Alan, you should go live with Singer. You won't have to phone him at 3 am. Get it over with.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Alan, you should go live with Singer. You won't have to phone him at 3 am. Get it over with.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Geez--first Alan and Kewl agreed on something, and now I agree with Black. We need Rob back to put this world back in order.Originally Posted by blackholeI think you’re got something here. This left wing liberal snowflake didn’t have the balls or tits to take Rob’s right wing views on directly. It’s the typical left-wing move. Sucker punch from the back.Originally Posted by coach bellyIs this One of the flakes that begged Druff to ban Singer, because he/she was too intimidated to post anymore?Originally Posted by OneHitWonder
Since he’s gone this poster has suddenly been giving us endless meaningless bullshit. I couldn’t even finish the post above without thinking that this must be what it’s like to be in college today. Being forced to sit and listen through all that drivel while not challenging what’s being said or get a failing grade.
Huh?
Bring back Singer?
Does a rectum REALLLY need a hemorrhoid?
What, Me Worry?
It took me all of two seconds to find a link to it. https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...bin-williams1/Originally Posted by kewlJWait...What now?Originally Posted by OneHitWonderI haven't heard anything to this effect. Can you link to a source or has anyone else heard any mention of this?
Williams was diagnosed with other similar diseases, along the way before his death. He knew what was coming.
At the moment, I spend some of my time to power of attorney for an elderly friend. He is only 74, but has Lewy Body dementia. So, I know some in-depth stuff about it. In many ways, it's still a psychological puzzle. But its hallucinations of the same set of made-up persons and animals are usually benign, and even entertaining or friendly to its sufferers. People last from 4 to 8 years with it, but, again, diagnosis is complicated by the fact that few doctors know much about it. A combination of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Which part of the disease comes first translates into its relative severity. Lewy bodies are one sort of junk that, sometimes, clogs a person's brain.
I have had a fair amount of clinical experience with such patients, and can pretty well pick up on the very early signs and symptoms in others even over the internet. Another part of this experience which appeals to me. Ha. Gambling addiction is really a composite of so many other things. In this way, too, something more that supports my above academic argument about gambling per se.
Science isn't a democracry, or something for the blind.Originally Posted by regnis
Interesting. Probably doesn't belong an a gambling forum but still interesting. I am presently involved in a battle among doctors, family, nursing home etc. as to whether a client of mine is competent enough, while suffering from LBD, to execute legal documents such as her Will, Trust, etc., and even whether she can sign a deed so as to complete the sale of her home.Originally Posted by OneHitWonderIt took me all of two seconds to find a link to it. https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...bin-williams1/Originally Posted by kewlJWait...What now?Originally Posted by OneHitWonder
Williams was diagnosed with other similar diseases, along the way before his death. He knew what was coming.
At the moment, I spend some of my time to power of attorney for an elderly friend. He is only 74, but has Lewy Body dementia. So, I know some in-depth stuff about it. In many ways, it's still a psychological puzzle. But its hallucinations of the same set of made-up persons and animals are usually benign, and even entertaining or friendly to its sufferers. People last from 4 to 8 years with it, but, again, diagnosis is complicated by the fact that few doctors know much about it. A combination of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Which part of the disease comes first translates into its relative severity. Lewy bodies are one sort of junk that, sometimes, clogs a person's brain.
I have had a fair amount of clinical experience with such patients, and can pretty well pick up on the very early signs and symptoms in others even over the internet. Another part of this experience which appeals to me. Ha. Gambling addiction is really a composite of so many other things. In this way, too, something more that supports my above academic argument about gambling per se.
Thank you for the link to Robin Williams conditions, OneHitWonder. I was not aware of that. Very Sad.
As for Rob Singer, WTF is the matter with you people? No wonder this site has been what it has been for so long...just nothing of any kind of relevance. A small handful of people arguing and attacking back and forth. I guess it's the drama. Some of you seem to love and NEED the drama. And you will call me the drama Queen?
Dan made the decision based on a number of things. One being that Alan himself called for it. Several posts later Alan wrote "Rob has been out of control lately and I don't think he has made a positive contribution here in months. I mean months." Now two weeks later, in a moment of schizophrenia, Alan says "bring him back".
Dan also said a number....not one member, but several, who had not posted in months, had complained and stated that they would not participate with Singer here. Dan made the decision, to hopefully allow this site to grow to more than the attackfest that it has been. It's HIS site...respect that. This whole Singer issue since I have been here just has not been fair to Dan or anyone else that wants to participate on a grown-up site. Quite frankly some of Singers comments and attacks were illegal. With complaints filed to the right authorities, it would be Dan that gets into trouble.
If you guys don't like it, go buy and start your own freaking site and make Singer the VIP members, or better yet, follow him to whatever site he is terrorizing now. For god sakes, stop being boys and act like adults.
kewlj did you have to say "in a moment of schizophrenia"? Am I supposed to respect you for that?
No, that was harsh. But come on Alan, you called on Dan to ban Rob. And you laid out valid reasons, that he does nothing but attack and hasn't contributed anything positive for months! (I would argue much longer). Then 2 weeks later you do a complete turn-about and advocate for his return? What do YOU call that?Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
And you know what, I reject these statement that you make on his behalf, that there are two Rob Singers....that in real life he is a decent person. THAT is the behavior of a bully....a coward! Big man talking shit on an anonymous message board.
Yes, Rob should have been banned. But even some murderers get limited sentences of 15-25 years.
More importantly, his absence seems to have given others carte blanche to post whatever they want without a critic.
OK, then criticize them.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
In the alternative, I doubt you'd be banned if you worked out something with Rob where he'd email you his responses to posts, you'd paraphrase them (using your inimitable journalistic style) and then post them under your name, saying "a little bird told me..."
That way you'd have your cake and eat it too / have it both ways: he'd technically be banned (as you urged), but his comments would once again be posted (as you urged): a win / win, wouldn't you say?
You may lack the time to go to your office for weeks on end, but something as important as this would cause you to jump like a scalded hamster.
What, Me Worry?
MisterV have I posted anything here that you think comes from Rob?
By the way, Regnis why would you like Rob to return?
It goes without saying I don't run this site, Dan Druff does, and he can do whatever he wants with it. With that being said, Dan is in a tough spot. This forum isn't really known for having the greatest of information, the brightest gamblers or others in the field, or anything like that. Sure, there are interesting discussions every now and then. But those discussions almost always turn into what this site is really known for -- all the drama, bullshit, arguing, and essentially just shit-slinging.
Assuming Dan is interested in growing the site, which is likely a fair statement (although I don't want to speak for him)....he's in a shit position. Do you say no more to all the shit-slinging and other nonsense which will just kill off the forum and hope you can figure out a way to get people here? I don't even know how you'd get people to sign up here, other than ads saying "We banned Rob Singer [like every other forum], come join us!" The other route is to allow the shit-posting to continue but try to keep it somewhat under wraps (ie: the banning of Rob Stringer), but I can't imagine that can lead to a successful and prosperous forum.
If I were Dan, I'd say no more to all the shit-posting and straighten this place around, because then it would at least have a chance to succeed. Granted, I'm no honor scout or whatever, but there's plenty of more stuff I could be posting when people make outrageous claims or put up some ludicrous stuff, but there's no point in really doing that since it's not constructive in any way (IMO).
Actually there's another way but it cannot be accomplished with an absentee moderator: deleting improper posts and comments.
Dan would have to drop by more than once a week.
I would support 15-25 years.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
When I first read that, my mind immediately went to the secondary definition.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
2. a state characterized by the coexistence of contradictory or incompatible elements.
And then to how refreshing it is to see a good metaphor around here.
I think the problem is Dan is sending mixed signals. When he banned Singer, Dan specifically said the racial posts were over the line, which sort of sends the message that all other attacks...wishing aids on people, attacking a members dead spouse, etc are fair game.Originally Posted by RS__
Dan really needs to decide what it is he wants this forum to be and make that vision clear. A legit gambling/vegas related forum (as the name suggests) with legitimate discussions on topics related to gambling/AP/vegas or the cesspool that it has been, with a handful of members attacking each other in the most vile personal ways possible, which basically eliminates any possibility of new members participating and reasonable, discussion beneficial to anyone.
Ah yeah THAT'S the definition I meant.Originally Posted by OneHitWonderWhen I first read that, my mind immediately went to the secondary definition.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
2. a state characterized by the coexistence of contradictory or incompatible elements.
And then to how refreshing it is to see a good metaphor around here.
Seriously, when I posted that I didn't mean to suggest that Alan legitimately has the mental, medical illness of schizophrenia. I was more or less saying he was flip-flopping. BUT, it was still insensitive of me. And he was either offended or is going to use the opportunity to pretend he was offended, so I apologized. It was a poor choice of words.
No, of course not.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Had you read my post a bit closer I was discussing the possibility of PROSPECTIVE actions on your part.
I was saying "This is what he could do ..."
What, Me Worry?
Mendelson is a harden television news veteran. One who wrote of how unflappable he is, at a poker game, etc, because of this. I don't think anyone has to cut him any slack in this direction, or expect that he isn't still on top of his "game". Certainly, he is far from schizophrenic. In the same way, I think, perhaps, too much manipulation on his part effectively killed this board, a long time ago. Posters are extremely sensitive to manipulation by board owners and moderators.Originally Posted by kewlJ
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote