Druff, please ban jsearles...

[Steve-O]

HE OWNS THE FUCKING SITE YOU IDIOT.

And are you claiming he isn't fair and impartial? LOL.

Owning the site doesnt mean shit when it comes down to a bet. Does Micon have the final say on any bet on DD? Does Bill Gates have the say over any dispute that happens on a Microsoft site? Absolutely not. Ive said it before and I will say it again; Druff can run this site how he sees fit. If that means banning me then so be it. I wont allow outside railbirds to dictate how I will handle my business though. As far as I am concerned, Druff has no more to do with this bet then does Slim T or Vwls or Drexel or Fookame.

Everyone trying to retroactively install Druff as the final and sole arbiter is the same as everyone trying to clamor for a mandatory escrow. You fucktards just want me to escrow and have Vegas go off of Jasep's credit line because we all know he doesnt have the 5 bills. He has practically been begging for the money since this all shook out

Would you be willing to do this? you seem to have replied to every post but this one

I think the easiest resolution is for you two to settle on an arbitrater (set a 48 hour time limit to decide) and abide by the ruling; if the ruling goes against him and Searles still won't pay, or he won't even accept this offer, then he should be insta-banned: Perhaps 10 respected community members could nominate an arbitrater and you would both be able to select one person from the list with the community voting for the third?

[jsearles22]

Owning the site doesnt mean shit when it comes down to a bet. Does Micon have the final say on any bet on DD? Does Bill Gates have the say over any dispute that happens on a Microsoft site? Absolutely not. Ive said it before and I will say it again; Druff can run this site how he sees fit. If that means banning me then so be it. I wont allow outside railbirds to dictate how I will handle my business though. As far as I am concerned, Druff has no more to do with this bet then does Slim T or Vwls or Drexel or Fookame.

Everyone trying to retroactively install Druff as the final and sole arbiter is the same as everyone trying to clamor for a mandatory escrow. You fucktards just want me to escrow and have Vegas go off of Jasep's credit line because we all know he doesnt have the 5 bills. He has practically been begging for the money since this all shook out

Would you be willing to do this? you seem to have replied to every post but this one

I think the easiest resolution is for you two to settle on an arbitrater (set a 48 hour time limit to decide) and abide by the ruling; if the ruling goes against him and Searles still won't pay, or he won't even accept this offer, then he should be insta-banned: Perhaps 10 respected community members could nominate an arbitrater and you would both be able to select one person from the list with the community voting for the third?

Steve-O, bro, do you honestly think at this point after all of this speculation that it would be in my best interest to allow this forum to vote on anything in any capacity? Everyone who is anyone has already weighed in.

[BCR]

What Vegas would do on DD is immaterial, as every time he did the right thing, it would get overturned if it was a popular poster. He didn't own the site, wasn't the sole moderator, and most of the big scams occurred
before he was a mod. If he could do the right thing there, he did it. Either way, the site didn't have the same mission as a site named Poker Fraud Alert.

Really this situation simply comes down to what Druff envisions his site to be. He has stated that he doesn't care if the site makes money, and if that's true, then he can decide however he chooses. Obv. he can do what he wants either way, he owns the motherfucker.

I think that Druff likes to be taken seriously though when he gets outraged at scams. If he wants to be taken seriously, then he has totally painted himself into a corner regarding JSearles. He gave him the title of scammer, has acknowledged as recently as last night on radio that he still is in agreement that JSearles owes the $500 and orchestrated a scam. At that point, when you are the sole owner and mod, how can you ever expect anyone to take your outrage seriously on any other matters? His comments and replies haven't been nuanced; he's in total agreement that it was a scam.

Any argument that JSearles is an active poster and valuable is akin to taking a comp from PeterDC at this point, or letting Russ Hamilton pick up the round of golf. If JSearles brings value to the site, then Druff is profiting from a scammer. Druff always holds everyone that profited from this type of shit complicit, even if they didn't pull the scam, if they knew and profited from the party after the fact.

