Alan vs. KJ

[coach belly]

My answer to the first part would simply be that AlanMendelson has pretty concretely demonstrated that he is AlanMendelson. There are multiple people on the forum, over the years, who have met AlanMendelson in person and say that is him.

tewlj just spent the past 24 hours explaining that he's been lying about himself all along.

tewlj is mentally ill, he is incapable of posting honestly.

Nothing he writes should be believed.

That, of course, includes another one of his silly yarns about consulting with an attorney.

Remember when he claimed that he had an attorney contact a forum owner to demand that personal identifying information about him be removed?

Wise up...tewlj is just desperately trying to extract himself from Alan's net.

[MisterV]

KJ, I believe Alan has established his identity online sufficiently to sue those who defame him online.

I recall a case some years ago where this sort of thing happened on what I think was a usenet site devoted to taking cruises / voyages.

Some guy and his daughter in Cherry Hill NJ filed suit and the plaintiff and his daughter had used their real names online.

[Ozzy]

Who cares?

How many pages does it take to determine Mendelbread is a degenerate gambling addict, Crimm is a a Man Serving hobo, and Grandpa Newell is the GOAT mooch?

But carry on because we all enjoy having something to read.

I will add 2 more. Kew is UNKOOL and the jury is still out if Alex is really a wolf. Can you confirm or deny this Alex ?

[redietz]

Just for the hell of it I will share that I spoke informally to an attorney friend last night on the phone. Liable / defamation cases aren't his specialty, but his opinion is what I said does not come close to defamation. His opinion is actually stronger than that in that he doesn't believe you CAN defame someone on an anonymous internet forum or chat room. I questioned as to a person using their real name and he said "who says that is their real name and identity?" Who says someone posting as John Smith is actually John Smith?" I didn't have an answer for that. Does anyone? redietz? MrV? Mission?

During the conversation he also said everyone that posts on gambling forums likely has a gambling problem. My immediate response was what about AP's? He said winning doesn't change anything, just masks and covers the problem. Yikes! I told him we would have to save that discussion for another day.

And people who watch television too much are tv addicts, and people who eat too much fast food are fast food addicts, and attorneys who give advice, whether paid for or free, are addicted to being attorneys because it's an authority trip. Anyone spending too much time doing something is an addict. Now, since time is money in a wage-per-hour culture, I can't argue against the idea, except to point out that no one is NOT an addict. So it's not really a useful perspective. Until you get to WHO decides who is NOT an addict. That's the fascinating part.

Seriously, I presented a paper way back when that considered these questions. Here's my last op ed that tackled them:

https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...ddictions.html


In summary, while I may think Alan casino hopping is not a great idea, I also have no business telling him how to spend his money. Maybe he gets laid more if he's living in the tunnels under Las Vegas. Who am I to have an opinion if that life is better or worse than living in a one bedroom with pretty walls and a pool outside? Maybe he doesn't get laid in the one bedroom, and that's what's important to him. Or maybe he has life experiences in the tunnel that lead him to write another great book, and that book becomes a movie, and Alan Mendelson is remembered for that book. I have no real business judging, because who am I to value pretty walls over experiences for somebody else?

[MisterV]

Maybe he gets laid more if he's living in the tunnels under Las Vegas. Who am I to have an opinion if that life is better or worse than living in a one bedroom with pretty walls and a pool outside? Maybe he doesn't get laid in the one bedroom, and that's what's important to him. Or maybe he has life experiences in the tunnel that lead him to write another great book, and that book becomes a movie, and Alan Mendelson is remembered for that book.

Huh?

Are you saying that Alan is in the tunnels now, or has lived in the tunnels?

At least eighteen days in a row?

[redietz]

My answer to the first part would simply be that AlanMendelson has pretty concretely demonstrated that he is AlanMendelson. There are multiple people on the forum, over the years, who have met AlanMendelson in person and say that is him.

tewlj just spent the past 24 hours explaining that he's been lying about himself all along.

tewlj is mentally ill, he is incapable of posting honestly.

Nothing he writes should be believed.

That, of course, includes another one of his silly yarns about consulting with an attorney.

Remember when he claimed that he had an attorney contact a forum owner to demand that personal identifying information about him be removed?

Wise up...tewlj is just desperately trying to extract himself from Alan's net.

Yeah, the thing is, coach, when he retires, he can come out of the woodwork, verify his life, write a book about it, and mention how he made complete asses out of all these trolls. It's all on these forums in perpetuity.

If and when he does that, you guys look like complete mental fucktards. Until then, you're suspected of being complete mental fucktards. And the more you pile on, the more you will look like maroons if and when he verifies what he's done.

Frankly, you are in a bad spot.

