Legal Opinion Request for MrV --

[MisterV]

I don''t have time to look for the case...

This: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...-idUSKBN1YA13U

[mickeycrimm]

But you can bet your ass redietz thinks/knows Rob is worth a lot of money. Or he wouldn't be going after him.

Or it could be he's just "fed up" and has enough extra time and money to throw at the problem.

Most defamation cases are filed "for the principle of the thing" with little expectation of substantial recovery.

So, if he sues and gets a judgment for a million bucks Rob can thumb his nose and say "Find the money if you can:" there is no obligation for people to pay off judgments against them, i.e. there is no civil or criminal penalties for that.

In other words, the only one who is going to make money is redietz lawyer....from the money redietz pays them. And redietz reputation will still be damaged. Oh, wait. That's right. The people his reputation is supposed to be damaged with never heard of Rob Singer. That is, until this case.

The real damage to redietz reputation will come when his clients find out that redietz is a troll on an obscure gambling forum called VCT where he gratuitously bashes other members. The real damage will occur when his clients read his troll posts and find out how bizarre he is.

[mickeycrimm]

Come on KJ, quoting negative comments from others is something someone with a very small cock and huge fragile ego does. Don’t be like him.

Come on Boz, you read the other forum, quoting out of context is all both these guys Singer and Mdog do. At least my quoting of Druff is not out of context.

Furthermore, the Newell thing is basically laid to rest. COMPLETELY DEBUNKED! Now if Singer is going to keep bringing it up, trying to revive his whole story, it is more than fair to quote Dan Druff each time. Druff basically said it in a nutshell. Would you rather that or have me make a 6 paragraph post saying what Druff said in a couple lines?

Still waiting for you to prove Rob never had a Newell. Speculation and conjecture don't cut it.

[mickeycrimm]

Come on KJ, quoting negative comments from others is something someone with a very small cock and huge fragile ego does. Don’t be like him.

Come on Boz, you read the other forum, quoting out of context is all both these guys Singer and Mdog do. At least my quoting of Druff is not out of context.

Furthermore, the Newell thing is basically laid to rest. COMPLETELY DEBUNKED! Now if Singer is going to keep bringing it up, trying to revive his whole story, it is more than fair to quote Dan Druff each time. Druff basically said it in a nutshell. Would you rather that or have me make a 6 paragraph post saying what Druff said in a couple lines?

Druff never listed any facts for his conclusion. He was all speculation and conjecture....just like you.

[mickeycrimm]

If some scoundrel, e.g. douchedawg doxes an AP such as KJ such that KJ's identity is made known to the casinos he counts cards at that is an actionable tort: intentional interference with an economic expectancy.

What if the AP's actions were part of the process that led to his doxxing?

[redietz]

In kewJ's case, I was informed that the most likely avenue of proving damages for someone calling him this or that on a forum is "lack of networking" or "reducing his ability to network." If his income took a sudden nosedive, and he had emails or PMs or posts wherein people assert they will no longer share scouting or invite him onto teams because of what was said on the forum that had no basis in fact, then his ability to network has been damaged. His ability to join informal but professional "clubs" has been damaged by allegations and assertions made by others.

If you think these "clubs" must be formal, you would be wrong. A woman sued a university for not allowing her onto a men's intramural basketball team. Her proving of damages involved her showing inability to network (she was a business grad) with predominantly male peers in the business department. She won.

[monet]

In kewJ's case, I was informed that the most likely avenue of proving damages for someone calling him this or that on a forum is "lack of networking" or "reducing his ability to network." If his income took a sudden nosedive, and he had emails or PMs or posts wherein people assert they will no longer share scouting or invite him onto teams because of what was said on the forum that had no basis in fact, then his ability to network has been damaged. His ability to join informal but professional "clubs" has been damaged by allegations and assertions made by others.

If you think these "clubs" must be formal, you would be wrong. A woman sued a university for not allowing her onto a men's intramural basketball team. Her proving of damages involved her showing inability to network (she was a business grad) with predominantly male peers in the business department. She won.

We see you.

[monet]

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/1510067933736685581

[Rob.Singer]

Come on KJ, quoting negative comments from others is something someone with a very small cock and huge fragile ego does. Don’t be like him.

Come on Boz, you read the other forum, quoting out of context is all both these guys Singer and Mdog do. At least my quoting of Druff is not out of context.

Furthermore, the Newell thing is basically laid to rest. COMPLETELY DEBUNKED! Now if Singer is going to keep bringing it up, trying to revive his whole story, it is more than fair to quote Dan Druff each time. Druff basically said it in a nutshell. Would you rather that or have me make a 6 paragraph post saying what Druff said in a couple lines?

Druff never listed any facts for his conclusion. He was all speculation and conjecture....just like you.

And why would anyone be surprised at something like this from Dan? It's his way of cowering in the same safe space as max & kew, who both had more than a week to get to the address I posted and live up to their vows to view the Newell before sale, yet chose to stay safely put so they could forever continue to fabricate the false non-ownership narrative--and therefore, the "he never played the DU glitch" lie, in order to sleep better at night. It was the way all 3 of them figured they could best cope with and live thru such an awful situation.

When these affadavits start showing up send a couple to me. I'll sign them on the Newell etc. and I have the proof to back them up. But will this ever happen? Not likely since it'll put an end to those infamous little safe spaces of theirs.

And this is what I have to say about that. I now give kew permission to make this all about himself, like he does everything.

[jdaewoo]

Still waiting for you to prove Rob never had a Newell. Speculation and conjecture don't cut it.

Can't prove that Rob hasn't been on Mars either.

[kewlJ]

And why would anyone be surprised at something like this from Dan? It's his way of cowering in the same safe space as max & kew, who both had more than a week to get to the address I posted and live up to their vows to view the Newell before sale, yet chose to stay safely put so they could forever continue to fabricate the false non-ownership narrative--and therefore, the "he never played the DU glitch" lie, in order to sleep better at night. It was the way all 3 of them figured they could best cope with and live thru such an awful situation.

Here is why Dan Druff's statement matters. First, Druff is a professional poker player. He is very adept at "reading" people and knowing who is bullshiting. I can only think of two people, at least in my time here, that Druff has felt the need to voice such an opinion about, Singer and coach belly.

Second in addition to being very adept at reading people, as administrator and owner of this forum, Dan Druff has information that the rest of us don't have. He probably knows for a fact that Singer has posted from places, while claiming to be somewhere else and that kind of thing. In addition, Druff is able to 100% identify sock puppets and has done so with Singer. Remember Girlfriday, a Singer sock puppet pretending to be a real estate agent, created for the sole purpose of backing up Singer's wrong assertion that no advantage player could get a mortgage?

So trying to dismiss Druff statements as "just another opinion" does fly. He is an expert on reading people and has information unavailable to the rest of us. When he says Singer never owned a Newell and never played the DU bug for any real money, that is as close to fact as there is.

Now as far as this latest lie that Singer has repeated of late, about me refusing to come "see" the Newell during a week's window before the fake sale, I challenge Rob to post any quote from me where I ever showed any interest or indicated any possibility that I would travel 300 miles to see something I already knew didn't exist. The fact is I never had any doubt that there was no Newell, but if there ever was any question it disappeared after the dealer showroom picture fiasco. And remember, I spoke with the general manager of that RV dealership. So there was never any question for me that there was no Newell, not even a 18 y.o. possibility of a billion to one.

So Rob saying that I balked at traveling 300 miles to see something I knew didn't exist is typical Rob Singer revisionist bullshit. I wouldn't have traveled 15 minutes to Silverton or South Point, let alone 300 miles to Pheonix.

[MisterV]

What if the AP's actions were part of the process that led to his doxxing?

That shouldn't matter.

Fact is, there is always going to a reason, or some "actions" by the victim which pissed off the doxxer and which led to the doxxer doxxing him.

[Rob.Singer]

I just took my daily shit and I gotta tell you....MAN DO I FEEL BETTER!

But please keep in mind, anyone who posts anything that makes me feel bad and gets me constipated, I'm gonna sue the living shit out of them!

[MisterV]

I just took my daily shit and I gotta tell you....MAN DO I FEEL BETTER!

Was the excreted "log" a full 9 1/2 inches long?

What about girth?

And of course it didn't stink?

[kewlJ]

What if the AP's actions were part of the process that led to his doxxing?

That shouldn't matter.

Fact is, there is always going to a reason, or some "actions" by the victim which pissed off the doxxer and which led to the doxxer doxxing him.

That action in this case was me stating that what Mdog claims can't be because it defies both the math and the reality of how Las Vegas works. THAT is the action, that his claims defy reality.

From day 1, when this guy chose his title of "adventures of" it has been a fiction fantasy. You will note that he posts the identical accounts on a forum for aspiring writers, writing "stories". He also tracks, is obsessed with and comments on how many views his posts and thread receives, as well as checks the ratings and rankings of forums when he is posting vs when he is not posting. Who does that?

All his movie clips also confirms he is having a hard time distinguishing between the real world and fantasy. He desperately wants to be and likely thinks he is, some character from a movie. referring to himself in the third person (Mdawg does this or Mdawg says that) is another clear indication of someone detached from reality.

