Misc WizardOfVegas Forum is Dying

I believe WoN said something about transmitting the gift cards electronically, has that changed that I've missed?

 

I'm not a mind reader to say whether or not he considered the former Trolling, but if he did, he certainly didn't mention it. The relevant subject matter, as I recall, was me saying I would have Banned you for that and you asked me to quote the sentence, which I did, and gave my explanation why. Personally, I don't believe I would have Banned you for Personal Insult for that post and I certainly did no such thing.

I am sure that the tone and/or verbiage had something to do with him construing it as an insult, though. If you had said something like, "I am not going to donate because I do not feel the need to donate to a site that has been attempting to, and has, in fact, made money in the past because it is not being effectively monetized currently. I also do not believe that any of the services I receive at this site warrant me parting with any of my cash especially when we consider the fact that my participation benefits the site and I do not believe that the customer service on the site is such as to warrant any greater benefit from me over and above my content."

If you had said that, then any Ban, in my opinion, would be indefensible.

I didn't say it was, I said that's why I would have Banned you for that post, which I definitely would have done.

Please direct your attention to Rule 4:

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/2-forum-rules/#post37215

That rule says not to quote from private communication, the Rule does not specify that said communication be via PM. In other words, the site has a rule that you cannot discuss communication intended to be private on the site whether or not the actual communication in question took place on the site.

Thus, you could make a claim of one E-Mail, ten, twenty, fifty or two-hundred thousand and he cannot ask you to prove the existence of said E-Mails because that would essentially be demanding you violate a rule of the site.

I would assume that you would know and understand that, and would be, therefore, making a point that he essentially is completely incapable of challenging just to better your argument. Ergo, Trolling.

I will stipulate that.

If you say so, like I said, it's a hypothetical ban that never happened anyway. You just asked what sentence I would have banned you for and I told you.

Maybe he was offended by the analogy, maybe he wasn't. I wouldn't know if the analogy offended him.

I'm not disputing 20+ E-Mails for reasons stated, they aren't any of my business, especially now when I have no reason to be concerned whether or not you can prove that claim. That claim wasn't even the subject matter of Wizard banning you, as you point out. It's just the subject matter of why I would have banned you.

I'm not tap dancing anything, quit changing the argument.

You asked, "What specific sentence was rule breaking(punctuation sic)," in the context of my stating I would have banned you for that post. That's what I am answering. I'm not answering why Wizard did or did not ban you, strictly speaking, I don't know. On that particular ban, he quoted the post, so I'm sure it had something to do with what part of your post he quoted.

 

YES. Thanks big for the phrase "pretentiously aggrieved". I fucking HATE those people, and I appreciate a way to address them in a public setting, as what I have been calling them wouldn't fly most places.

Haha, nice try, but you're too late. LarryS is already my officially designated ball washer, and I'd not rob him of that

 

There's been no confirmation, remember this is the same member( StrictlyAP) who welched on Ayecarumba bet.

 

EB just Pm'd me and he says hi to everyone, he is having a great vacation in a Camden Walmart

Punishment according to you around the corner

what? Alam Mendolson left wov self banning himself??? Fuck I just had lunch with him yesterday and he had nothing but good things to say about wov

Punishment around the corner....private communication(or is it only detailing private communication that is on the wrong side of your beliefs)

you actually think you and manboy and BBB control our private lives. You actually think you can have muzzle a disclosure that I privately talked to someone about the weather.

Hi all, I saw manboy doing research in panama getting a happy ending massage.......he says to hi and that he will be back in 2 days and give a detailed report

it all comes down to "gotcha" for the right person. Banning someone because they didnt word something the way you wanted it worded is oppressive. Or using an oppressive rule like ONE cannot talk about ANY private communication in the world....even between you and your wife is nonsense. It shines the light on wov as being a board of poorly thought out rules and rules that are arbitrarily enforced.

Who careS how "you would have phrased it:". I dont phrase things like you do...I am a big boy...I can use the english language as i see fit...using colorful language within the bounds of the rules. There is no rule against ruffling feathers. Thats all I did IN A SINGLE NON REPETETIVE POST. And remember ...if that causes a bad mood....then a punishment is to follow....according to the manboy.

There is no rule against being blunt, frank, cogent,talk .........but if one is on the wrong side of an issue..there seems to be a rule.

What if I used that analogy agasint Nathan.....Hey Nathan, you sound like a guy that sets his house on fire and then complains about the fire depts water damage........ Maybe that would be amusing....NOT WORTH A BANNING AT ALL.....not worth a suspension.

But the "how dare you" culture would not allow that against manboy. He could have countered. He could have engaged me....and told me where I was wrong. But as a coward will.....a coward does......

 

It would have helped to add closure had MS posted a specific reason for nuking LarryS., but for reasons unknown and unknowable he chose not to.

His choice, but in so choosing he's created a monster.

 

Think nothing of it, I'm sure I've borrowed a gem or two of yours along the way.

 

That's what Rule 4 says, if you don't like Rule 4, make a complaint about Rule 4 in the sub-forum dedicated to Rules or don't post there.

I should imagine that the person you disclosed the conversation about the weather with would be perfectly fine with such disclosure and would not complain about it, so I'm sure you would be fine there.

But, yes, we do think we can control the content of the sites, which is what Administrating a site partially entails. In this case, we do not allow content that quotes from private information unless there is an actual or assumed agreement of the parties that they don't mind the information being shared.

Obtuseness is not an attractive quality. If you said that about anyone, they denied it, and you couldn't prove it, you'd be gone.

I should assume that it means private communication between Members of the Forum. Most Rules at most Forums pertain to Members of the Forum.

For the remainder of your post, I reiterate that I would not have banned you for Personal Insult for that post and, as a result, cannot answer for a Banning for Personal Insult for that post.

 

If anyone has any doubt about WizardofNothing being StrictlyAP, take a few minutes,go to WOV (When a member doesn't pay thread) only read what he has to say ( 5 minutes) guaranteed identical match.

 

Two thumbs up for RS

 

yeah so the rule is useless unless you have the other party or parties submit to you a complaint or at least an indication that they didnt want the info disclosed....even if it is weather, your penis size, or a greeting from the happy ending massage table.

simply disclosing private info alone is non actionable by a same website.

 

so the crap about me disclosing private info in that link you provided is all BS because you have no basis to suppose that I was doing so without permission. That is just the assumption of a mod with too much time on their hands and an itchy nuke button finger

And the fact that same one time post, and claim, has no proof attached.....well guess what...if I was asked for proof.....I could have gotten the email folks..at least the ones that could post.....to chime in. There are hundreds of one time posts with claims on wov that never got punished. They were allowed to play out, and allowed people to ask for proof. Not so here. You would ban based on no proof being offered on the very first post, and the assumtion that the people I referred to were not allowing my comments.
But I wasnt given that opportunity. Manboy could say...I doubt that...lets see some proof.
But he didnt challenge it because he obviously knew that once proof came in he would look bad.
So much better to label something an "insult"

A typical example of a mod with a finger on the ban button.

 

I don't want to waste a VPN to ask this question on WOV ? Besides it would probably get deleted. I met Ahigh and his pinball machine at G2E. Seemed like a nice guy. At a WOV dice challenge at Ahighs house I won $100 from Tupp. Told him give it to Ahigh, told Ahigh spend it on his kids. He posted Pix of teenage boy and girl, I think, shopping.
Am I the only one that thinks he is hooked on drugs now ? Just asking!

 

I assume when you say "the sites" you are referring to WoV/WoO? It would be one thing to attempt to control the content of your sites, but Wizard's statement announcing my banning (a year ago this week) suggests he thinks he can control the content of the whole internet.

Just to refresh your memory, it went like this "It is with my much regret that I have to nuke kewlj. Normally we don't consider what goes on at other forums in our suspensions here. However, he has been spreading private and untrue information on other forums based on events here."

I dispute that I was spreading untrue information. But more importantly it is referencing a post that I made on another site, ZenZoneForums, a site I am sure Mike was not even familiar with, but of course he was alerted to my post by the guy that came to WoV, ONLY try to get me silenced. But regardless of how he was alerted that banning and statement announcing the banning indicates Michael Shackleford, seems to think his authority goes far beyond his own sites. He clearly attempted to control content elsewhere and frankly that is disturbing.

And this very disturbing "control" issue extends beyond this one occasion. Just recently, in preliminary discussions of a possible return to WoV, with a third party, I was informed that I would need to apologize for things I said about Qfit on that same, completely unaffiliated site.

I don't know who these guys think they are that they can place demands on membership concerning speech on other sites? Perhaps he would like to dictate who members can associate with outside of his site, or where members are permitted to worship?

 

That's an interesting question.

I met Aaron at a WoVCon: we talked a bit, played a little craps, but I couldn't get much of a feel for the guy, but he didn't seen to be whacked out on meth or opioids / heroin, if that's what you mean.

He really fucked the pooch with that NTGL fiasco; financially and credibility wise it flush him down the toilet.

I don't know what caused him to get divorced, but I'd bet she wound up with custody: shit happens.

By report he's moved out of Las Vegas and is working in California.

No problem if he smokes weed, but he's too high strung to handle the harder shit.

 

+1

Let it go. You knew Mike and (I'd assume most people) don't want their PMs to be written in public, yet you did so anyway. Your issue is (or should be) with Norm, not Mike. If I were in Mike's shoes, you can be damn sure I would have banned you, too. I'm not seeing how Mike tried to "control content on another site" by banning you from WOV.

 

No I won't let it go. Mike is your friend and you want and have been defending him without knowing all the facts. As a matter of fact...you don't want to know the facts....but I am going to tell you anyway. These are facts that I haven't shared with anyone because I couldn't do so without compromising a couple folks that told me something in confidence. But now it's a year later and it's time (although I won't name them).

Here is the post at ZenZone that got me banned from WoV.

KewlJ:

I have just learned a very disturbing thing about Norm.

For those that may not know, the feud between Norm and myself has spilled over onto several sites. As discussed earlier in this thread, one of those sites was Wizard of Vegas, where I have been a contributing member for 4 plus years. Norm has been a member for 6 years, but did not participate for the last 5 years and nine months of that period until he showed up just to troll me. So in reality the feud didn't so much as "spill over" as Norm specifically took it there trolling me.

So the end result of several days of the feud spilling on to that site was that I was suspended twice, Norm once and I have decided not to continue to participate there. So Norm, won yet again. The freedom of speech guys managed to silence me on yet another site.

But here's the disturbing part. I have just learned that Norm sent 19....NINETEEN, PM's in a 24 hour period to Mike Shackleford, begging for my suspensions. He even leaned on his longtime professional friendship with Shackleford in these numerous PM's. Although I am trying to refrain from personal attacks....there is seriously something wrong with this guy (Norm). He is a really sick dude.

Now it would be those final 3 lines that Shackleford thinks violated something he told me in private in a PM. And here's why he thinks it. This is a private message I received from Mike Shackleford:

Mike Shackleford:

I will be sorry to see you go. If I had the choice between you and Norm as members, I would take you any day.

In my defense, I have considered Norm a friend for years before his first post. He has helped me out several times when I needed some difficult blackjack math confirmed and he has never asked for anything in return. So, when he, after all the favors he has done for me, asked for one in return, I had a hard time saying "no."

So I concede that working out that truce and then enforcing it was done out of some favoritism towards Norm. Had Norm been somebody I didn't know, I wouldn't have bothered with it. Nevertheless, I tried to enforce it fairly, and stand by that you broke it at least twice. There was another time I could have given you a suspension for breaking it between the two times I did, and Norm wrote to me several times demanding I take action. He was enraged that I didn't.

After I did suspend Norm, he wrote me to saying that we're no longer on speaking terms as he claimed I showed favoritism your way.

Ok, now first of all....read that statement a couple times. Given "the choice between me and Norm as members, he would take me any day?" That is exactly the choice he had and he did exactly the opposite. I also ask you to note where he says he "couldn't refuse Norm's favor". I have said all along Norm had one goal....to get me banned. Norm has always denied it. But Mike himself states in this PM that "Norm asked a favor to have me banned and Mike couldn't say no".

You will also note the final line where Mike states Norm stopped speaking to him because Mike hadn't banned me when Norm first insisted. That tells you a lot about both these guys.

So the part that Mike used to ban me is that he thinks that when I said Norm contacted Mike 19 times, it was based on his statement in this PM, where Mike says Norm wrote me several times.

But the fact is I got that "norm contacted Mike 19 times" context not from Mike's PM, but from two other sources. One a moderator at WoV (and not one of the two that posts here regularly) that told me privately that Norm contacted Mike 20 times in a 24 hour period . The second source is or was a member of both WoV and this site, gambling forums, (I beleive he has stopped participating here....maybe both places) that confirmed that Norm contacted Mike 19 times and threatened legal action.

So Mike's basis for banning me was that I violated his PM, but in fact I did not. My comments were based on two other sources that told me almost the same thing as Mike himself.

The fact is Mike was looking for a reason to ban me. He himself said he couldn't refuse Norm's demand/request. And he indicated that he was upset that Norm has stopped speaking to him. So when I posted something that Mike thought violated his privacy he jumped on it. But once again, Mike didn't really bother to find out the truth. If he had he might have discovered that this information came from one of his mods as well a second source, someone who considered himself a friend of Mike's.

 

You say Norm threatened the Wiz with "legal action?"

Why hell, that explains it right there.

I assume he thought the threat was real; he did a quick cost/benefit analysis and concluded there was less downside to nuking you.

 

No, No, No. I did not say that. That was told to me by this second source, a member at the time of both this site and WoV, who claims he is a personal friend of Mike Shackleford and had personal knowledge.

But it certainly is consistent with Norm's behavior. Let's just say...."if I was a betting man"....that I would have no trouble laying odds on this statement.

And btw, the statements that I posted, both the post on zenzone that got me banned and Mike's PM to me, were posted in their entirety, just so I am not accuse of leaving anything out.

And of course, I welcome Mike to pop in and discuss anything that I have said that he feels untrue.