Russian meddling in our election, Pres Obama took the extraordinary tough stance and told Putin to, “cut it out”.
Yes, we the people saw it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'd say you're two parts nonsense and three parts dunce.

No person formally educated in math would ever say something so blatantly stupid as "it's mathematically impossible for 18 yo's in a row to ever happen".

If you ever paid attention you'd see where I have never disputed math. After all, based on education levels and the moronic things you say and claim, you're clearly the math incompetent here. And maybe....just maybe....you can introduce us to one or two of redietz' "university math professors" who says accomplishing what I have the way I've been able to do it, is "mathematically impossible".

The more you post about these things, the clearer it gets that you're nothing but an angry, hateful, "look at me!" needy minority in a world filled with normal human beings. (and can you just IMAGINE the heat level under eddie's soaking wet collar right about now!) :).

---

Crazy, ugly, delusional cousin Eddie. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, kew is unable to depart from this forum because he is ADDICTED to it....just as he is addicted to casino gambling! He thrives on conflict, which is why he throws out so many stupid and irrelevant topics and replies. Meaningless drama is his daddy, which is the exact reason for filling his posts with every personal family and social problem that his dysfunctional family has created for themselves. And to top it all off, he is a walking, talking, proven liar and bs'er.

Thus, threads like this appear that only an idiot like maxp could love.

---

Says the idiot that has over 100,000 posts in the internet gambling forums that are full of hocus pocus, smoke and mirrors, and endless derogatory comments about others. Rob has a mirror behind his lap top to look into and get ideas for posts. He's really talking about his loathesome self.

---

Up-oh mickey's all riled up again!100,000 posts? Be my guide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'd say you're two parts nonsense and three parts dunce.

No person formally educated in math would ever say something so blatantly stupid as "it's mathematically impossible for 18 yo's in a row to ever happen".

If you ever paid attention you'd see where I have never disputed math. After all, based on education levels and the moronic things you say and claim, you're clearly the math incompetent here. And maybe....just maybe....you can introduce us to one or two of redietz' "university math professors" who says accomplishing what I have the way I've been able to do it, is "mathematically impossible".

The more you post about these things, the clearer it gets that you're nothing but an angry, hateful, "look at me!" needy minority in a world filled with normal human beings. (and can you just IMAGINE the heat level under eddie's soaking wet collar right about now!) :).

---

Crazy, ugly, delusional cousin Eddie. :rolleyes:

---

....and then twinkle toes stews over it for the better part of the day, comes back huffing and puffing like a ferocious brute as only a girly-man can, he starts calling Alan names and defacing Dan for having minds of their own....and finally, he moans about being thrown out of WoV like a useless rag by wizard.

And then cousin eddie gets under his skin once again and we start the fun all over!!

All I can say is thank God I didn't throw the 18 yos in a row. I was only there to see it.

Had I been the shooter I'd have to hide.

I wonder if the shooter after all these years has seen the comments and that's why he's hiding?

Would anyone ever admit to something like that?

What a laugh.

A shooter at Red Rock threw 8 yos in a row. Is it okay that happened? I wouldn't want the dealers to talk about it unless it's okay to have happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

All I can say is thank God I didn't throw the 18 yos in a row. I was only there to see it.

Had I been the shooter I'd have to hide.

I wonder if the shooter after all these years has seen the comments and that's why he's hiding?

Would anyone ever admit to something like that?

What a laugh.

A shooter at Red Rock threw 8 yos in a row. Is it okay that happened? I wouldn't want the dealers to talk about it unless it's okay to have happened.

---

You filthy, dirty, rotten, stinking Liar... you know you never saw 18 Yo's in a row... just admit it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

I repeat: I can't fathom why Rob or Alan would even WANT to be here! The thread on the player's stats screen spoke volumes and was dissed off as inconsequential. When these two are gone, it turns into a vile name calling war- not any better than when they're present.

---

You learned a lot in the Singer school of mudslinging. Rob taught you well. Every game had a small sample space. About 200,000 coin-in would be about one royal cycle. Two of the games the house lost money. But the stats pretty much are inconsequential because the sample spaces are too damn small, period. There is no disrespect in that conclusion. However, Rob's loser protege felt it necessary to say the stats were disrespected. Get the fuck out.