But I don't really care about his mental issue. I care that he is on a gambling forum, that is supposed to be grounded in math, run by a guy supposed to be one of the gambling math experts and this person makes claims that defy the math and reality. And I and every other person based in math, and knowledgeable about gambling and how the gambling industry works, has every right to call him out saying that is not how things work and that is not how the math works. And if he is going to repeat his BS claims over and over, we have a right to call him out over and over.

That is the action we are talking about. And doxxing someone, knowing it can cause financial harm to them and their career, is not a reasonable nor acceptable response.

And before anyone says I doxxed him first, he is NOT an AP. Not trying to remain anonymous from casinos so he can play (he claims the opposite). His name being out there has cause him NO financial issues or loss of income or future income. The ONLY harm he has incurred is people can look for themselves, so his fantasy claims are shot. THAT is the extent of his damages. His feelings are hurt.

[Ozzy]

What took you so long to surpass Comrade Dietz Kew ?

[Don Perignom]

I don't know anything about suing, but to preserve your legacy, have you considered a time capsule?



You print out your accomplishments, put them inside, and then hide the box where it won't be found for a few hundred years. Some advisors recommend burial, but best placement is inside an eave of your house. You can look it up on Youtube, enormous hives develop, and no one inside has any idea. If thousands of buzzing bees can go undetected, ain't nobody gonna notice a box.

[mickeycrimm]

In kewJ's case, I was informed that the most likely avenue of proving damages for someone calling him this or that on a forum is "lack of networking" or "reducing his ability to network." If his income took a sudden nosedive, and he had emails or PMs or posts wherein people assert they will no longer share scouting or invite him onto teams because of what was said on the forum that had no basis in fact, then his ability to network has been damaged. His ability to join informal but professional "clubs" has been damaged by allegations and assertions made by others.

If you think these "clubs" must be formal, you would be wrong. A woman sued a university for not allowing her onto a men's intramural basketball team. Her proving of damages involved her showing inability to network (she was a business grad) with predominantly male peers in the business department. She won.

What if the person KJ sues proves that KJ doxxed him first?

[Rob.Singer]

What if the AP's actions were part of the process that led to his doxxing?

That shouldn't matter.

Fact is, there is always going to a reason, or some "actions" by the victim which pissed off the doxxer and which led to the doxxer doxxing him.

That action in this case was me stating that what Mdog claims can't be because it defies both the math and the reality of how Las Vegas works. THAT is the action, that his claims defy reality.

From day 1, when this guy chose his title of "adventures of" it has been a fiction fantasy. You will note that he posts the identical accounts on a forum for aspiring writers, writing "stories". He also tracks, is obsessed with and comments on how many views his posts and thread receives, as well as checks the ratings and rankings of forums when he is posting vs when he is not posting. Who does that?

All his movie clips also confirms he is having a hard time distinguishing between the real world and fantasy. He desperately wants to be and likely thinks he is, some character from a movie. referring to himself in the third person (Mdawg does this or Mdawg says that) is another clear indication of someone detached from reality.

But I don't really care about his mental issue. I care that he is on a gambling forum, that is supposed to be grounded in math, run by a guy supposed to be one of the gambling math experts and this person makes claims that defy the math and reality. And I and every other person based in math, and knowledgeable about gambling and how the gambling industry works, has every right to call him out saying that is not how things work and that is not how the math works. And if he is going to repeat his BS claims over and over, we have a right to call him out over and over.

That is the action we are talking about. And doxxing someone, knowing it can cause financial harm to them and their career, is not a reasonable nor acceptable response.

And before anyone says I doxxed him first, he is NOT an AP. Not trying to remain anonymous from casinos so he can play (he claims the opposite). His name being out there has cause him NO financial issues or loss of income or future income. The ONLY harm he has incurred is people can look for themselves, so his fantasy claims are shot. THAT is the extent of his damages. His feelings are hurt.

If you keep blabbing this stuff so you'll someday be able to believe it, all you're really doing is making an epic ass of yourself.

Everyone has long ago already decided what to think about MDawg ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT ANY BIASED HELP FROM THE MOST NEUROTIC POSTER ON THE INTERNET. So for you to keep repeating your theories and jealousy-laced nonsense over his accomplishments or failures, only makes you look even more like the internet forums banned loser that you really are.

Wise up, fool.

[kewlJ]

Wait what? Who said KJ was suing anyone?

If I end up in court over the situation, it is more likely I am a defendant because I took matters into my own hands.

But I hope that doesn't happen either.