Going forward, most scams and shadiness are going to be based around individuals. There are a few small sites catering to small player pools that no one outside a few individuals give a shit about any more. This is why scams and shadiness usually has 2 viewers, and Flying Stupidity has 65 viewers, because no one cares about Lock Poker or some other 3rd world company at this point. If you get jacked by a black market company still willing to provide poker to US players outside the law, then you shouldn't be shocked if it goes south, or that an illegal operator is being shady. It's buyer beware. Stories like the one Pavoe brought about a certain individual hacking into millionaire players' computers that he befriended is the type of story that can still be outrageous.

Whenever we get legalized poker at the state or national level, these stories about conmen will always still exist, and at times, will draw heavy interest. There aren't going to be any more UB's, and if there are, they won't interest a heavily US-read poker site. When we play, we'll be playing on Harrahs.com or whatever, whether it's in 2 years or 10, and the scams will be about individuals gaming the system, not that the game is rigged, because there will be regulatory bodies and deep pocketed companies behind the corporations. How do you go about pointing fingers and labeling individuals bad at that point, if you allow scams orchestrated on your site, recognized as a scam by you personally? You can't credibly do that.

I have no issue with JSearles, and outside this, he doesn't really annoy me, but he is certainly unapologetic, going as far as making threads poking the hornet's nest. He has never offered a settlement, or seemed amenable to a payment plan or anything else. Druff personally labeled him a scammer and said he owes. If he doesn't take action, then why would anyone care that Micon broke a contract with him? Why wouldn't Vegas take an extra few minutes to delete something personal when it inevitably pops up on VPR? Just seems short-sighted to allow a guy you personally labeled a scammer to continue to run freely in your house. Especially when you're not going to lose a poster who can bring views to the other sites in this small community. He's dead at DD, and he certainly isn't going to be welcome at a forum where Vegas has autonomy over the forum.

If the regulatory environment changes, I'd like to see all the sites actually make some money. I found myself using thug instead of a racist term earlier this week because I thought to myself, "If Druff ever has a chance to make money, I don't want him to have to delete 1000 of my posts." But if a site called Poker Fraud Alert allows shenanigans he personally labeled as a scam to be run on the site, then having any creditability is already shot.

[Jasep]

BCR in God Mode

[jsearles22]

What Vegas would do on DD is immaterial, as every time he did the right thing, it would get overturned if it was a popular poster. He didn't own the site, wasn't the sole moderator, and most of the big scams occurred
before he was a mod. If he could do the right thing there, he did it. Either way, the site didn't have the same mission as a site named Poker Fraud Alert.

Really this situation simply comes down to what Druff envisions his site to be. He has stated that he doesn't care if the site makes money, and if that's true, then he can decide however he chooses. Obv. he can do what he wants either way, he owns the motherfucker.

I think that Druff likes to be taken seriously though when he gets outraged at scams. If he wants to be taken seriously, then he has totally painted himself into a corner regarding JSearles. He gave him the title of scammer, has acknowledged as recently as last night on radio that he still is in agreement that JSearles owes the $500 and orchestrated a scam. At that point, when you are the sole owner and mod, how can you ever expect anyone to take your outrage seriously on any other matters? His comments and replies haven't been nuanced; he's in total agreement that it was a scam.

Any argument that JSearles is an active poster and valuable is akin to taking a comp from PeterDC at this point, or letting Russ Hamilton pick up the round of golf. If JSearles brings value to the site, then Druff is profiting from a scammer. Druff always holds everyone that profited from this type of shit complicit, even if they didn't pull the scam, if they knew and profited from the party after the fact.

Going forward, most scams and shadiness are going to be based around individuals. There are a few small sites catering to small player pools that no one outside a few individuals give a shit about any more. This is why scams and shadiness usually has 2 viewers, and Flying Stupidity has 65 viewers, because no one cares about Lock Poker or some other 3rd world company at this point. If you get jacked by a black market company still willing to provide poker to US players outside the law, then you shouldn't be shocked if it goes south, or that an illegal operator is being shady. It's buyer beware. Stories like the one Pavoe brought about a certain individual hacking into millionaire players' computers that he befriended is the type of story that can still be outrageous.

