Originally Posted by redietz View Post
Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
Originally Posted by Spock View Post
But wait! That can't be true because Boob21 read articles! Lots and lots of articles! If you read those articles you might think differently, (but probably not).

Of course Boob can't supply a SINGLE one of those, but just trust him. He's right, everyone else is wrong.

It looks to me like he's trying to tie the Game King button hustle with the Keno one.

And Boob, so you know, I'm not an AP. I just hate jackasses that believe they know everything. (<----- that would be YOU)
Hey, Spock, or should I say Spook. Lol. I’ve noticed that’s kind of an AP thing to do, meaning slightly twist a person’s handle and think that makes you clever. Spock/Spook, you can believe whatever you want to... it doesn’t mater to me. No matter how many articles I post, it won’t prove anything. You think these guys were incencent since that’s the way you’re wired. In your world, the casinos are always in the wrong.

At the very least, I think these five people are unethical since they took advantage of a computer bug. What they did is similar to getting free food out of a vending machine when it’s malfunctioning. An AP would probably think this is an advantage play...I think it’s unethical. This is what makes you and me different.

Regardless of how these five people found this play (either by an inside sources or through blind luck), they knew what they did is take advantage of a bug in the machine’s program. They were making 5 times the payout so they knew something was wrong with the program. Therefore, they tried to stay under the radar for as long as possible.

I’m surprised the judge didn’t make these people pay this money back to the casino, like the judge did in the Phil Ivey edge sorting case. But as we all know, each judge is different. Btw, judges have ruled in the favor of the caisbo when a bug happens in a big jackpot payout. I know this gets APs upset too.

To be able to sleep at night, you need to believe what you believe. I don’t want to post an article that might make you doubt your beliefs. I can tell this case is very important to you. I think they are guilty, but I can’t prove it. No article will do that. And at the very least, I think these 5 people have no ethics.

Usually I just roll my eyes at people claiming the ethical high ground, but I looked more closely at Bob21's postings.

I'm sure he realized that his "free food out of a vending machine" analogy above was half a step off. If he instead compared it to "free cigarettes out of a cigarette machine," both in addictive correlation and ethics, he would have been closer to the real world mark. But that would have been less helpful to the casino industry, so he went with food.

And then we can get into the ethics of someone posting anonymously, blathering opinions that have no real world fallout for his actual self. Is that ethical? Going to bat for an industry from the safety of anonymity? Why not take things in a truly ethical direction and put your real name on your postings, so everyone can attach a face to the opinions? That would be the truly ethical thing to do. Have the courage of your convictions, or opinions, or blather. Sitting somewhere behind a pseudonym, with no ramifications for whatever you spout, isn't quite as ethical as standing up and taking responsibility for your opinions, and the consequences of those opinions.

Instead, Bob21 is afraid to use the same pseudonym across forums. That's hilarious.

I guess that's the difference between someone like Bob21 and me. According to him, ethical counts for something. Compared to him, I'm ethical. Who knew? And unafraid. He's a coward -- defending an exploitative industry without absorbing any of the real world consequences of having defended that industry.

How manipulative is someone who can't even use the same alias in different anonymous venues? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question.

Yeah, Bob21, you're a real ethical warrior.

LOL.
This has got to be one of the dumbest posts I’ve read in a while. What does logging into different forums with different handles have anything to do with ethics? I could see it if I was trying to accomplish something by doing this. None of my handles have anything to do with my other handle. All my handles state what I think. Am I unethical since I use different passwords to log onto different acounts? In your world view, I probably am.

This is another thing you’ve got to love about APs. They have this code of ethics, which they constantly call each other out on, but they themselves violate. Look at kJ, he called me out for using different handles, but used a sock puppet to get access to a site he was banned on. Who does that but a person who has little ethics? If Dan should ban me on this site, I’m not coming back. I’m not creating a sock puppet to get back on.

Btw, I know several APs who use different handles on different sites. Three is Three on BJTF and Dummy on blackjackinfo. Has he violated some moral code amongst APs?

Most APs will stoop to almost any level to take advantage of a casino. This is why the judge ruled against Phil Ivey in the edge sorting case. My guess is if this same judge was presiding over this case, it might have gone different.

Btw, where is this code of ethics book APs live by? It appears to be very different from what is considered normal. APs use false names, make up stories, hide their ID, but somehow this is ethical. I guess it is in their world.