Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: Requesting a review of the 'Singer' situation

  1. #1
    On September 29,2017, Dan Druff took the following action.

    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    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.

    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    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.

    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 07-14-2018 at 09:45 AM.

  2. #2
    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'.
    What, Me Worry?

  3. #3
    Kewlj why don't you just avoid this forum and do your reading and posting over at WOV?

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Kewlj why don't you just ... do your ... posting over at WOV?
    Hello, McFly?
    What, Me Worry?

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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.

  6. #6
    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?

  7. #7
    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!
    What, Me Worry?

  8. #8
    MisterV.... duh.

  9. #9
    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.
    What, Me Worry?

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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..., 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".
    Last edited by kewlJ; 07-14-2018 at 11:16 AM.

  11. #11
    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.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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.

  13. #13
    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.
    Last edited by redietz; 07-14-2018 at 11:35 AM.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    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.

  15. #15
    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.

  16. #16
    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.

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    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.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    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!) .

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    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.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. LuxBus Review
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-15-2016, 02:13 PM
  2. NCL Escape Review
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-31-2016, 04:34 PM
  3. Interesting situation with generous CET comps for one-time VP player
    By Dan Druff in forum Total Rewards and MLife
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-02-2014, 03:34 PM
  4. Someone please review Oscar's Steakhouse when it opens
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-15-2011, 03:00 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-14-2011, 07:28 PM

Posting Permissions

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