Whenever we get legalized poker at the state or national level, these stories about conmen will always still exist, and at times, will draw heavy interest. There aren't going to be any more UB's, and if there are, they won't interest a heavily US-read poker site. When we play, we'll be playing on Harrahs.com or whatever, whether it's in 2 years or 10, and the scams will be about individuals gaming the system, not that the game is rigged, because there will be regulatory bodies and deep pocketed companies behind the corporations. How do you go about pointing fingers and labeling individuals bad at that point, if you allow scams orchestrated on your site, recognized as a scam by you personally? You can't credibly do that.

I have no issue with JSearles, and outside this, he doesn't really annoy me, but he is certainly unapologetic, going as far as making threads poking the hornet's nest. He has never offered a settlement, or seemed amenable to a payment plan or anything else. Druff personally labeled him a scammer and said he owes. If he doesn't take action, then why would anyone care that Micon broke a contract with him? Why wouldn't Vegas take an extra few minutes to delete something personal when it inevitably pops up on VPR? Just seems short-sighted to allow a guy you personally labeled a scammer to continue to run freely in your house. Especially when you're not going to lose a poster who can bring views to the other sites in this small community. He's dead at DD, and he certainly isn't going to be welcome at a forum where Vegas has autonomy over the forum.

If the regulatory environment changes, I'd like to see all the sites actually make some money. I found myself using thug instead of a racist term earlier this week because I thought to myself, "If Druff ever has a chance to make money, I don't want him to have to delete 1000 of my posts." But if a site called Poker Fraud Alert allows shenanigans he personally labeled as a scam to be run on the site, then having any creditability is already shot.

Let me preface this by saying that I still dont think I ran a scam. With that being said, I dont understand this entire "ban him" dynamic. I am at times not very eloquent, so I will rely on the words of others. Should Russ Hamilton be allowed on this site to speak his mind if he wanted to? How about Howard Lederer or the Lock Poker admins? Hell I think the community was asking for some of the Lock admins to be brought here. The afact is, pointing out a scammer and banning him is two different things. What does banning really accomplish in the whole scheme of things? I think the ideas regarding The Gangs of New York quote and others are more fitting. If an ostracized individuals wants to subject himself to punishment then so be it.

Furthermore, the public outcry for banning me is almost humorous. No one took it upon themselves to have Mike banned, or Vwls, or many others who have been accused in the past. If you want to sit on the iron throne and hand down judgements, they have to be fair and consistent. Druff would seemingly be opening a can of worms by banning me.

And lastly, everyone keeps saying Druff has acknowledged this was a scam by me, but Druff has never outright said that. He called it a semi-scam, and he called it an angle shot. There were clearly issues with the bet and Druff has acknowledged those. Now everyone wants to just act like Druff has said this was a straight up scam.

[Steve-O]

What Vegas would do on DD is immaterial, as every time he did the right thing, it would get overturned if it was a popular poster. He didn't own the site, wasn't the sole moderator, and most of the big scams occurred
before he was a mod. If he could do the right thing there, he did it. Either way, the site didn't have the same mission as a site named Poker Fraud Alert.

Really this situation simply comes down to what Druff envisions his site to be. He has stated that he doesn't care if the site makes money, and if that's true, then he can decide however he chooses. Obv. he can do what he wants either way, he owns the motherfucker.

I think that Druff likes to be taken seriously though when he gets outraged at scams. If he wants to be taken seriously, then he has totally painted himself into a corner regarding JSearles. He gave him the title of scammer, has acknowledged as recently as last night on radio that he still is in agreement that JSearles owes the $500 and orchestrated a scam. At that point, when you are the sole owner and mod, how can you ever expect anyone to take your outrage seriously on any other matters? His comments and replies haven't been nuanced; he's in total agreement that it was a scam.

Any argument that JSearles is an active poster and valuable is akin to taking a comp from PeterDC at this point, or letting Russ Hamilton pick up the round of golf. If JSearles brings value to the site, then Druff is profiting from a scammer. Druff always holds everyone that profited from this type of shit complicit, even if they didn't pull the scam, if they knew and profited from the party after the fact.

Going forward, most scams and shadiness are going to be based around individuals. There are a few small sites catering to small player pools that no one outside a few individuals give a shit about any more. This is why scams and shadiness usually has 2 viewers, and Flying Stupidity has 65 viewers, because no one cares about Lock Poker or some other 3rd world company at this point. If you get jacked by a black market company still willing to provide poker to US players outside the law, then you shouldn't be shocked if it goes south, or that an illegal operator is being shady. It's buyer beware. Stories like the one Pavoe brought about a certain individual hacking into millionaire players' computers that he befriended is the type of story that can still be outrageous.

Whenever we get legalized poker at the state or national level, these stories about conmen will always still exist, and at times, will draw heavy interest. There aren't going to be any more UB's, and if there are, they won't interest a heavily US-read poker site. When we play, we'll be playing on Harrahs.com or whatever, whether it's in 2 years or 10, and the scams will be about individuals gaming the system, not that the game is rigged, because there will be regulatory bodies and deep pocketed companies behind the corporations. How do you go about pointing fingers and labeling individuals bad at that point, if you allow scams orchestrated on your site, recognized as a scam by you personally? You can't credibly do that.

I have no issue with JSearles, and outside this, he doesn't really annoy me, but he is certainly unapologetic, going as far as making threads poking the hornet's nest. He has never offered a settlement, or seemed amenable to a payment plan or anything else. Druff personally labeled him a scammer and said he owes. If he doesn't take action, then why would anyone care that Micon broke a contract with him? Why wouldn't Vegas take an extra few minutes to delete something personal when it inevitably pops up on VPR? Just seems short-sighted to allow a guy you personally labeled a scammer to continue to run freely in your house. Especially when you're not going to lose a poster who can bring views to the other sites in this small community. He's dead at DD, and he certainly isn't going to be welcome at a forum where Vegas has autonomy over the forum.

If the regulatory environment changes, I'd like to see all the sites actually make some money. I found myself using thug instead of a racist term earlier this week because I thought to myself, "If Druff ever has a chance to make money, I don't want him to have to delete 1000 of my posts." But if a site called Poker Fraud Alert allows shenanigans he personally labeled as a scam to be run on the site, then having any creditability is already shot.

These are all good points, and I guess it depends on the direction Druff wants to go and what type of precedent he wants to set for these situations in the future. But I think it's also important for scammers, cheats, and such to have an outlet to answer for their crimes. I'm sure if Russ Hamilton or Ray Bitar started to post on here people would be going nuts talking about the site's good fortune not calling for Druff to ban them. Sure we could all sit around and gossip and speculate but without hearing from the actual criminals, cheaters, and scammers what good does it do?

I think giving Searles the Scarlet Letter and having his trolls keep what he did fresh in everyone's mind is a better outcome than letting him drift off into the night and the situation forgotten in a year's time --giving him the chance to reappear under a new name or at a new site and try more BS.

***EDIT*** Given his unwillingness to resolve this I think a ban is fine as well

[jsearles22]

What Vegas would do on DD is immaterial, as every time he did the right thing, it would get overturned if it was a popular poster. He didn't own the site, wasn't the sole moderator, and most of the big scams occurred
before he was a mod. If he could do the right thing there, he did it. Either way, the site didn't have the same mission as a site named Poker Fraud Alert.

Really this situation simply comes down to what Druff envisions his site to be. He has stated that he doesn't care if the site makes money, and if that's true, then he can decide however he chooses. Obv. he can do what he wants either way, he owns the motherfucker.

I think that Druff likes to be taken seriously though when he gets outraged at scams. If he wants to be taken seriously, then he has totally painted himself into a corner regarding JSearles. He gave him the title of scammer, has acknowledged as recently as last night on radio that he still is in agreement that JSearles owes the $500 and orchestrated a scam. At that point, when you are the sole owner and mod, how can you ever expect anyone to take your outrage seriously on any other matters? His comments and replies haven't been nuanced; he's in total agreement that it was a scam.