---

OK, here is what you stated in the other thread:

Wow! Just glancing my usual quick overview before moving back to other forums and emails and I actually enjoyed this thread enough to go thru it all! All good


Frankly, this thread was awesome after the initial negativity was moved to a separate thread by Dan. Funny, the initial thread is 1 1/4 pages long and the separate thread is now close to nine full pages. There are no vile comments in the shortened thread. You may want to visit the "moved" thread. It was moved due to the first two pages. Based on this, I think your premise is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

You filthy, dirty, rotten, stinking Liar... you know you never saw 18 Yo's in a row... just admit it!

---

Please monet. Don't you realize I stand to rake in $25-million from book and movie rights by keeping up this lie? Don't you realize that by keeping up this lie my credibility and popularity has grown exponentially? Don't you understand that by keeping this lie going I have a year of speaking engagements lined up? Haven't you realized that this lie has made me the #1 authority on dealer protocols and gaming protection? I just have to keep up this lie. Even my literary agent and booking agent are depending on me to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deech

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

I repeat: I can't fathom why Rob or Alan would even WANT to be here! The thread on the player's stats screen spoke volumes and was dissed off as inconsequential. When these two are gone, it turns into a vile name calling war- not any better than when they're present.

---

You learned a lot in the Singer school of mudslinging. Rob taught you well. Every game had a small sample space. About 200,000 coin-in would be about one royal cycle. Two of the games the house lost money. But the stats pretty much are inconsequential because the sample spaces are too damn small, period. There is no disrespect in that conclusion. However, Rob's loser protege felt it necessary to say the stats were disrespected. Get the fuck out.

---

OK, here is what you stated in the other thread:

Wow! Just glancing my usual quick overview before moving back to other forums and emails and I actually enjoyed this thread enough to go thru it all! All good


Frankly, this thread was awesome after the initial negativity was moved to a separate thread by Dan. Funny, the initial thread is 1 1/4 pages long and the separate thread is now close to nine full pages. There are no vile comments in the shortened thread. You may want to visit the "moved" thread. It was moved due to the first two pages. Based on this, I think your premise is wrong.

---

Uh-oh----better duck, as the usual litany of profanity and name-calling comes the way of anyone who doesn't see things his way!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Uh-oh----better duck, as the usual litany of profanity and name-calling comes the way of anyone who doesn't see things his way!

---

Again, Rob, you are writing about yourself.

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

LarryS this post is not exactly true and/or there are some parts that you believe that have other factors. For example, your very first line. Requesting that someone (you) be banned and my leaving the site, had nothing to do with each other. I requested you be banned because you were doing nothing but trolling and attacking, which simply did not have anything to do with the topic of gambling. I left the site when the owner went off the deep end. He started creating his own sock puppets, for the purpose of making strange accusations and defending himself against strange accusations. In the end some things were revealed about him that were a privacy concern. And that is when all the AP's left.

Now back to this site: You quote "So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?."

My answer is yes it is LarryS. We as participants invest in a site with our time and effort. I was invited to this site and it quickly became clear that it was nothing but an attack site on AP's. Singer was the worst of it. So 3 months in, I was pretty fed up and thinking about leaving, mentioned it several times. Dan then banned Singer stating he too was fed up with it. But it was more than that. Dan expressed that he wanted the site to go in a different direction. He wanted more legitimate discussion on the topic of the site. He specifically mentioned that he wanted to attract new members and posters, mentioning that he had received private communications from several lurkers and former members who would not participate with the way things were. All this was on September 29, 2017.

And guess what, new names began participating, just as Dan wanted. Some current WoV joined. Others members who just lurked began to occasionally post. Sure there was still an anti-AP bias from the likes of Alan, coach belly, slingshot and blackhole, but there was some improvement with the worst of the attacks gone.

Then 6 months later on April 5, Dan reversed course and reinstated Singer. Yes you are correct that is his choice. And that should have been my que to once again seriously consider exiting. Actually very little consideration would have been needed. I was tricked into continuing to invest my time and effort in a site under the false guise of Dan's promise and statements that of what he wanted the site to be. Unfortunately less than 24 hours later I lost my partner/spouse and my mind was on other things. I was off the site for several weeks and out of town for 4 weeks taking care of things. And then I came back and said, well we will see how it goes.

