Advantage play / cheating / crime....where is the line?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

A smart person wouldn't have commented at all on the questionable legality of the exploit. No reason to bring more attention to it. That implies two possibilities.

---

Irrelevant. A smart person understands commenting negatively about what others have done in no way affects what they have done. That's the same as implying anyone who agreed with Kane and Nestor's exploits brought attention to themselves--who did nothing. Let's hang Vegas Vic, who "brought attention" to this play.

There's your two possibilities.

---

The two possibilities I saw were:
1. You weren't very smart about commenting in the exploit....admitting you thought it was illegal.
2. You didn't really exploit the double up flaw.

You claimed to have taken many extreme precautions like not even telling your family until years later. Yet you commented on the exploit admitting you thought it was fraud...right in the middle of your Statute of Limitations clock. That's not very smart.

Of course there is a third possibility. That both 1 and 2 are true.

---

I hear a mic drop...……...And unowme leaves the stage :)
My bet is option 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

A smart person wouldn't have commented at all on the questionable legality of the exploit. No reason to bring more attention to it. That implies two possibilities.

---

Irrelevant. A smart person understands commenting negatively about what others have done in no way affects what they have done. That's the same as implying anyone who agreed with Kane and Nestor's exploits brought attention to themselves--who did nothing. Let's hang Vegas Vic, who "brought attention" to this play.

There's your two possibilities.

---

The two possibilities I saw were:
1. You weren't very smart about commenting in the exploit....admitting you thought it was illegal.
2. You didn't really exploit the double up flaw.

You claimed to have taken many extreme precautions like not even telling your family until years later. Yet you commented on the exploit admitting you thought it was fraud...right in the middle of your Statute of Limitations clock. That's not very smart.

Of course there is a third possibility. That both 1 and 2 are true.

---

There is no question in my mind that #2 is true.
I personally believe #1 is almost definitive proof that #2 is true.

Now that is only my opinion, but anyone not sure or whatever, should really just think about #1. If #2 was true, there is NO explanation for #1. The usual Singer deflection doesn't even work.

Something I have learned in my 2+ years here. Singer's #1 course of action when he is caught in something that isn't true or doesn't make sense is deflection. Usually with some sort of completely unrelated attack. But when it is so blatant that he doesn't think that will work, he goes to something I call "radio silence". Just hiding and waiting for the storm to blow over.