Any argument that JSearles is an active poster and valuable is akin to taking a comp from PeterDC at this point, or letting Russ Hamilton pick up the round of golf. If JSearles brings value to the site, then Druff is profiting from a scammer. Druff always holds everyone that profited from this type of shit complicit, even if they didn't pull the scam, if they knew and profited from the party after the fact.

Going forward, most scams and shadiness are going to be based around individuals. There are a few small sites catering to small player pools that no one outside a few individuals give a shit about any more. This is why scams and shadiness usually has 2 viewers, and Flying Stupidity has 65 viewers, because no one cares about Lock Poker or some other 3rd world company at this point. If you get jacked by a black market company still willing to provide poker to US players outside the law, then you shouldn't be shocked if it goes south, or that an illegal operator is being shady. It's buyer beware. Stories like the one Pavoe brought about a certain individual hacking into millionaire players' computers that he befriended is the type of story that can still be outrageous.

Whenever we get legalized poker at the state or national level, these stories about conmen will always still exist, and at times, will draw heavy interest. There aren't going to be any more UB's, and if there are, they won't interest a heavily US-read poker site. When we play, we'll be playing on Harrahs.com or whatever, whether it's in 2 years or 10, and the scams will be about individuals gaming the system, not that the game is rigged, because there will be regulatory bodies and deep pocketed companies behind the corporations. How do you go about pointing fingers and labeling individuals bad at that point, if you allow scams orchestrated on your site, recognized as a scam by you personally? You can't credibly do that.

I have no issue with JSearles, and outside this, he doesn't really annoy me, but he is certainly unapologetic, going as far as making threads poking the hornet's nest. He has never offered a settlement, or seemed amenable to a payment plan or anything else. Druff personally labeled him a scammer and said he owes. If he doesn't take action, then why would anyone care that Micon broke a contract with him? Why wouldn't Vegas take an extra few minutes to delete something personal when it inevitably pops up on VPR? Just seems short-sighted to allow a guy you personally labeled a scammer to continue to run freely in your house. Especially when you're not going to lose a poster who can bring views to the other sites in this small community. He's dead at DD, and he certainly isn't going to be welcome at a forum where Vegas has autonomy over the forum.

If the regulatory environment changes, I'd like to see all the sites actually make some money. I found myself using thug instead of a racist term earlier this week because I thought to myself, "If Druff ever has a chance to make money, I don't want him to have to delete 1000 of my posts." But if a site called Poker Fraud Alert allows shenanigans he personally labeled as a scam to be run on the site, then having any creditability is already shot.

These are all good points, and I guess it depends on the direction Druff wants to go and what type of precedent he wants to set for these situations in the future. But I think it's also important for scammers, cheats, and such to have an outlet to answer for their crimes. I'm sure if Russ Hamilton or Ray Bitar started to post on here people would be going nuts talking about the site's good fortune not calling for Druff to ban them. Sure we could all sit around and gossip and speculate but without hearing from the actual criminals, cheaters, and scammers what good does it do?

I think giving Searles the Scarlet Letter and having his trolls keep what he did fresh in everyone's mind is a better outcome than letting him drift off into the night and the situation forgotten in a year's time --giving him the chance to reappear under a new name or at a new site and try more BS.

***EDIT*** Given his unwillingness to resolve this I think a ban is fine as well

LOL, Scarlet letter. It took me a little while to get that shopped how I wanted it!

[Pay The Line]

Put any suspected scammer on "Double Secret Probation" and only allow them to post in a special "Suspected Scammer or Unresolved Dispute" thread, until the issue is decided.

[Steve-O]

Put any suspected scammer on "Double Secret Probation" and only allow them to post in a special "Suspected Scammer or Unresolved Dispute" thread, until the issue is decided.

Maybe Druff could make it so a flashing SCAMMER picture like the "On Air" one appears in every Searles post

[Jasep]

Put any suspected scammer on "Double Secret Probation" and only allow them to post in a special "Suspected Scammer or Unresolved Dispute" thread, until the issue is decided.

Maybe Druff could make it so a flashing SCAMMER picture like the "On Air" one appears in every Searles post

Remove PM capability to eliminate the option of preying on new members privately like Muffin Bluffin did at DD IMO

[Steve-O]

Maybe Druff could make it so a flashing SCAMMER picture like the "On Air" one appears in every Searles post

Remove PM capability to eliminate the option of preying on new members privately like Muffin Bluffin did at DD IMO

Another good idea

[RealTalk]

Remove PM capability to eliminate the option of preying on new members privately like Muffin Bluffin did at DD IMO

Another good idea

Lol none of these will happen

[hutmaster]

The funniest part of this thread is that not only did Jsearless lose the bet, but his attempt to weasel out of it based on grammar is also incorrect! The exact wording as proposed by Vegas was:

How about I find, let's say 15 posts, where you have used those two words incorrectly?

As worded 'those' is a demonstrative adjective. Essentially it makes 'two words' become one as it refers to them collectively. If the wording were to mean each word individually....the correct phrasing would have been:

How about I find, let's say 15 posts, where you have used each of those two words incorrectly?

Pay up Searless!

[limitles]

The funniest part of this thread is that not only did Jsearless lose the bet, but his attempt to weasel out of it based on grammar is also incorrect! The exact wording as proposed by Vegas was:



As worded 'those' is a demonstrative adjective. Essentially it makes 'two words' become one as it refers to them collectively. If the wording were to mean each word individually....the correct phrasing would have been:

How about I find, let's say 15 posts, where you have used each of those two words incorrectly?

Pay up Searless!

I disagree with your assessment. Searles means those two words have to be misused in the same post( thanks Duddley )
You've made a stronger case for Searles with the reasoning he's already using

[Sloppy Joe]

Somebody replace "STAKE ME BRO" with "SCAMMER" or something of the sort and make it his permanent avatar unless he pays.

[jsearles22]

The funniest part of this thread is that not only did Jsearless lose the bet, but his attempt to weasel out of it based on grammar is also incorrect! The exact wording as proposed by Vegas was:



As worded 'those' is a demonstrative adjective. Essentially it makes 'two words' become one as it refers to them collectively. If the wording were to mean each word individually....the correct phrasing would have been:



Pay up Searless!

I disagree with your assessment. Searles means those two words have to be misused in the same post( thanks Duddley )
You've made a stronger case for Searles with the reasoning he's already using

I agree, my perception of the bet was that BOTH of those words "collectively" as Hut put it would be used in the same post.

[jsearles22]

Somebody replace "STAKE ME BRO" with "SCAMMER" or something of the sort and make it his permanent avatar unless he pays.

Any other pics? These same two pics over and over are pretty lame. No one can even come up with anything witty or a nice photoshop or anything. Im actually fairly disappointed. I have thousands of pics available and they chose two where i look like douche but then no one can even make them better? One pic is literally 7+ years old!

[Sloppy Joe]

Somebody replace "STAKE ME BRO" with "SCAMMER" or something of the sort and make it his permanent avatar unless he pays.

Any other pics? These same two pics over and over are pretty lame. No one can even come up with anything witty or a nice photoshop or anything. Im actually fairly disappointed. I have thousands of pics available and they chose two where i look like douche but then no one can even make them better? One pic is literally 7+ years old!

That's the best one to encapsulate what a piece of shit you are.

[jsearles22]

Any other pics? These same two pics over and over are pretty lame. No one can even come up with anything witty or a nice photoshop or anything. Im actually fairly disappointed. I have thousands of pics available and they chose two where i look like douche but then no one can even make them better? One pic is literally 7+ years old!

That's the best one to encapsulate what a piece of shit you are.

Really? I can think of many pictures that show me in much more compromising positions. I hadnt shaved in 8 weeks or so. My child was born and I was off work during that time. Normally I must shave for work so this was the lone beard in my adult life (pretty lame attempt I know). I was hocking up a loogie or something and my wife thought it was a funny pic (and I agree). If anyone thinks this pic tilts me or bothers me whatsoever they havent been keeping up at all! I find it humorous. I find it hilarious as well that the same 2 pics keep floating around and no one is creative enough to come up with shit. Its kind of sad actually, where is all of the creativity that used to float around here? C'mon people!

[trevor]

This thread delivers.