Well it's been 3 months since Singer's reinstatement and we have seen how it is going. Singer never kept the promise to participate in one single thread. He never kept the promise to stop attacking Redietz and AP's. And it has gotten worse. Some AP's and some of the new members gained have left. And I am back to where I see no sense in continuing. Only this time things are different for me. I actually have other options to continue to share and discuss my AP and blackjack experiences as I am back on qfit's blackjack site I used to participate at. (Amazing that qfit and I were able to reach an understanding but Michael Shackleford can't find a way....but that's another story)

So before I exit and I am not going to make a big deal, just stop investing my time and effort here, but before I did, I wanted to remind Dan of what he said and that he broke his word and that's why the site is in decline and right back in the gutter. I wanted to give him the opportunity to reconsider his re-instatement of Singer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

I'm 110% ladies man. Ask your wife, cuckold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

I'm 110% ladies man. Ask your wife, cuckold.

---

Mickey, you don't need to respond to Larry's hate attacks. Nobody questions your sexuality. This is just Larry doing his version of hate attacks. See you let Singer back to do this and this is what happens.

And BTW, just like Singer's broken promises to cease such attacks, remember LarryS's arrival here. With his history brought to Dan's attention, Dan announced Larry was on a short leash and Just like Singer, LarryS promised to turn over a new leaf and contribute in a positive manner. And to his credit, he has for most of his time here. (I suspect that it has nearly killed him...lol) But Dan's reversal of Singer and once again allowing these Hate attacks is Larry's signal that he too can go back to his hate attack ways. THAT is the door that Dan opened by reinstateing Singer.

Maybe the way to go is to just start reporting these attacks and this site and have this site shut down and other headaches for Todd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

I was wondering if my admitted raping of dachshunds (males only) would be categorized as constant self-promotion or a baring of my soul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Maybe the way to go is to just start reporting these attacks and this site and have this site shut down and other headaches for Todd.

---

LOL

Who will you report "these attacks" to, the Dept. of Internet Good Taste and Decency?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

LarryS this post is not exactly true and/or there are some parts that you believe that have other factors. For example, your very first line. Requesting that someone (you) be banned and my leaving the site, had nothing to do with each other. I requested you be banned because you were doing nothing but trolling and attacking, which simply did not have anything to do with the topic of gambling. I left the site when the owner went off the deep end. He started creating his own sock puppets, for the purpose of making strange accusations and defending himself against strange accusations. In the end some things were revealed about him that were a privacy concern. And that is when all the AP's left.

Now back to this site: You quote "So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?."

My answer is yes it is LarryS. We as participants invest in a site with our time and effort. I was invited to this site and it quickly became clear that it was nothing but an attack site on AP's. Singer was the worst of it. So 3 months in, I was pretty fed up and thinking about leaving, mentioned it several times. Dan then banned Singer stating he too was fed up with it. But it was more than that. Dan expressed that he wanted the site to go in a different direction. He wanted more legitimate discussion on the topic of the site. He specifically mentioned that he wanted to attract new members and posters, mentioning that he had received private communications from several lurkers and former members who would not participate with the way things were. All this was on September 29, 2017.

And guess what, new names began participating, just as Dan wanted. Some current WoV joined. Others members who just lurked began to occasionally post. Sure there was still an anti-AP bias from the likes of Alan, coach belly, slingshot and blackhole, but there was some improvement with the worst of the attacks gone.

Then 6 months later on April 5, Dan reversed course and reinstated Singer. Yes you are correct that is his choice. And that should have been my que to once again seriously consider exiting. Actually very little consideration would have been needed. I was tricked into continuing to invest my time and effort in a site under the false guise of Dan's promise and statements that of what he wanted the site to be. Unfortunately less than 24 hours later I lost my partner/spouse and my mind was on other things. I was off the site for several weeks and out of town for 4 weeks taking care of things. And then I came back and said, well we will see how it goes.

Well it's been 3 months since Singer's reinstatement and we have seen how it is going. Singer never kept the promise to participate in one single thread. He never kept the promise to stop attacking Redietz and AP's. And it has gotten worse. Some AP's and some of the new members gained have left. And I am back to where I see no sense in continuing. Only this time things are different for me. I actually have other options to continue to share and discuss my AP and blackjack experiences as I am back on qfit's blackjack site I used to participate at. (Amazing that qfit and I were able to reach an understanding but Michael Shackleford can't find a way....but that's another story)

So before I exit and I am not going to make a big deal, just stop investing my time and effort here, but before I did, I wanted to remind Dan of what he said and that he broke his word and that's why the site is in decline and right back in the gutter. I wanted to give him the opportunity to reconsider his re-instatement of Singer.