And the funny thing is, this is analogous to the Singer double-up bug claim, which you defend. If Singer could verify any of it, he'd make an ass out of doubters. And Singer is basically saying he lied for decades to pull it off. Yet you don't go around calling Singer a liar and not to be believed. You take two different stances for what amounts to the same thing. Now if Singer could verify what he's done, he probably would. KewlJ can simply trot out the blackjack Hall of Famers he knows when he retires to demonstrate who he was and what he's done.

[kewlJ]

KJ, I believe Alan has established his identity online sufficiently to sue those who defame him online.

I recall a case some years ago where this sort of thing happened on what I think was a usenet site devoted to taking cruises / voyages.

Some guy and his daughter in Cherry Hill NJ filed suit and the plaintiff and his daughter had used their real names online.

I have no idea what kind of case you are talking about, what was said (physical threats can be a serious thing even on an anonymous forum) or any other circumstances, so I am not going to speculate as to how it compares to what we are talking about.

The facts of this situation are Alan's adult son came to this forum and announced that his father had a gambling problem that was preventing him from paying his debts and interfering with relationships with his kids and grandkids. THAT is a sign of a gambling problem.

At a different time that same son posted that Alan had enticed him to drive him to a casino with the promise of splitting any Royal Flush jackpot won. That in itself seems like a sign to me, but there is more. A Royal was hit. The jackpot split as promised. Alan then proceeded to lose his share of the jackpot, all money he had initially brought to gamble and borrowed back the half jackpot he had paid the son. THAT is a sign of a gambling problem.

On another occasion, the son started a thread asking if anyone had seen his dad, Alan. He explained he hadn't heard from Alan in a while and assumed he has been at the casino everyday and wondered if anyone had seen him and if he was ok. THAT is a sign of a gambling problem.

I have already mentioned hitting a 100k Royal Flush jackpot and still losing for the year. THAT is a sign of a gambling problem.

The multiple wives alone isn't relevant, but when Alan states that one of the marriages the problem was his wife had a different view on his gambling than he did. THAT is a sign of a gambling problem.

Again, I just assumed it was common knowledge that many or most people on these forums think Alan has shown signs of a gambling problem at times. Stating that opinion is NOT defaming him.

Now I have printed copies of all these things just in case I need them, But it is just ridiculous. I issued an opinion based on things said and shared by Alan and his son, right on this forum.

[Mission146]

Okay, so if your concern was truly for Alan's wellbeing, why not PM him?

[Mission146]

Actually, forget I said anything. This whole matter has already had more attention and discussion (including from me) than is really warranted. Or, more simply, it's a fucking stupid conversation that all came about just by way of neither Alan nor yourself being willing to just drop anything. The only place where you really overstepped was, "Showing signs of problem gambling," which is my entire objection to what you said.

I'm not even saying you're necessarily right or wrong, just that you shouldn't have said that part.

[kewlJ]

In looking for Alan's son's comments I came across one of many discussions about the tracking of a second table. I obviously saw it at the time because I responded to some comments, but reading it now, I should have just let Alan's son make my arguments. Not that it mattered, Alan dismissed everything his son said as well, because it wasn't what he wanted to hear. This isn't really relevant to anything now, but it is funny as shit. Thank God for Alan's son, in this case the apple fell and rolled far from the tree. Oops, I better shut up or I will be sued.

I don't know the background to this... But yes... You can do this...

You do not need to see the entire card. You only need to see if it is a face card, ace, or more than a few pips (the number of clubs, diamonds, hearts, spades). You can definitely see the cards at the table next to you. You only need to be able to make out a tiny portion of a card to tell what it is. This is why I do not understand why if you do play poker (which you don't know how to do) you must sit next to or directly infront of the dealer to see the cards. You can not take photos like this from a cell phone, (especially your antiquated one)((and I gave you a brand new Galaxy S8 which you neglected to use)). The lens perspective is very different from the human eye so a photo is not going to be what you see.

Actually... The cards used at blackjack (Poker Sized) are easier to read from a far than the decks used at Poker (Bridge Sized).

Plus the Black Jack cards are usually large faced (bigger letters) but then again, as I stated previously, you do not need to read the letters or numbers on the card. You simply need to only see the pips.

If a dealer has the stump off the table enough at a poker table I can makeout much of the card while being pitched. If a picture or what suit. It isn't perfect, but even having the knowledge of the player being dealt a red card rather than a black card can give you an "edge" at a poker game.

But yes... If you know how to read cards you can read them from across the room very easily...

I was using that as an example to show you don't need to see much of the card to know what it is. A split second view of a card is all I need to know what it is. Stationary on a table can see them even clearer.

I don't need to. I know what all 52 cards look like in a deck. I only need to see an 1/8th of a card to know what it is let alone having them laid out on a stationary table.

Do you know what a stop sign looks like from a block away?

Also... It is pretty easy to add 1 + 1- 1 + 1 + 0 + 0 ... I mean.. it's not exactly complicated math. I can calculate odds based on my holdings on the fly.

If you are going to count you better be able to see 12 cards on a table and be able to figure the sum within a second... Just as easily as you can figure 2+2 = 4

[coach belly]

Yeah, the thing is...

[kewlJ]

I'm not even saying you're necessarily right or wrong, just that you shouldn't have said that part.

Mission I honestly didn't think it was a big deal. I didn't even think Alan would necessarily argue the point.

Longtime participants of these forums, even just those that read, there are certain things we all know.

We all Know Rob didn't have a Newell.
We all know Mdawg's claim are nonsense.
Similarly with Marcus Clark.
We all know coach belly is just going to take the opposing view against people he doesn't like (mostly AP's)
Most of us know Singer didn't play the double up bug.
We all know Alan didn't see 18 y.o.'s in a row.
We all know Mdawg didn't win 55 hands in a row at blackjack or whatever he claimed.

There are thing we all or most of us know. I just assumed that Alan "has shown signs of a gambling problem" is one of them.

[coach belly]

Longtime participants of these forums, even just those that read, there are certain things we all know.

We all know that tewlj is mentally ill, and incapable of posting honestly.

Nothing he writes should be believed.

[kewlJ]

Yeah, so both coach belly and Mdawg repeatedly claim I have mental illness. I mean on a daily basis. Can I sue them for that? of course not. It is an anonymous message board, and they are expressing an opinion. Trolling, but still an opinion.

[MisterV]

Actually KJ what CB posted is defamatory, much more than what you posted.

He is in essence calling you a crazy liar.

You are not a public figure.

So yes, he libeled you, as he and others have done for some time now.

But since your real name is unknown there's really nothing to be done about it as he is libeling an anonymous person.

Sad, isn't it?

[redietz]

Actually KJ what CB posted is defamatory, much more than what you posted.

He is in essence calling you a crazy liar.

You are not a public figure

So yes, he libeled you, as he and others have done for some time now.

Sad, isn't it?

You get tarred and feathered while he and others just cruise right along.

The point: CB knows not to say that kind of shit repeatedly at WoV or else he'd be suspended and then probably nuked.

So not just "pick your battles," but "pick your battle ground."

Regardless, his comment is defamatory on its face.

Hey, if you have twenty or so grand lying around that you don't give a flying fuck about you can fuck with him.

Could be interesting.

Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."

Hmmmm. I have 20K lying around. I don't think I'd be considered a public figure. What constitutes a public figure? If I'm a public sports handicapper, does that make me a "public figure?"

I can't think of a much better 20K investment. It would be a rip. Not sure what would be cheaper, the 20K or bribing forum owners to get forensic access to their poster base. I don't know crap, but my nephew is majoring in online forensics, so that could be a family project.

[kewlJ]

Damn Redietz dude. You have a LOT of neices and nephews.

Oh wait...i forget where you live. Hillbilly country.

Just kidding Redietz
..dont sue.

[coach belly]

I have 20K lying around. I can't think of a much better 20K investment. It would be a rip.

Maybe you'd like to serve the summons and complaint to me personally.

I'll even pass along Rob's quote to your face...and let me tell you something pendejo. You pull any of your crazy shit with me, you flash your piece out on the Boardwalk, I'll take it away from you and stick it up your ass and pull the fucking trigger 'til it goes click.


What number post was this quote taken from?

You get tarred and feathered while he and others just cruise right along.

The point: CB knows not to say that kind of shit repeatedly at WoV or else he'd be suspended and then probably nuked.

So not just "pick your battles," but "pick your battle ground."

Regardless, his comment is defamatory on its face.

Hey, if you have twenty or so grand lying around that you don't give a flying fuck about you can fuck with him.

Could be interesting.

Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."

[MisterV]

What number post was this quote taken from?

That was my original post; at first I thought it would be actionable.

But after posting it dawned on me that as KJ is anonymous it would not be actionable, as nobody knows who the hell he really is, so I modified it, and deleted the reference to CB.

I sometimes change / modify my posts as I solidify my thoughts on a subject; bad habit, I suppose, which can cause confusion and sometimes embarrassment.

Oh well.

[coach belly]

That was my original post; at first I thought it would be actionable.

But after posting it dawned on me that as KJ is anonymous it would not be actionable, as nobody knows who the hell he really is, so I modified it, and deleted the reference to CB.

You edited your post after the ditz quoted you?

The first sentence of the post that remains references CB.