I'm glad you said these were not confirmed facts Blackhole because your opinion above is filled with errors compounded by more errors. Thanks for joining the forum. I'm sure Dan appreciates the traffic.
I'm glad you said these were not confirmed facts Blackhole because your opinion above is filled with errors compounded by more errors. Thanks for joining the forum. I'm sure Dan appreciates the traffic.
I have nothing against you personally Alan, I’m just calling it the way I saw it.
I’m looking forward to how this case continues to develop and how it ends. I’m hoping you’ll remain as honest with what takes place in the future.
Blackhole: you don't know me; you never talked to me; you never talked to my lawyer; I presume you never spoke to my doctors or did you speak with anyone from Caesars or even see their surveillance tape which shows me walking in that door. Yet you say you're "just calling it the way I saw it"?
In reality, you are imagining things and filling in the gaps of knowledge with what you think should be.
While I appreciate blackhole's experience and cynicism, I'd like to point out that experience and cynicism aren't always correct and don't always draw the correct conclusions.
For example, blackhole's cynicism pointed in the direction of "APs" is, I think, reasonable. However, I bet sports, and I've accumulated such a statistically unlikely record over 40 years that I personally undermine the entire theory that there are no winning APs, if you accept sports betting as a form of AP. So while I understand that 99.9% of sports bettors are mirages (therefore our moniker, "Integrity Sports"), there are 50-100 individuals or teams of people in this country who can do real long-term damage to sports books. Plus we have partners/clients who see exactly what we are doing day-to-day, so I couldn't get away with saying this unless they had seen it.
Similarly, blackhole draws what seems like a generically reasonable conclusion regarding Alan, but the point is he doesn't really know. He's opining.
Well, I don't see the point of opining here. What's the upside? Reveal Alan to be someone he doesn't present himself to be? Do you really have the data to make that case? Do you really have an intellectual ability or perspective beyond other forum members that uniquely qualifies you to call Alan out?
I doubt it.
Unless you're a telepath, it's just opining and calling someone out for the fun of it. It accomplishes nothing. Does it really inform anybody? Okay, blackhole doesn't like the saccharin pats on the back Alan gets here. So what? I don't love them, either. But people give family and friends saccharin pats on the back all of the time. Do we all need to get called out for it every time we do it?
You both have good points against my reaction.
Yet, discussing such serious issues in the public’s eyes like this will always run the risks of pessimistic reactions like mine. (Which by the way has yet to be proven wrong)
Blackhole my main concern when I originally posted about my injury was to inform the public about a danger using a door at Caesars. Check the dates on my website posts. There was nothing about a lawsuit, or claiming damages. In fact, at the time of the injury when I asked Caesars' risk management to replace the jacket I actually said to them "I'm not going to sue you, just give me another jacket."
My lawyer was well aware that I was performing as a reporter/blogger.
It wasn't until later, specifically when the wound failed to heal properly and then when the secondary infection set in, that the situation became worse. Initially it was a bad cut from a door that closed too fast.
Both I (on my website) and my lawyer (in a letter to Caesars) commended them for adjusting the door.
When you open by calling someone "a degenerate compulsive gambler", you always run the risk of pessimistic reactions like mine. Is asshole worse? I don't know, but then it's only my opinion and nothing you've said has proven me wrong.Originally Posted by blackhole
Nothing would be a bigger waste of time than trying to prove wrong an anonymous poster's opinions. The poster could, theoretically, come back and pose similar or spin-off opinions as other posters. It would be an unending suction of time, energy, and brain cells. A true, if you will, black hole.Originally Posted by blackhole
Well this is refreshing....someone else who is not afraid of telling the truth about the way he sees things.
In case anyone missed it, when blackhole identifies Alan as a smart, well-off, degenerate compulsive gambler, he hit the nail squarely on its head. And when he said that Alan was using this silly door incident as nothing but a seemingly simple way of getting a bunch of free play to play even more vp with, it's as if God took a few moments off from his busy schedule to set the record straight here.
Alan, God bless him, is only attempting to put the squeeze on CET and it's not out of revenge or anger at losing or anything like that. He simply is, as ALL 7-Stars are, addicted to offers and free play and the like, which is also the reasoning behind him not approaching any of this in a serious, professional manner. I believe by airing out all the personal details here, all he's done is seriously downgrade any value that might be obtained from the effort--if indeed there's any value to be had at all. I remember discussing a similar type thing on facebook over an incident in Tucson, where I repeatedly said any lawsuit was a waste of time and could only be viewed as gold-digging, and I was right. I believe the same thing is occurring here.
Red, I know the doors being talked about and many children have walked thru them all the time. And there are also plenty of public domain doors all over the country that can be construed as "death-defying" if I'm translating your characterization correctly. It's very clear that what happened to Alan was a careless accident, and when the light came on upstairs he saw an opportunity for some quick cash. I also can see how this episode can be so repulsive to blackhole, as it's so true that everyone in this country is always looking to game the system in some way. Yes there may be a way that CET coughs up a little something here, but the prudent thing would have been to just walk away after getting a free jacket replacement. Think about it--Alan still works. Does he really need all this hassle?
Good luck with whatever happens. And blackhole should be thanked for his mature approach on the overall picture.
