1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice

Feedback Clarifications on Ad Hominem attacks

Discussion in 'Suggestions / Comments / Criticisms / Problems' started by Admin Team, Jan 4, 2023.

  1. Admin Team

    Admin Team Administrators Admins

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Likes:
    479
    This thread was reported to us today and we have just cleaned it up by moving all the off-topic posts to the GF Chat Room. If haters want to hate on you or any other member, they will need to do so either in the GF Chat Room thread or the Personal Feuds section. We created those areas specifically to contain all the vitriol within them so that it doesn't metastasize elsewhere on the site. Such posts outside of those areas are violations of rule #1 (Be Respectful), violations of rule #2 (No Disruptive Behavior), and violations of rule #7 (No Off-topic Posting), so we will come down hard on members that break our rules to try to derail productive gambling discussion threads such as this one. That goes for all members in all gambling threads outside of those 2 areas. We don't want to see any vitriolic derailments happening outside of those 2 specific areas. Everyone has their own separate playground now, so there are no excuses. Folks, please do your part by continuing to report such disruptive behavior outside of those 2 sections the moment it happens so we can take swift action to keep the site organized and the community productive.
     
  2. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    The primary complaint lodged against UNKewlJ by many is that he does not actually play blackjack and lifts what he writes from what he read somewhere. No personal experience.

    And anyone reading the above post would have to agree. It's rare to find such an impersonal derived contrived expression of casino play on a gambling forum, but practically all of the UNKewl one's posts resonate of "The powers that be, say...." versus I did this and this happened. In all of UNKewlJ's posts at all these forums there is an uncanny lack of descriptions of actual blackjack hands played. A complete sort of third hand, third person relating of what might happen.

    And that, is the point of this post - to beware of advice that is offered that clearly doesn't even pass the smell test of credibility, as far as being representative of personal experience.

    Such a post is not "hating" is not off topic and is in fact directly on topic with the original post by soxfan where he questions the claim of being able to count multiple tables. And my response would be, that UnKewlJ never has counted multiple tables because he doesn't even really play much blackjack, as evidenced by his posts themselves!
     
  3. redietz

    redietz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Likes:
    335
    Location:
    Tennessee
    The problem with MDawg's speculation is that it reflects the expectation of a hot-dog type of recreational gambler as opposed to a professional. A professional has no real interest in this particular hand or that -- they are all just "hands." What matters is the mathematical reality and the mathematical context, not the "whoo boy, I'm gambling, it's so exciting" kind of perception of what's going on.

    Now as a sports bettor, I can give details and times and places of everything I do because nobody is going to ban me unless I'm betting well into six digits a game, and if they were to ban me, so what? I can always get someone else to place my wagers. Blackjack players, however, will have their livelihood damaged if they spout time and location immediately after the fact. And no professional blackjack player is going to be scribbling hand by hand records of what he's doing to report at a later date. That kind of narcissistic OCD behavior would end one's career in one tour around town.

    Can you imagine if I were to ooh and ahhh over every game I lost or won? How banal. And if I were to give details of losing this way or that, how boring except in the most striking of circumstances -- like I lost the famous Buffalo/Houston NFL game with a 35-3 lead way back when. But one sentence suffices to describe that game. You don't have to give details like, "I squirmed in my seat at the Golden Nugget as such and such happened in the third quarter." Professionals don't do that, and they don't write that way.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  4. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    The standard way to discuss any topic is to prove the theory with empirical evidence. When a post reads like a detached exercise in hypothesis, it far from establishes the credibility of the poster.

    I haven't followed your posts closely but I understand that the primary complaint lodged against you is that you never posts your picks in advance. If true, that would at a minimum tend to mean that you lose your bets and don't want them exposed. Whether it also means that you never actually place the bets, would be something to consider as well. if there is some other "professional" reason for never posting anything in advance, I am sure everyone would like to hear it. (I suppose I could see often not wanting to post sports picks in advance, but...never?)

    When the sum of tens of thousands of posts by someone who supposedly has had a lot of experience inside casinos almost never describes any sort of personalized experience not just with blackjack hands played but with dealing with casinos and casino personnel, it becomes obvious that the whole deal was lifted from somewhere else. Anyone who plays a lot in casinos would have many experiences to relate, that would back up the claimed theory of play, and given UNKewlJ's clear inability to control his thoughts, words and emotions, or to stick to any kind of resolve to quit these forums, not respond to certain posters, etc. it is impossible that he would exercise restraint in disclosing actual experiences versus his unending rambling commentary on everything else under the sun. By now, he would have let slip out yards of personal experience commentary - if in fact, there was actual commentary to slip out.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  5. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    You use the word "professional" but there really isn't much if anything professional about the way UNKewlJ conducts himself online, from repeatedly reversing course on his vowed courses of action, to faking his own death, to creating sock puppets to poke his nose into others' business, to making up obvious lies about people, really nothing professional about any of that.

    Anyway soxfan created a thread to discuss a claim of UNKewlJ about counting multiple tables - and you can't really discuss the credibility of such a claim without getting into the credibility of the person making the claim.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  6. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    Trying to discuss gaming topics when someone who knows nothing about gaming is the admin is difficult, and moving these posts outside of the very thread started to challenge someone's gaming claims, doesn't make much sense. But then of course, here it comes:
    a very long drawn out explanation about why these posts were moved and why they were somehow off topic. Such a post is pending! and will no doubt follow soon.

    SoxFan started a thread to challenge UNKewl's claim of counting tables. A valid response was to point out that UNKewlJ doesn't even play blackjack, as evidenced by his own posts, and that his defense of that claim was all theoretical. Of course, somehow, the lucidity of that argument escaped admin, and resulted in these disjointed posts now drifting aimlessly in their own thread.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  7. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    I just don't see the above posts as anything but on topic with a thread created to challenge someone's alleged casino play. Saying that hey, the reason this claim is false is because the guy doesn't even play blackjack and look at his own post it seems to establish that all he does is spout theory, so how would he know, seems to be directly on topic.
     

  8. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    The very title of this thread is ridiculous too ;) in that it doesn't even explain what the thread is about. It is about "Why UNKewlJ has no credibility with his claim of counting multiple tables at once" or "Why I believe UNKewlJ does not even play blackjack" or some such, it is not simply a clarification of what the title would imply.
     
  9. KewlJ

    KewlJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Likes:
    1,072
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I will address this one time.

    The admin is obviously trying to clean things up here which is bad news for those that do nothing but attack me.

    Mdawg you are free to believe whatever you like. But you should not be free to make accusations that you are making that I don't play blackjack and that I have plagiarized things said.

    I obviously play blackjack and for a living. YOU yourself proved that last year by finding and posting where I lived. Now you are just throwing shit at the wall, hoping something sticks.

    As for plagiarizing. Of course some of the common information about card counting can be found in numerous books. That is where I learned some of it for God sakes. But I challenge you or anyone else repeating this ridiculous "plagiarizing comment" to link or point to anywhere that someone discussed some of the specifics that I do, like tracking a second table, my own version of team play, spreading both ways betting or some of the other more specific things I have talked about.

    What you are lobbying for is some sort of rule where a player has to prove who he is to post on this forum. That will guarantee that no real professional players post here. There are very few already, I guess you want to ensure there are none.

    Again, you are throwing mud, hoping something sticks as a form of attacks to discredit me. If the admin has any hope of directing this forum back to legitimacy, they should put a stop to this and these unsubstituted accusations.
     
  10. Admin Team

    Admin Team Administrators Admins

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Likes:
    479
    Then attack the message, not the messenger. What did KewlJ write regarding this thread topic that is wrong? Inform the community. Dissect their post and provide your perspective and experience regarding what is wrong with what they wrote in relation to Blackjack. Not a single thing you mentioned in this response corrects anything in KewlJ's post that you linked to, it's just a criticism of his style of writing and a statement that you personally consider don't consider him credible. Attempting to discredit a fellow member without actually pointing out what specifically they said in their post that is wrong and why it's wrong doesn't do anyone any good and certainly doesn't provide any value to the community. Ad hominem attacks are the lowest form of debate because they don't address the topic at hand in any way and that's why they will be considered rule violations outside of the aforementioned areas. You may have a problem with KewlJ, but that doesn't mean that all the other readers and members do. Note that the same applies to KewlJ in relation to your posts, since this applies to all members.

    Yes, if true. And if it's true, then prove it. And if you can't prove it, then attack the message, not the messanger.

    Then dissect and correct what is wrong with what he said using your own Blackjack knowledge and experience.

    Just saying that and pointing to the "evidence" without actually dissecting and correcting what he said that is wrong isn't enough. Anyone can say that about any other member. On-topic specifics matter. Specifically dissect what he said and point out how it is specifically wrong in relation to Blackjack.

    We assume a member is credible until they prove otherwise. Point out what KewlJ said that is wrong instead of just saying it's wrong without actually specifying what exactly is wrong. Again, anyone can say that about anyone. That's why specifics matter.

    This is valid criticism and on-topic in a thread where such a Sports Better is claiming to be good and above average. That's now what you did in the KewlJ thread in question. He was asked a question. He answered it. You attacked him instead of what he specifically said.

    Prove it. Until then, it's just your conjecture and assumption which does not need to be repeated in every thread involving KewlJ.

    More conjectures and assumptions. Your disdain for him is clouding your judgement. We have no such bias clouding ours.

    We don't need to know about gambling to understand what an Ad Hominem attack is. Attack the message, not the messenger.

    This is your go-to defense whenever we disagree with you. Instead of using an irrelevant go-to defense in this matter, point out where you specifically dissected KewlJ's posts in that thread and commented on how what he said is wrong and why it is wrong. You won't because you didn't, and that's the problem. We are not here to defend any member, we are here to keep discussions productive. Ad Hominem attacks derail threads and make them unproductive.

    Agreed if true, but where did you prove that he doesn't play blackjack?

    Again, where did you prove this? All we've seen are conjectures and assumptions on your part in relation to this, no actual proof. Provide actual proof, and it will on-topic.

    Gambling theory is fine and on-topic. Attacking a member based on assumptions is not.

    We don't agree that your argument was lucid.

    It resulted in the original thread staying on-topic and productive with the ad hominem off-topic posts moved to the chat room where you can continue them there.

    You still don't seem to be getting it. A post proving a member is a fraud in a thread that member is responding in attempting to come off as knowledgeable on the subject matter? On-topic. A post merely accusing a member of being a fraud without providing any actual hard evidence that they are or even refuting any of their points on the subject matter? Off-topic.

    This thread is clarifying how we will handle Ad Hominem attacks moving forward. Members must attack the message, not the messenger, or their posts may be moved for violating our rules. This clarification is important to manage expectations moving forward.

    No, that is your personal vendetta. Not the original thread. Not this thread. Just your personal vendetta that doesn't concern this community as a whole. You have 2 areas where you can continue your personal vendetta, the Personal Feuds section or the chat room. Members will not be allowed to pollute the rest of the site with their personal vendettas. That is one of the points we are clarifying here to the whole community.

    We are, but needless to say, this all applies to you as well as it does to all members.


    In short, folks, attack the message, not the messenger. Unfounded Ad Hominem attacks outside of the Personal Feuds and Chat Room areas are considered rule violations.
     
  11. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    Lol, the hypocrite steps in his own shit, time and again.

    <<But you should not be free to make accusations that you are making that I don't play blackjack and that I have plagiarized things said.>>

    That is a legitimate accusation that is backed up with fact, with your own contradictory, devoid of any personal experience, posts.

    On the other hand, the hypocrite thinks he should be allowed to state that some random article about some guy who lost a cheap watch was MDawg.

    POINT BEING, that when UNKewlJ is attacked, he cries foul, and tries to move the goal posts. But when he comes with some wild nonsense about gaming executives visiting his brother's apartment on Halloween, or claiming that MDawg was a victim of a prostitute's robbery scheme, he expects everyone to just let such things pass.

    Can't really say it much better than PunkCity already has:

     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  12. Admin Team

    Admin Team Administrators Admins

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Likes:
    479
    It's not. Anyone could say that about any member to attempt to discredit them which is why it's so meaningless. Again, attack the message, not the messenger.

    He won't be, at least not outside of the Personal Feuds and Chat Room areas. No member is above our rules. Not you. Not him. No one. We have a track record of losing multiple valuable AP members for enforcing our rules against them and hurting their ego. We don't care. No one is above this community. This community is above all.
     
  13. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    Over all, if I were Admin, I would feel very bad about having taken even the smallest step to leave an UNKewl thread devoid of criticism. Assuming that Admin is right in its motives, it picked the wrong, perennially hypocritical, ever contradictory and regularly caught lying, person to hoist on a platform as a test dummy for this new policy.

    Personally, I really don't think anyone should do anything to clean up any threads. Let the chips fall where they may except for racist completely disrespectful rants. I mean what's the difference between JBS posting his regular "you're full of shit" posts in response to anything he thinks is wrong, versus posts calling out anyone for being a liar.

    Sometimes there is more proof offered than at other times, but once Admin starts going down the path of censoring criticism by moving it out of threads, it becomes a matter of Admin's imposing its opinion on the forum. Why does Admin get to decide which criticism is valid and which is not? Even deciding what is ad hominen and what is not comes down to a matter of deciding what is valid and what is not.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  14. MDawg

    MDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Likes:
    453
    Occupation:
    Lawyer, Businessman
    Location:
    California
    I think it's curious that coming hard upon Admin's long post
    about why it does not get involved in what is true and what is not between forum members, is this about face policy of censoring by moving any critical posts that admin feels are not sufficiently backed up?
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023

  15. KewlJ

    KewlJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Likes:
    1,072
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    This "lying" accusation that Mdawg and others repeat, all they can point to is that I sometimes say I am done posting when frustrated and then resume sometime later. That is NOT lying....that is frustration. Lying is a person that for 7 months posts reports of winnings totalling over a million dollars and then one day says "I am about even on this trip".

    To those people repeating this lying accusation, I again say, prove it. Show my a lie about substance, about my claims that has been proven a lie? There is one, but it occured 13 years ago on a blackjack forum when I lied after being robbed thinking that was going to protect me from further incidents. I have fully owned that. But show me, show us anywhere that any comment I have made about my play and claims has been proven a lie.

    This isn't this hard Mdawg. I don't know why you are struggling with this. The admin here doesn't want this shit polluting the gambling topic forums any longer. They have provided a place (feuds section) for you to continue to spew your hate. But if you do, you will be talking to yourself as I am no longer interested in that crap.

    Otherwise you are just trying to bully this administrator as you have done with other administrators.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  16. Admin Team

    Admin Team Administrators Admins

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Likes:
    479
    Criticize all you want in that thread as long as you are knowledgeable about Blackjack and can refute actual specifics mentioned. Now, if you don't know enough about Blackjack that you can't refute actual points being made and must attack the messenger instead, then no, that won't be tolerated outside of the aforementioned areas.

    It was reported and brought to our attention, so we took action.

    Then every thread will just become the chat room thread. We aren't going to let that happen as it's a disservice to readers and other members.

    The chips will fall exactly in this way: every member with a personal vendetta will simply chase the member they dislike across the entire site to post ad hominem attacks wherever that member posts and therefore derail every thread that member posts in. No, we aren't going to let that happen as the site is bigger than any individual members and their personal vendettas.

    It's no different and we have sanctioned member JBS in such instances that have been reported to us. Again, no one is above our rules.

    It's not censoring in the strict sense because we aren't deleting the posts in question, and we aren't imbeciles and have excellent reading comprehension and can tell when a message is being refuted versus when a member is being attacked. We don't need to know about gambling in order to realize when a member is being attacked without supporting evidence and when their message is not being refuted with specifics. All that takes is reading comprehension. Not gambling knowledge and not subjectivity.

    Because we have more experience running forums than any other member so we have a keen understanding of how destructive ad hominem attacks are on the productivity of a forum community. We may not have much gambling knowledge, but we are an authority when it comes to managing forums as we have decades of experience. Also, keep in mind that members can still criticize other members all they want in the correct aforementioned areas, just not wherever they want.

    Apples to oranges. We don't know what is true and what is not in relation to gambling matters. We absolutely do know what an ad hominem attack is when we see one regardless of the subject matter and we absolutely do know when a member has resorted to that lowest level of discourse instead of refuting the points they claim to disagree with since we can read, and we certainly know how destructive ad hominem are to the productivity of a community when they are allowed to be made on any topic since we have been running multiple forums for a long time.


    MDawg, it is evident that your intention is to chase KewlJ around this site to attack him personally everywhere he posts which is why you are so bothered by our actions even though they weren't done against you or in favor of him as they apply equally to all members. If you feel so strongly about this, feel free to start a poll here in the Feedback section to see if other members agree with you. You may be surprised by the results. We have a lot of experience running forum communities for decades, so we can already anticipate those results. The vast majority of members of any forum community simply don't care about feuds between members or their flame wars. We already ran a similar poll a few years back that should give you a preview of the results.
     
  17. coach belly

    coach belly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2016
    Likes:
    51
    Location:
    NJ
    Does that apply to your accusation below as well? Do you intend to prove what you wrote here?....

     
  18. coach belly

    coach belly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2016
    Likes:
    51
    Location:
    NJ
    MDawg posted his trip reports, and kewlj called him a liar.

    Without proof, kewlj's "he's lying" accusation is a personal attack upon MDawg.

    You (Admins) have permitted this for quite some time, and now you have decided to defend kewlj (of all members) against personal attacks?

    kewlj's made personal attacks against many members here, as well as repeated false accusations, which you (Admins) astutely pointed out, cannot easily be disproven.

    tewlj's repeatedly called me a criminal, am I required to prove that I am not? How would I do that?
     
  19. KewlJ

    KewlJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Likes:
    1,072
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Furthermore, the math comes into play here. A person making claims that defy the math or even is extremely unlikely by the math, should be subject to reasonable challenge. he is not required to prove it, but he should expect some people to doubt him. The math simply doesn't work. A good example would be the late Alan Mendelson and his 18 y.o.'s in a row. He should have expected people to doubt that claim (and I think he did). If he wanted to attempt to prove it, he was free to do so. He never did because he never could.

    Mdawg also made a similar claim with 60 consecutive winning blackjack hands in a row. he later back-tracked when the math was pointed out. But the people at WoV that challenged that had every right to.

    This is a gambling forum (to some extent). The math matters!

    Every challenge I have ever made of anyone started with the math. Their claims defied or were extremely unlikely based on the math. These may have dissolved into attacks when I was attacks but nothing ever started that way by me. It always started about the math. Can you and these other guys that attack me say the same?
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023
  20. KewlJ

    KewlJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Likes:
    1,072
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    And I didn't whine to administration here. I just decided not to participate here. It just so happens the administration decided to make some changed that seemed reasonable to me, so I thought I would give it a try and answer a legitimate blackjack question from a new member. And that is going to be my position. I just am not going to continue with this nonsense. male prostitutes and sugar daddies, and whatever other nonsense you haters come up with just because you don't like me.

    I play blackjack for a living and you damn well KNOW it, because YOU proved it. I don't even make a lot of money. Lower end compared to most AP's. But comfortable for me. Because you don't like me doesn't give you the right to make up lies every day.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2023

Share This Page