Over at WoV, Shackleford deleted a comment and suspended someone for making a negative comment about Alan. Despite Shackleford's reasoning that his forum is about "free speech" and that is why he allows Mdawg's claims, free speech took a back seat in this instance. I think we have all come to expect such flip-flopping by Shackleford.
But here on this forum, which Dan Druff trumpets as the free speech forum, Druff removed a comment of mine about Alan (and he probably will remove this thread too). Can you square that up Druff? Free speech as long as someone doesn't say something about the Jews or about someone you like? Is that it? Free speech with an asterisk?
My comments about Alan were not nasty. I didn't hate Alan and am sorry he passed. But let's face it Alan held some anti-AP and anti-Math views, and he was in your face with them. He clearly was anti-AP, that is didn't like advantage players that play within the math to win. Within the last month, I stated he was anti-AP and several people agreed. I don't think there was any question about this.
And his anti-AP biased extended beyond him not liking advantage players, he repeatedly tried to discredit not only myself, but many AP's, with some less than honest tactics and comments.
In addition, of course there was the 18 y.o. in a row that he will be forever known for that didn't occur and again his dishonesty prevented him from admitting that. Instead he double and tripled down a hundred times. And there were other bizarre Alan claims, many about craps like the dice landing on top of each other. And of course one of my favorites, "quitting while ahead" as a winning strategy. This voodoo concept was repeated by Alan probably several hundred times. He started dozens of new threads on the topic.
So there are some people that didn't like Alan, so what. He worked hard at that. I am not saying it is ok to say something nasty upon his passing or say you are glad he is gone, which I think the post at WoV went in that direction, but come on, Alan was anti-AP, anti-Math, anti-winning players (I think it is obvious why) and not only clung to but repeatedly promoted voodoo-ish gambling theories. Not everyone appreciated that.