That is why I hoped Alan would be honest in the future. My opining view is obviously closed at this point regardless of the actual outcome.Originally Posted by redietz
Why are these old guys so jealous and bitter? Nothing wrong with living on a fixed income and some people have more disposable income than you, get over it. I'm sure you waste your money somewhere, you just don't have as much to waste. Why does it bother you so much that a guy likes to spend him money in casino's? It doesn't affect you, but you get a thrill out of labeling someone a "degenerate gambler". I waste my money on shows and expensive dinners, is that better than gambling it away?Originally Posted by blackhole
Worrying so much about how someone else spends their money smacks of jealousy and envy.
Rob, you missed the key point.
Caesars refilled the door's pneumatics afterwards. They looked at the door and decided there was an issue. Their evaluation was that the door wasn't right. If there were any question, they wouldn't have bothered, because it basically admits to a problem with the door prior to the accident.
I wonder if Rob would be as forgiving if he was injured walking through an automatic door at an airport?
I still don't get where it is wrong if Alan does want compensation for his injury. If there was no fault on the part of Caesars, then he might have gotten a nuisance value. Since there was fault, he is entitled to damages.
I once had a friend that was drunk and high and fell down next to the pool and into the water at a vegas casino that I can't name. He was cut up pretty badly--his face looked like he went 10 rounds with Tyson. Clearly there was no fault by the casino. I made one call on his behalf and we received all the medical costs, $5,000 for his pain and suffering, and $3,500 legal fees. I would have held out for more but he said grab it.
The way Caesars has handled Alan's case is a clear indication of fault on their end. They just aren't smart enough anymore to quickly make it go away.
There's way too many of these entitlement-type injuries in this country, and it annoys those of us who go out of our way not to seek compensation for simple carelessness. Just as I get after Dan for nit-picking his way through life, I tire of reading about how so many people feel they deserve some type of payment for a simple accident resulting from not paying full attention to what they're doing.
Just my opinion--I'd never waste my time on something like this. I'd mug them in the casino if I felt they owed me for something unpleasant that occurred. All this pussy-footing around with doctors, lawyers, picture & video-taking, etc. seems so counter-productive to having a good quality of life. Alan has overcome some big and serious obstacles in his life. Why bog things down with something like this?
Maybe they felt that if they did something, that effort would have been enough. They may have believed that Alan might be like so many others are after such an event: concerned that his issue led the way to it being corrected so no one else need experience this type of thing. For many, that's satisfaction enough to close the case.Originally Posted by redietz
Rob you amaze me. Let me spell it out for you: the friggin door slammed on me. No door is supposed to do that. Anyone walking through a door like that would not expect it to close that fast. The door hit me. My hand was cut. I later developed infections. Do you get it yet? The door could have been at a mall or an office building or at a store or at an apartment building AND THE SITUATION WOULD BE THE SAME. It has nothing to do with a casino or casino gaming.
Is this getting through your one track obsessive compulsive mind yet?
I am going to give Caesars the benefit of the doubt. So far a third party risk management firm has been calling the shots. I want to see what Caesars is going to do now that I was told Caesars will talk to me directly. I was just talking about this with friends at dinner. Let's see if Caesars does talk to me or if last week's email exchange was meaningless.Originally Posted by regnis
I have thought about this situation since Alan first talked about it, and pictured what I would have done.
I am not one who files frivolous lawsuits or demands money for small injuries. As I pointed out, I was twice injured at Caesars properties since 2009, and asked for nothing both times.
However, I think I probably would have pursued something this time if I were injured by this fast-closing, sharp door.
There are two issues at play here:
1) The door has a sharp edge. That's a stupid design, and it's dangerous. I could stand in the way of any door at my home, let it close on me at a reasonable (or even somewhat fast) rate, and I would never get any cuts. It might hurt a bit, but it wouldn't slice through my skin. For Caesars to have a sharp door which the public frequently uses (often carrying luggage and trying to squeeze through) is irresponsible.
2) The door closed too fast. I was skeptical if this was really true (even after seeing the first video), but clearly Caesars agreed, as they slowed it down after Alan's injury.
Had this been me, I would have visited doctors, added up the out-of-pocket expenses beyond insurance coverage, and asked for whatever that was plus $2000.
I would have asked this directly of Risk Management, and then Caesars itself if Risk Management refused, noting that I would sign a liability waiver if they paid. If Caesars refused, I would have then taken it to an attorney.
Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com
I'm surprised at your comment, considering the issue over this happening to be in a casino was brought up in scathing--but in so very truthful--fashion by someone other than me.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I do believe, however, that regardless where this occurred, you'd still be trying to get some sort of payday out of it. That's just the way you roll. Dan already admitted that he'd be the same type of opportunistic gold-digger as yourself had it happened to him. And notice how he portrays himself as much more cunning than you on such an event. Even when he doesn't say this type of exciting "ambulance chasing" is right in his wheelhouse, he does.
You had an unfortunate accident. Accept your part of the responsibility for it and move on. As the other poster said, you've completely weakened your bargaining strength by blabbing all about it here anyway. The only smart choice you've left yourself is to walk away. You're overly obsessing over this, just like Dan does when it comes to a bottle of Gatorade. It is THAT silly at this point.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote