Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 132

Thread: AP Tactics LV

  1. #21
    I'm pretty sure cwazy is WON. Think about it. There is only one person that would gain if the admins act and start tearing down information in that thread...

  2. #22
    Originally Posted by Prozema View Post
    I'm pretty sure cwazy is WON. Think about it. There is only one person that would gain if the admins act and start tearing down information in that thread...
    I think LarryS misunderstood Cwazy... Cwazy is saying WoN has a lawsuit against WoV if I'm reading those posts correctly.

    I have been directly questioned if I was waxie22... I am not.

    I am surprised nobody has asked me if I'm Cwazy... seems reasonable but I'm not.

    Prozema, it is no big secret that The Wizard and others in that WoN/SaP thread have deleted whole posts and serious questions and information on no proof or grounds. The Wizard has changed his rules because of waxie22 to ban or delete information from beyond a reasonable doubt to now stated only needing a reasonable doubt. The next rule change will be his resignation or should be but he has too much ego and pride of that site.

    Interesting that he has pride in allowing crews of Gamblers and con men to run wild on his site. I and KewlJ have admitted AxelWolf contacts us through PMs to edit or delete information on posted materials. Try to wake up and realize this whole thing is a con job. First get the suckers interested and tell them the math behind the games. Put bait on the website to sign up for online Casinos. Next allow your Mods and members to take part in illegal pick ups for free play behind the scenes. Next allow WoN on your site for years until Monet causes his banning and later WoN is found out to be a con man and members hold onto that information for at least 8 months. Not hard to connect these dots.

    Do you ever see the pictures of this Wizard with all the Bovada Models. My wife would ring my neck if I posed with a bunch of ladies like that!?

  3. #23
    Hi Monet. Thanks for responding to my post. I read cwazy's posts and thought something was suspicious. You can just smell it. I have no specific knowledge that he is or is not WON / SAP but I do know WON had several other handles he disclosed to me via PM. I'm pretty sure I was a target because when I was new, I reached out to him about the now hiring thing in his signature line. Fortunately, I'm a bit like you in that I'm not really into the whole team thing unless it's my wife.

    Also, please note I did object to deleting posts in the suspension discussion thread, but quickly got the smack down by the wizard.

    Tell me more about the AxelW editing posts thing after speaking with you and KJ... Is that what all the secret mod jazz is about?

  4. #24
    Yes Prozema... you questioned the deletion by saying you can't clearly follow the threads when they delete whole posts. I read you saying that and I read the Wizard acknowledging you and telling you too bad basically... not those exact words but he said he is gonna do what he is going to do. An executive decision has been made. Heil Wizard!

    Yes, when I post up information about real world gambling or things like the double up at the Plaza for tax day... AW will send me some nice talking message requesting that I edit or delete information to suppress players getting wise or the Casino getting wise. I have obliged him in the past but I refuse to do so anymore for him or others. Power to the people and down with the Man and such!

    Am I the only one seeing AW and WoVers in here every day reading all posts but responding to none?

  5. #25
    Unless I’m mixing up names, I’m pretty sure cwazy is not SA nor Monet. And I don’t remember hearing of any interactions between cwazy and SA. I think he’s just similar to 1BB who cares more about being “technically right”. Then again, he could be working with SA, but I seriously doubt it.

    I vaguely remember waxie posting, although it seemed like he was posting pro-AP stuff on another forum and not WOV. Maybe I’m mixing up names, but don’t think he’s SA nor Monet.

    What’s the problem with asking someone to delete sensitive information in their post? I’ve asked people to remove sensitive information in their post plenty of times. I don’t see a problem with it. If you think Axel is a secret mod, he isn’t.


    Monet, your “connecting of the dots” is way off. You can concoct all this shit up in your head and connect imaginary dots, but it doesn’t make what you write to be true.

  6. #26
    Ah, ok. I get it now. AW was not editing others posts, he was suggesting others edit their own posts. That sounds about right. From what I've seen on the forums, I think AW is a good guy... I get where he is coming from. I'm also clear as a bell that nothing you or I say will change his mind. With that said, even if I disagree with him, I don't see any benefit to arguing with him.

    I think there is a lot of cross forum lurking going on both here and there. Why wouldn't they lurk here? You and MC are solid gold.

  7. #27
    You're probably right RS. I shouldn't have said that cwazy was WON. Something about his posts in that thread made my spider senses start to tingle... That's all. I just suspect something is not on the level with that account. I have no evidence to support any of this.

    I really don't care if there is a secret moderator or not. If there is a secret mod, I really don't care who it is. I was just curious on Monet's opinion on the matter.

    I don't think there is anything wrong with asking someone to edit a post. I also don't think there is anything wrong with someone ignoring that request.

    I hope this helps clarify my prior post.

  8. #28
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Do you ever see the pictures of this Wizard with all the Bovada Models. My wife would ring my neck if I posed with a bunch of ladies like that!?
    Why?

    It's just business.

    What, he should pose with construction workers?

    Sin City, baby: nothing more evocative of sin than a busty, scantily clad woman.

    Well, maybe there is one thing: priests (and isn't that ironic?)
    What, Me Worry?

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Do you ever see the pictures of this Wizard with all the Bovada Models. My wife would ring my neck if I posed with a bunch of ladies like that!?
    Why?

    It's just business.

    What, he should pose with construction workers?

    Sin City, baby: nothing more evocative of sin than a busty, scantily clad woman.

    Well, maybe there is one thing: priests (and isn't that ironic?)
    You make a good point. I suppose this is all subjective. The problem is when a person who constantly claims ethical and moral behavior and is married with a family this type of stuff can cause problems. You can't claim to be moral and ethical in Casino actions and look down on others for pulling shots in the Casino. You can't preach ethics in one area in your life and in another area you instruct people how to get cheaper prices for hookers. Prostitution is illegal in Las Vegas last I checked. You can't call people stealing in Casinos thieves and credit trolls and scum and after that tell people how to get illegal prostitutes. Either be a good guy in all aspects of life or not. If your not going to be squeaky clean you can't point fingers at thieves and expect to be taken seriously. If your going to take pictures or run YouTube instructions you should be professional and not use sex to sell your product when you preach ethics as hard as this person does. As I say... subjective... we can't really agree. Some people believe image is everything.

  10. #30
    I agree, he on the one hand is the authority of right and wrong on the site. Always has been. Wants it to be kind and "clean.
    Yet he calls his wife a ball and chain, he gloats that he doesnt buy her valentines gifts even though she would like one, he writes a blog about traveling alone to a country, maybe it wasPanama and the entire story was how he hung out with a prostitute, and went site seeing with her and met her friends and only gave her a little money. And then treating women as props, when posing with them, allowing a thread on his board of men discussing their favorite womans body part, ...marginalizing women . Add it all together and he should be the last person to weild a heavy hand on etiquette . He says he hates when valentines day falls on a weekend because then he has to do something with both his wife AND kids.(You know be a good husband and father.....if its not too much trouble)

    All the above has this man treating women as props, and pieces of scenery, as people to disrespect, to use. And he has the nerve to make managerial decisions to delete posts based on what? He should look in the mirror first.
    90 percent of people who were banned have not behaved even half as repulsive as shackelford.

    Posing with models for the average loving respectful husband is no big deal in the context of vegas,

    shackleford is far from a respectful husband, or even respectful in general

    who woldnt want to work for free for a man of this caliber

  11. #31
    It's interesting, Monet, how you seem to be portraying yourself as the antithesis of the wiz.

    He's honest, you steal.

    He's ethical, you cheat.

    Maybe you should try wearing a white hat for a change?

    Who knows, honesty and integrity might turn out to be something you'd enjoy projecting, instead of: well, you know.

    Then again, if there is such a thing as an honest crook, I suppose you'd get the nod.
    What, Me Worry?

  12. #32
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    It's interesting, Monet, how you seem to be portraying yourself as the antithesis of the wiz.

    He's honest, you steal.

    He's ethical, you cheat.

    Maybe you should try wearing a white hat for a change?

    Who knows, honesty and integrity might turn out to be something you'd enjoy projecting, instead of: well, you know.

    Then again, if there is such a thing as an honest crook, I suppose you'd get the nod.
    I think Monet is more interested in projecting himself as being a “badass” and a “crook” or “theif”, than someone whom....oh idk, you’d see and be like, “Oh yeah, he’s a normal person.”

  13. #33
    He's honest?

    was he honest when he banned me? I dont think so..it seems he was hiding something....you know..something like a reason

    Is he honest when he personally gives a seal of approval to certain online casinos....when even if he was flying periodically to the overseas headquarters, he has no expertise in determining if programs are run consistently fair 24/7. He is not a computer expert

    He allowed someone that a hell of a lot of people thought was a con man to advertise for free on the signature line. Either he is well informed or he is a naive dope...pick one.

    he asked for money from members while at the same time negotiating a 2 mil dollar deal for his site and never retracted the cup waiving. The post stayed up. And he didnt offer to return money till people complained . A very honest man.....not

    he(the wiz) is in the same boat as monet. Mr V thinks shacklefords shit dont stink. Maybe when the head is so far up the ass,it affects the olfactory nerves.

  14. #34
    Just because I have something good to say about the man doesn't mean I deserve to be covered up with cat litter.
    What, Me Worry?

  15. #35
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Just because I have something good to say about the man doesn't mean I deserve to be covered up with cat litter.
    I thought that every common man agreed that all lawyers should be at the bottom of the ocean and that it is a good start. I never heard this new idea about cat litter?

  16. #36
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Do you ever see the pictures of this Wizard with all the Bovada Models. My wife would ring my neck if I posed with a bunch of ladies like that!?
    Why?

    It's just business.

    What, he should pose with construction workers?

    Sin City, baby: nothing more evocative of sin than a busty, scantily clad woman.

    Well, maybe there is one thing: priests (and isn't that ironic?)
    Exactly... Sin City baby... anything goes. That's the whole point of this debate. When you and the rest of the mob mentality can step back and look at things objectively and realize and admit that you are no better than the next guy I can stfu and drop the debate. When you and others can admit your just as bad and evil as the next guy, that we have no difference between the worst of the worst and the best of the best I can concede the argument. When I don't have to listen to the APs and Gamblers of the world cry from the mountain tops about how moral, honest and ethical they are compared to someone else I will shut up. I doubt this will happen though. You bastards are stuck too deep into the trenches and have too many numbers in your hoarde.

  17. #37
    Michael Shackleford and honesty/dishonesty. Yeah, I just might have a thought or two on that.

    Shackleford banned me because someone he considered a friend requested that he silence me. That in itself doesn't fall under dishonesty. It falls under weakness. He was put in a bad position by someone he admires and considered a friend. Shackleford was manipulated and used. And as time has gone on, that has become more and more obvious.

    But where dishonesty enters this situation is in the months that followed, when Shackleford repeatedly said things to me via PM that completely contradicted what he said publicly. Things like "he felt he owed Qfit a favor, so when asked he couldn't say no". Things like "if he was to let me back on the site, Qfit would stop talking to him".

    I can think of no other word for his behavior than dishonest, although in a strange way, he was being completely honest to me via PM. It was the membership at WoV that he was being dishonest to.

    But I want to fast forward from all that to the present. Now 2 years later, it is very, very obvious to anyone who wants to see that Qfit never intended to participate at WoV. He has participated very sparingly over the last two years, occasionally making a few token posts when I point out how little he participates. So now with this benefit of hindsight, Mike HAS to know that he was used and manipulated. So his continuing refusal to acknowledge that, I would call a form of "dishonesty".

    And the bigger picture is that "dishonesty" appears to be a trait of Mr. Shackleford. It seems to be something that shows itself over and over again, in many different situations.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 03-21-2018 at 01:32 AM.

  18. #38
    Good morning, everyone.

    I'm going to go back to the subject of AP tactics and general morality, but please do not take this as a deliberate attempt to steer the conversation away from WoV and/or Wizard. I'm just talking about what I thought the thread is about. I might circle around back to that, who knows?

    The first thing on adultery is that if we're not talking about, "Open marriages," then I can see LarryS' point. The only thing that I will say is that the act of, "Cheating," could still either be or not be in a person's moral set, morality being subjective. Also, people occasionally violate their own moral sets, so despite believing that cheating is immoral, a person can do it anyway.

    LarryS, the thing is that you talk about, "Small print," but in many of these players card type situations, I never actually agreed to anything at all or made any representations of any kind. Also, if you think sending people mail about a promotion to come into your establishment and gamble when they may not have done so otherwise, and then pulling the promotion only after they have arrived at the casino or made plans (perhaps paid for travel) is not F'ing them, then we just have an unsolvable disagreement on that. Something about treating others the way you want to be treated, or something like that. Besides, there are credit card gimmicks, checking account sign-up gimmicks, grocery store gimmicks...and the majority of those companies keep their promises. Granted, you're not violating any of their written or unwritten terms to do these things, but they are in the majority not violating their own terms to you.

    I also agree with LarryS on rationalization, but that's just life. "Usually I wouldn't do this, but..." that kind of thing. It is because of these rationalizations (among other factors) that our individual moral sets are also somewhat variable.

    Anyway, we either fit our actions to fit our morality, fit our morality to fit our actions...or just say, "Screw it," do something, and admit we behaved immorally. It is what it is. These are all mental conceptions and abstractions, anyway. In the physical world, you either did something or you did not do something. In the legal context, your actions were either illegal or they were not illegal. When it comes to morals/ethics, you're really only accountable to yourself, anyway.

    Not really worried about that other stuff, next posts.

    ------

    Monet, in my opinion there are no friendships that, "Don't count," and I think I probably lost a few friendships that I didn't have yet.

    ------

    The rest all seems like it's not on the topic I thought that this thread was about and the context of my first several posts.

    On the topic, it seems that we can all agree that morality is, one way or the other, "Subjective." For that reason, individual action-based decisions, and whether or not those actions are moral or immoral, are also going to be subjective. It's actually a pretty good jumping off point for everything else, in my opinion. Now that we all agree that morals are different, it enables us to discuss why we think one action is immoral/moral compared to the other, so those are good potential discussions.

    Definitely further than many Religious people get. Some are reasonable. Most think morality is both objective and absolute, both of those adjectives because it, "Came from God," of course. That doesn't stop them from violating those morals from time to time, but the good news is those violations can be solved with repentance. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

    It's truly adorable. Do you want to talk about your all-time great justifications? By being accountable only unto God, they are not accountable for anything that they do to anyone else, most especially people who are not of the faith. If two people are of the same church, they basically have to forgive one another. Ha!

    So, morality is objective because we have these would-be inviolable tenets handed down from a fictional character. Except, in order to violate them, all that one need do is apologize to said fictional character. Ha!

    No thanks. I'll be accountable unto myself and others instead...even if being accountable to others is much harder than being accountable to a God. Although, I guess it is easier to be infinitely merciful when you don't exist. Non-entities tend not to hold grudges for very long.

  19. #39
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    You can't call people stealing in Casinos thieves and credit trolls and scum and after that tell people how to get illegal prostitutes.
    I fail to see how this follows unless your only definition of what is moral and immoral is "whatever the government says it is"

    One of these is an actual crime with a victim, the other is a victimless "crime".

  20. #40
    Also, if you think sending people mail about a promotion to come into your establishment and gamble when they may not have done so otherwise, and then pulling the promotion only after they have arrived at the casino or made plans (perhaps paid for travel) is not F'ing them, then we just have an unsolvable disagreement on that. Something about treating others the way you want to be treated, or something like that. Besides, there are credit card gimmicks, checking account sign-up gimmicks, grocery store gimmicks...and the majority of those companies keep their promises. Granted, you're not violating any of their written or unwritten terms to do these things, but they are in the majority not violating their own terms to you
    >>>mission

    Inever said bait and switch is not fucking someone. I am saying that fucking them back through stealing is shady. Thats all. You can choose not to give them your business. You can register a complaint, you can go to yelp, you can tell your friends not to patronize their establishment,...whatever the business...you can do those things. But to seek vigilante justice makes one as dirty as the perpetrator .

    Double or triple dipping ona 4 of a kinds screen is stealing. Just as if you have a sandwich shop card that gives you a free sandwich after 10 purchases....and you personally initial the boxes on the card to get you a free sandwich earlier than normal(a mom and pop sandwich shop near me uses simple initials in a box so I use that example). Even if the mom and pop shop forgot to give me a pickle with my last sandwich and they forgot the cheese...it would still be shady for me to take matters in my own hands and initial an extra box..Again vigilante justice.

    So getting back to the original supposition that everyone is shady, and they are hypocrites if they point fingers at others while claiming they themselves are clean.

    And then we get to the levels or degrees of "shadiness" ...and thats where we get into personal opinons. Some may view themselves on a scale of 1-10 on a shadiness scale as a 2, when someone viewing from the outside views it as a 5 or 6. The person doing the self assessing will generally give themselves a lower score than is deserved.

    Way beofre bill cosby has these accusations, he said something in a context that I am not sure..maybe it was regarding people who feel blacks have more of a propensity to steal. He said something like....if a jewelry store had its window broken, you would also see little old white ladies with their hands in the window grabbing for the diamonds.

    everyone has their line that they will cross into the shady area of life

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •