Lol @ Micon

[Baron Von Strucker]

Did you try the lobster macaroni reciepe that I gave you? Was it delicious and easy to make? I am having company over and would like to hear how yours turned out.

thank you Bootsy the Lobster macaroni turned out perfect and good timing my family had just arrived and have never tried lobster, very good recipe i will try the recipe with some fish and crab as well.
cheers.

[Bootsy Collins]

Did you try the lobster macaroni reciepe that I gave you? Was it delicious and easy to make? I am having company over and would like to hear how yours turned out.

thank you Bootsy the Lobster macaroni turned out perfect and good timing my family had just arrived and have never tried lobster, very good recipe i will try the recipe with some fish and crab as well.
cheers.

Good to hear. It will be a side dish for some bacon wrapped filets.

[Lobster macaroni]

I always deliver.

[Steve-O]

[QUOTE=chinamaniac;8161]

This is absolutely ludicrous IMO. You get info from people on other people you are going to deal with in the poker and gambling world. It's all under the table dealings. Druff has nothing to gain by saying someone is trustworthy or whatever but if that's his read then that's his read.

Like I said in my previous post in the end nobody should be responsible because they vouged for someone. It is just their read.

In the end you get information on someone or something and you make your decision. if you get burned you get burned, someone vouging for someone shouldn't be insurance on your gamble

I disagree, the language used in the vouch is pretty explicit. I guess it depends on what a vouch means to you. I've grown up with, and been close to, a lot of shady characters and been unintentioanlly brought into many a dealing I want nothing to do with. I know from my dealings that saying you "vouch" for someone, and using the language that Druff did that you could find yourself in trouble. One instance I can explain is when a cousin of mine decided to sell an illegal product that was sold wholesale by a friend of mine. When my cousin approached him about "working" together on "consignment" my friend looked at me which was my cue to say "yes its fine to advance him the product" but knowing my cousin I instead said, "this is between you two". Had I vouched for my cousin I would have been on the hook when he inevitably didn't come up with the money --which I ended up doing anyway to keep him from getting a beating, but it was my decisaion at that point; if I had vouched for him it would have been mandatory.

***Edit*** as a funny aside: My friend was very lenient and let this drag on for about two months before calling me; turns out my cousin sold a little, used most of it, and tried to win the money he owed by taking the little he collected and going to the casino.

Sure a person is responsible for their own dealings, especially if they are only an acquaintance of the person doing the vouching. BUT, when you say something along the lines of "you can ship first with no worries, absolutely NO worries" you are implying something that to the wrong person may mean something you did not intend. Basically. my point is that Druff 100% vouched for this guy, which means different things to different people obviously, but as Tony pointed out his backtracking and justification is #1 unnecassary and #2 not all that flattering.

[chinamaniac]

I doubt druff would fry micon for this and had Peter not been outed as a Degenerate Gambling Scammer I am sure Micon would have vouged for Peter too if someone asked Micon if he was legit because there was really no reason to believe he was not legit.

I gave the guy a few winning picks and chatted with him online and he actually booked my bets and paid me like 1k in winners. Then he offered me and someone else a limo to our hotels when we arrived in Vegas.

He put me up at the Bellagio for 2 nights and a baller room @ Caesars for several more nights. He also gave me access to charge everything back to the room. He told me to take the boys out to dinner and order whatever we wanted as well as charge all drinks to the room which I did. All we had to do was tip in cash I believe.


If someone asked me to vouge for him after that week I would have said he is 100 % legit so far in my interactions and I would see no reason not to trust the guy.


Vouging just gives someone a read on someone they don't know. Doesn't mean the vouger is responsible for anything. This guy was and is good at what he does and had a long 7 month track record of hooking up people with a lot of stuff. I think Micon or Brandon saw the guy with like 250k in winning tickets or open bets at one point or something like that.

You could ship 20k to a known pro who has a great track record and for all you know they could be broke and never ship you 20k back on a trade.

In the end it is up to each individual to make their own decisions on whether to trust somebody.

I can appreciate what you are saying here and i totally respect you China, the reasoning is sound but you didn't really know the guy so how could you make a solid opinion on weather or not the guy was trust worthy or not from your short but lucrative experience with the guy,
and to say that micon would have vouched for him is just putting words in his mouth and holds no weight sory.

And I truly believe Micon would have vouged for Peterdc as would just about anyone else that dealt with him. if they tell you they wouldnt have then there is without a shadow of a doubt in my mind they aren't telling you the truth


Ok, I have done 50-100k transactions with a well online pro. If I am tell you I am 100 % confident that he is legit and he scams you and runs am I at fault if he fucks you?

Absolutely not. In the end it is your idea to do the transaction.

If Micon says Reggiman is legit which I believe he is and for some reason he just lost his life savings and he fucks you over is that Micons fault. Absolutely not.

In the end it is your decision to deal with the guy.

Same with PeterDC. Druff gave his read which doesnt mean you should feel 100 %. You may trust druffs opinion but in the end there is always risk and it is yours.

Should all of the Rakeback sites be responsible for giving rakeback out on AP, UB and FTP.

No , it is your risk. It is always a gamble with financial transactions

[Steve-O]

I can appreciate what you are saying here and i totally respect you China, the reasoning is sound but you didn't really know the guy so how could you make a solid opinion on weather or not the guy was trust worthy or not from your short but lucrative experience with the guy,
and to say that micon would have vouched for him is just putting words in his mouth and holds no weight sory.

Ok, I have done 50-100k transactions with a well online pro. If I am tell you I am 100 % confident that he is legit and he scams you and runs am I at fault if he fucks you?

Absolutely not. In the end it is your idea to do the transaction.

If Micon says Reggiman is legit which I believe he is and for some reason he just lost his life savings and he fucks you over is that Micons fault. Absolutely not.

In the end it is your decision to deal with the guy.

Same with PeterDC. Druff gave his read which doesnt mean you should feel 100 %. You may trust druffs opinion but in the end there is always risk and it is yours.

Should all of the Rakeback sites be responsible for giving rakeback out on AP, UB and FTP.

No , it is your risk. It is always a gamble with financial transactions

Nobody is really saying this. the debate seems to be accountability, which doesn't neccasarily mean 100% innocent or guilty.

Suppose you vouched for someone who stole $50k from me, would you say the above if I was waiting at your front door to talk to you? If you said "you can ship first with no worries, ABSOLUTELY NO WORRIES" you would call that your opinion or read????? I agree there is some risk involved to the person who is doing the deal, but to completely absolve yourself of any part in the matter after making such a claim is simply crazy.

Like I said before, he didn't say he has always come through, or something along those lines, it's the absoluteness of the language that makes this far more than "opinion" or a "read". And I didn't say Druff is on the hook for any money lost; I said the wording of his vouch was as close to saying this as you can get --which it is... you took that one sentence by me out of context, but when viewed in its entirity my thoughts are pretty clear:

"Saying I can vouch for someone is a sacred statement in the world of gambling, and Druff's "vouch" was about as crystal clear as you can get. If nobody got hurt that's fine, but you still vouched for the guy, basically 100%. This isn't an issue of semantics where Druff said "PeterDC has always done right by me" or "I've never had an issue dealing with him". Druff's statement was about as close to "it's on me if anything happens" as you can get. Should Druff be pilloried for this? No, everyone makes mistakes. But I think he should own it, and say I made a bad mistake, thankfully nobody --as far as I know-- got burned, and I've been working double-time ever since to make sure nobody else makes the same mistake."

[Ricky]

Druff has no idea who may have put what stock in that vouch and it was a silly thing to say.

The bottom line is that Druff vouched for the wrong turd and got burned. It's happened to all of us, but he should own it, take responsibility and learn from the mistake. No amount of misdirection or subterfuge is necessary, just own your shit. People respect that a lot more, at least I do.

Voice of reason folks.

As a big boy (lol BVS), and a small business owner, I had a friend vouch for a guy so I would hire him, only to have that person turn around and steal from me.

I didnt hold it against my friend. But he owned it, apologized, and explained why he vouched for the guy (turns out, he was a weekend crackhead, funny, because he had a physique like fluffer, but was a glass dick puffer).

On the flip side....

I myself swore that another close friend of mine was a good guy for years (all the while, my wife harping that he was a POS). He ended up being a total pos, and now 10yrs later (lol $140 4days later Jasep) he still owes me over 1k.

My wife makes me own that shit every time dat pricks name comes up.

[chinamaniac]

I told people a bookie was 100 % easy to deal with and he was for 10 years, he then lost 1 million in 2 weeks and ran , am I at fault because I sent him new customers

fuck no

do your research and deal with people based on that

if u get screwed then do better research or do your gambling in casinos or with very reputable online books

[Steve-O]

I told people a bookie was 100 % easy to deal with and he was for 10 years, he then lost 1 million in 2 weeks and ran , am I at fault because I sent him new customers

fuck no

do your research and deal with people based on that

if u get screwed then do better research or do your gambling in casinos or with very reputable online books

China, nobody is arguing you are at fault, or culpable for the debts. The point is that you did in fact vouch (although 100% easy to deal is not the same as what Druff stated) and if you have no remorse for this you are emotionless. I think you are misunderstanding what myself and two or three other people are saying.

[tony bagadonuts]

I told people a bookie was 100 % easy to deal with and he was for 10 years, he then lost 1 million in 2 weeks and ran , am I at fault because I sent him new customers

fuck no

do your research and deal with people based on that

if u get screwed then do better research or do your gambling in casinos or with very reputable online books

China, telling someone that a bookie is 100% easy to deal with is not a vouch. I agree with Steve that a vouch is somewhat of a sacred trust and should not be done lightly. I can count the people that I would actually vouch for on one hand, and I'm talking about my brother, my father, my wife, etc.

If peterdc had scammed the guy that druff had told that he could ship first 100%, I would feel that morally Druff would be on the hook for a portion of the funds. I can tell you that if I vouched for someone the way druff did and they ended up stealing, I would snap settle the debt without thinking twice. After all, I was the one who vouched for him.

Getting a vouch is doing research.

Long story short, don't fucking vouch for people you don't know.

[fluffer]

lets be real here folks

druff is ther one that keeps trashing micon...not that there is anything wrong with that

[chinamaniac]

I told people a bookie was 100 % easy to deal with and he was for 10 years, he then lost 1 million in 2 weeks and ran , am I at fault because I sent him new customers

fuck no

do your research and deal with people based on that

if u get screwed then do better research or do your gambling in casinos or with very reputable online books

China, telling someone that a bookie is 100% easy to deal with is not a vouch. I agree with Steve that a vouch is somewhat of a sacred trust and should not be done lightly. I can count the people that I would actually vouch for on one hand, and I'm talking about my brother, my father, my wife, etc.

If peterdc had scammed the guy that druff had told that he could ship first 100%, I would feel that morally Druff would be on the hook for a portion of the funds. I can tell you that if I vouched for someone the way druff did and they ended up stealing, I would snap settle the debt without thinking twice. After all, I was the one who vouched for him.

Getting a vouch is doing research.

Long story short, don't fucking vouch for people you don't know.

Still don't agree. No matter whom you vouch for they can still fuck someone and while you may feel bad about it in no way should you be on the hook for anyones shit if you vouch for them. Druff said 100 perce3nt u can trust him. he never said anything about covering a debt if the guy got screwed. And he shouldnt have to say that. I would tell someone Druff is 100 % legit right now and I believe he is but if he dissapeared then why should I pay? The other guy is doing the transaction. I gave him my opinion and thats that. Shit happens sometimes when you deal with people you dont know

If Peterdc scammed the guy then I still wouldnt put druff at fault. Should druff feel bad? Absolutely. Should he pay the debt. No way not even a penny.

In the end it is the guys risk

I've done at least 50k in trades with Quaternion. To me he is 100 % legit and I don't think he would ever screw anyone. If I sent someone to him for a 10k trade and said "Yes I believe he is 100 % legit, ive dealt with him numerous times etc." and then he screws them I feel bad but I don't feel financially responsible 1 bit.

In the end it is your risk, your dealing with internet characters and people you barely know. Druff was wrong with Peterdc but he should never feel responsible if someone got rolled.

Maybe what he should have said was "Yes I believe he is 100 % trustworthy BUT deal with him at your own risk"

But again it is common sense to deal with anyone at your own risk which is why druff probably didnt throw that in. I send people to guys all the time for 5 and sometimes 6 figure trades. it is up to them to deal with the people.

[Ricky]

On an unrelated note, Tylerlim made me laugh for the first time just now.

Moulin Rouch lawlz.

Currently reevaluating my life as a result.

[tony bagadonuts]

China, telling someone that a bookie is 100% easy to deal with is not a vouch. I agree with Steve that a vouch is somewhat of a sacred trust and should not be done lightly. I can count the people that I would actually vouch for on one hand, and I'm talking about my brother, my father, my wife, etc.

If peterdc had scammed the guy that druff had told that he could ship first 100%, I would feel that morally Druff would be on the hook for a portion of the funds. I can tell you that if I vouched for someone the way druff did and they ended up stealing, I would snap settle the debt without thinking twice. After all, I was the one who vouched for him.

Getting a vouch is doing research.

Long story short, don't fucking vouch for people you don't know.

Still don't agree. No matter whom you vouch for they can still fuck someone and while you may feel bad about it in no way should you be on the hook for anyones shit if you vouch for them. Druff said 100 perce3nt u can trust him. he never said anything about covering a debt if the guy got screwed. And he shouldnt have to say that. I would tell someone Druff is 100 % legit right now and I believe he is but if he dissapeared then why should I pay? The other guy is doing the transaction. I gave him my opinion and thats that. Shit happens sometimes when you deal with people you dont know

If Peterdc scammed the guy then I still wouldnt put druff at fault. Should druff feel bad? Absolutely. Should he pay the debt. No way not even a penny.

In the end it is the guys risk

I've done at least 50k in trades with Quaternion. To me he is 100 % legit and I don't think he would ever screw anyone. If I sent someone to him for a 10k trade and said "Yes I believe he is 100 % legit, ive dealt with him numerous times etc." and then he screws them I feel bad but I don't feel financially responsible 1 bit.

In the end it is your risk, your dealing with internet characters and people you barely know. Druff was wrong with Peterdc but he should never feel responsible if someone got rolled.

Maybe what he should have said was "Yes I believe he is 100 % trustworthy BUT deal with him at your own risk"

But again it is common sense to deal with anyone at your own risk which is why druff probably didnt throw that in. I send people to guys all the time for 5 and sometimes 6 figure trades. it is up to them to deal with the people.

Interesting discussion China. This really may come down to semantics. There is trust, and then there is a vouch.

For instance, I trust you. We have never met, but I have sent you money, and you are like one of two people on all of these boards that knows my real name. But I wouldn't vouch for you, because I don't really know you.

You don't vouch for people you don't know, and Druff should have fuckin better known better.

Again, my issue isn't really the mistake druff made, it's the way he has addressed that mistake over the last couple of days.

[Steve-O]

China, telling someone that a bookie is 100% easy to deal with is not a vouch. I agree with Steve that a vouch is somewhat of a sacred trust and should not be done lightly. I can count the people that I would actually vouch for on one hand, and I'm talking about my brother, my father, my wife, etc.

If peterdc had scammed the guy that druff had told that he could ship first 100%, I would feel that morally Druff would be on the hook for a portion of the funds. I can tell you that if I vouched for someone the way druff did and they ended up stealing, I would snap settle the debt without thinking twice. After all, I was the one who vouched for him.

Getting a vouch is doing research.

Long story short, don't fucking vouch for people you don't know.

Still don't agree. No matter whom you vouch for they can still fuck someone and while you may feel bad about it in no way should you be on the hook for anyones shit if you vouch for them. Druff said 100 perce3nt u can trust him. he never said anything about covering a debt if the guy got screwed. And he shouldnt have to say that. I would tell someone Druff is 100 % legit right now and I believe he is but if he dissapeared then why should I pay? The other guy is doing the transaction. I gave him my opinion and thats that. Shit happens sometimes when you deal with people you dont know

If Peterdc scammed the guy then I still wouldnt put druff at fault. Should druff feel bad? Absolutely. Should he pay the debt. No way not even a penny.

In the end it is the guys risk

I've done at least 50k in trades with Quaternion. To me he is 100 % legit and I don't think he would ever screw anyone. If I sent someone to him for a 10k trade and said "Yes I believe he is 100 % legit, ive dealt with him numerous times etc." and then he screws them I feel bad but I don't feel financially responsible 1 bit.

In the end it is your risk, your dealing with internet characters and people you barely know. Druff was wrong with Peterdc but he should never feel responsible if someone got rolled.

Maybe what he should have said was "Yes I believe he is 100 % trustworthy BUT deal with him at your own risk"

But again it is common sense to deal with anyone at your own risk which is why druff probably didnt throw that in. I send people to guys all the time for 5 and sometimes 6 figure trades. it is up to them to deal with the people.

I'm not understanding your definition of "vouching"?

It's one thing to say one of the following:

"This guy is easy to deal with"
"For a big trade i would reccomend so and so"
"He has always come through in the past"

The implication of these "vouches" is that you have dealt with the person honorably in the past; I don't even consider these "vouches" more suggestions. On the other hand, saying, "I can vouch for peterdc, BTW. You can ship to him first with no worries. And I mean zero worries" is a totally different animal. There is no implications about what you are saying, and it seems this information was offered, not asked for.

Now I agree with you that unless Druff is giving this information to a super-close friend or family member the person should take it for what it is; if you don't really know Druff you shouldn't be asking him to vouch for someone in the first place. But I know plenty of people that if they had been screwed on a deal after this would at the very least have very unflattering thoughts about Druff.

It's actually a little sad that people use the word vouch so loosely and it means so little. China what you are doing is recommending not vouching, there is a big difference, at least where I'm from. The #1 definition of the word is: personal assurance; give a guarantee

[tony bagadonuts]

Still don't agree. No matter whom you vouch for they can still fuck someone and while you may feel bad about it in no way should you be on the hook for anyones shit if you vouch for them. Druff said 100 perce3nt u can trust him. he never said anything about covering a debt if the guy got screwed. And he shouldnt have to say that. I would tell someone Druff is 100 % legit right now and I believe he is but if he dissapeared then why should I pay? The other guy is doing the transaction. I gave him my opinion and thats that. Shit happens sometimes when you deal with people you dont know

If Peterdc scammed the guy then I still wouldnt put druff at fault. Should druff feel bad? Absolutely. Should he pay the debt. No way not even a penny.

In the end it is the guys risk

I've done at least 50k in trades with Quaternion. To me he is 100 % legit and I don't think he would ever screw anyone. If I sent someone to him for a 10k trade and said "Yes I believe he is 100 % legit, ive dealt with him numerous times etc." and then he screws them I feel bad but I don't feel financially responsible 1 bit.

In the end it is your risk, your dealing with internet characters and people you barely know. Druff was wrong with Peterdc but he should never feel responsible if someone got rolled.

Maybe what he should have said was "Yes I believe he is 100 % trustworthy BUT deal with him at your own risk"

But again it is common sense to deal with anyone at your own risk which is why druff probably didnt throw that in. I send people to guys all the time for 5 and sometimes 6 figure trades. it is up to them to deal with the people.

I'm not understanding your definition of "vouching"?

It's one thing to say one of the following:

"This guy is easy to deal with"
"For a big trade i would reccomend so and so"
"He has always come thorugh in the past"

The implication of these "vouches" is that you have dealt with the person honorably in the past; I don't even consider these "vouches" more suggestions. On the other hand, saying, "I can vouch for peterdc, BTW. You can ship to him first with no worries. And I mean zero worries" is a totally different animal. There is no implications about what you are saying.

Now I agree with you that unless Druff is giving this information to a super-close friend or family member the person should take it for what it is; if you don't really know Druff you shouldn't be asking him to vouch for someone in the first place. But I know plenty of people that if they had been screwed on a deal after this would at the very least have very unflattering thoughts about Druff.

It's actually a little sad that people use the word vouch so loosely and it means so little. China what you are doing is recommending not vouching, there is a big difference, at least where I'm from. The #1 definition of the word is: personal assurance; give a guarantee

Steve-O, I don't know where you came from, but I'm glad you're here. Nice job.

[Hockey Guy]

I'm not understanding your definition of "vouching"?

It's one thing to say one of the following:

"This guy is easy to deal with"
"For a big trade i would reccomend so and so"
"He has always come through in the past"

The implication of these "vouches" is that you have dealt with the person honorably in the past; I don't even consider these "vouches" more suggestions. On the other hand, saying, "I can vouch for peterdc, BTW. You can ship to him first with no worries. And I mean zero worries" is a totally different animal. There is no implications about what you are saying, and it seems this information was offered, not asked for.

Now I agree with you that unless Druff is giving this information to a super-close friend or family member the person should take it for what it is; if you don't really know Druff you shouldn't be asking him to vouch for someone in the first place. But I know plenty of people that if they had been screwed on a deal after this would at the very least have very unflattering thoughts about Druff.

It's actually a little sad that people use the word vouch so loosely and it means so little. China what you are doing is recommending not vouching, there is a big difference, at least where I'm from. The #1 definition of the word is: personal assurance; give a guarantee

Up until about 6 months ago I would have agreed with china on his definition of vouching. Since then I've been been educated on what "vouching" means &, from what I've come to accept, Steve-O is spot on. When you use the word "vouch" it has implications that perhaps you didn't mean. I would never use that word again not even for a close friend. It means different things to different people.
I agree with Tony that china's examples are not "vouching" unless you actually use the word &, when that word is used, the implications should be explained to both parties.

[408Mike]

I can appreciate what you are saying here and i totally respect you China, the reasoning is sound but you didn't really know the guy so how could you make a solid opinion on weather or not the guy was trust worthy or not from your short but lucrative experience with the guy,
and to say that micon would have vouched for him is just putting words in his mouth and holds no weight sory.

And I truly believe Micon would have vouged for Peterdc as would just about anyone else that dealt with him. if they tell you they wouldnt have then there is without a shadow of a doubt in my mind they aren't telling you the truth


Ok, I have done 50-100k transactions with a well online pro. If I am tell you I am 100 % confident that he is legit and he scams you and runs am I at fault if he fucks you?

Absolutely not. In the end it is your idea to do the transaction.

If Micon says Reggiman is legit which I believe he is and for some reason he just lost his life savings and he fucks you over is that Micons fault. Absolutely not.

In the end it is your decision to deal with the guy.

Same with PeterDC. Druff gave his read which doesnt mean you should feel 100 %. You may trust druffs opinion but in the end there is always risk and it is yours.

Should all of the Rakeback sites be responsible for giving rakeback out on AP, UB and FTP.

No , it is your risk. It is always a gamble with financial transactions

I have to back China on this, 100%. Back (way back) around 2004 or so I was in a position on a couple forums to make or break sources and to be honest I took that very seriously. A well known and well liked source named **** was doing good biz out of the uk and for quite a while I am guessing was pulling in 200k per month in orders without a hitch.

I may or may not have helped 20-30 people get in touch with they guy and one day the SOAB turned. It was a month long process, he stocked up on fake product so when he ran out of the legit he never intended to stock up on again, he sent out the worthless fakes and kept saying people were crazy for thinking anything was wrong. Then one day no more emails, answered no calls, he was fucking GONE. Just between the people I knew and loosely knew he made off with 150k, I can't say how much total but it was...not a fun time..

Of course I and a certain few people felt like shit but believe it or not, the guys who lost the most said they weren't too mad, in our spots they would have trusted the guy too. Move on you know.

Point is anyone from this forum would have trusted peter just like **** was trusted, and if you lost money to peter you can't blame micon druff china etc because if you were them, guaranteed you wouldn't have "seen the unseen" and avoided the guy. Get a grip. Blaming any of them is stupid.

I will say it's VERY weird peter has stayed in touch with anyone from these forums, but whatever. He really must be that funny...

[chinamaniac]

I also missed the part where stuff said he would cover all losses if shit went wrong

[gauchojake]

I also missed the part where stuff said he would cover all losses if shit went wrong

When you vouch for someone there are a lot of people who believe that's implied.