---

waaa....waaa....waaa....what a whiny little wussy. "My forum is my home away from home" or whatever you're crying about.

How about you straighten out your miserable, mommy-dearest life and grow a real pair. You're never gonna get over that Shack sacked you because you were an annoying little twit who didn't listen. I personally enjoy watching your P-A-I-N here as you disclose your dysfunctional personal life and struggle to make up your version of a "bj pro" so you can think of yourself as relevant.

Leave, stay, who really cares? Ignore me, Alan, etc. if you're too addicted to do what you keep promising.

What a big baby!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

What then was the point of suggesting he post there?

That is currently no more possible than your having actually seen 18 yo's in a row.

---

Sarcastic humor is my guess as to why Alan suggested that Kewlj post on a website that posters on here already know he is banned from. Just like Helen from Diary Of A Mad Woman sarcastically saying to Charles,"Why don't you get yourself something to eat?" Knowing he is in a damn wheelchair and cannot access the food himself anymore.

I've added a feature to this forum which will allow me to kick users from threads.

I will be using it a lot to control the disruption and trolling on this forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

Kj has a history of requesting someone be banned and then leaving the site that accommodated him.

Why can't he just ignore singer. I do. I mean at this point in his life...he is a nobody in gambling..just like I am or kj. So his posts carry no weight...they are not must read material.
It's so easy to skip over posts...especially posts of nobodies.
Personally I only read maybe 10 present of signers posts..and maybe only 30 percent of the gay contingents post (kj,axel,mc)....and that works out just fine for me.

So Dan changed his mind. Is that some monumental assault to kj?.
The vulgarity especially of singer,the drunken rants of mc, the make believe stories of alan, the constant self promotion of redietz, the make belive James Bond stories of monet, and the hysterical whining of kj are all part of the tapestry of this site. Plus the existence of sexual diversity with kj axel and Mc just adds to the mix

---

I'm 110% ladies man. Ask your wife, cuckold.

---

Mickey, you don't need to respond to Larry's hate attacks. Nobody questions your sexuality. This is just Larry doing his version of hate attacks. See you let Singer back to do this and this is what happens.

And BTW, just like Singer's broken promises to cease such attacks, remember LarryS's arrival here. With his history brought to Dan's attention, Dan announced Larry was on a short leash and Just like Singer, LarryS promised to turn over a new leaf and contribute in a positive manner. And to his credit, he has for most of his time here. (I suspect that it has nearly killed him...lol) But Dan's reversal of Singer and once again allowing these Hate attacks is Larry's signal that he too can go back to his hate attack ways. THAT is the door that Dan opened by reinstateing Singer.

Maybe the way to go is to just start reporting these attacks and this site and have this site shut down and other headaches for Todd.

---

hate attacks? In thsis world, calling someone part of the gay contingent of this site is not an issult unless you feel gays are inferior. Calling someone gay or italian, or jewish is not an insult.

You seem to be a self hating gay man if you take my post as hate.

Its purely observational, and you still didnt answer why you cannot manually skip over a nobody in the gambling world. Why are you drawn to alan and singer like a moth to moonlight. What is it about you where you just cant ignore people who get their vitamins from your reaction. Why do you give them exactly what they want.

You could still post a thread on the topic of AP or BJ and once someone goes off topic report it to dan and have him REMOVE IT. bUT YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. You cant engage the people in a back and forth and then complain that they ruined your thread. Ignore them ad continue with your mission to "help people"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I've added a feature to this forum which will allow me to kick users from threads.

I will be using it a lot to control the disruption and trolling on this forum.

---

What about a feature that only allows invited members to a particular thread the OP started?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

What about a feature that only allows invited members to a particular thread the OP started?

---

Not a good idea: it would have a chilling effect on any uninvited newbies who might want to weigh in.

No, if Dan doesn't fall asleep at the wheel and actually monitors the forum regularly the worst of the trolling will stop, especially if he actually throws the troll out the fucking door.