"Grammatically Challenged Scammer"
Nuff said
"Grammatically Challenged Scammer"
Nuff said
Seemingly a double entendre given the circumstances?Originally Posted by RichardBrodiesCombover.
It's hilarious that we as a society think everyone can be a dr, a lawyer, an engineer. Some people are just fucking stupid. Why can't we just accept that?
Seemingly a double entendre given the circumstances?
The bet was flawed and that can't be over looked? Even Druff said it was flawed? Please show me that quote, cause either you are just making shit up now, or I missed something Druff said. This is what I remember Druff saying, and unlike our asshole welching friend here, this is not taken out of context...Sorry, I only deal with shenanigans and the occasional bouts of childhood mischief!
No I understand precisely what you want, and I think you did in fact win the bet. The fact that the bet was flawed cannot be overlooked though. A number of reasonable people all see it (even Druff has said as much). Being scummy is not being a scammer anymore than a person seeing you drop a $100 bill and pocketing it after you walk off is a theif. They are both scumbags, but you have to protect yourself from these scumbags too, not cry foul when you fall victim to their scumminess.Dude, I don't think you are getting this. Do you not see that all I am asking for is for Druff to give him the ultimatum of either paying me, or being banned? It's not about him being punished, it's about Druff doing what he can do to help me get paid. There is no doubt that he owes me $500, so I would think this would be PFA's move, and nothing else.
I really don't get what the hold up is TBH.
All along (before the bet took place) you have said this kid is a scumbag, yet you entered into a bet with him??? with no preconditions and without being absolutely clear regarding the terms. If I were you i would keep griping about not being paid and demanding he pay, but I don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA. To keep with my analogy it would be like going back to the store where you dropped the $100 and demanding they ban the guy who pocketed your dropped bill from shopping there.
Wow dude... You read Jsearles' bullshit enough over 30 pages and you start to believe it. Unbelievable. I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy. Do you really believe the shit you just typed?jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.
I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.
Make no mistake, this asshole knew exactly what the bet was, but then tried to find some bullshit technicality in the wording to get out of it. I seriously can't believe you are buying into that crap now.
Also, you don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA? Are you fucking kidding me? The site is called pokerFRAUDalert for Christs sake, and it's a forum based on gambling. If you can't see how this has EVERYTHING to do with Searles place on PFA, we really don't have anything left to discuss.
Steve-O, during my time as a mod at DD I have dealt with this type of situation many times, and the protocol has ALWAYS been to ban unless the guilty party pays up, and Druff ALWAYS backed me on those decisions. This is one of the main reasons why I am pretty surprised no action has been taken.
At any rate, I've said all I can say about this, I am done talking about it, at least till Druff decides to finally chime in, if he ever does. Seems to me I have an extremely large majority agreeing with me here, something eventually will get done, or not, we'll see.
Last edited by vegas1369; 05-28-2012 at 09:35 PM.
I will not grace this forum with my excellence unless Mr. Dan recounts and gets a fucking grip on the real world
wtf is druff thinking? this is pokerfraudalert.com lolThe bet was flawed and that can't be over looked? Even Druff said it was flawed? Please show me that quote, cause either you are just making shit up now, or I missed something Druff said. This is what I remember Druff saying, and unlike our asshole welching friend here, this is not taken out of context...
Wow dude... You read Jsearles' bullshit enough over 30 pages and you start to believe it. Unbelievable. I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy. Do you really believe the shit you just typed?jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.
I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.
Make no mistake, this asshole knew exactly what the bet was, but then tried to find some bullshit technicality in the wording to get out of it. I seriously can't believe you are buying into that crap now.
Also, you don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA? Are you fucking kidding me? The site is called pokerFRAUDalert for Christs sake, and it's a forum based on gambling. If you can't see how this has EVERYTHING to do with Searles place on PFA, we really don't have anything left to discuss.
Steve-O, during my time as a mod at DD I have dealt with this type of situation many times, and the protocol has ALWAYS been to ban unless the guilty party pays up, and Druff ALWAYS backed me on those decisions. This is one of the main reasons why I am pretty surprised no action has been taken.
At any rate, I've said all I can say about this, I am done talking about it, at least till Druff decides to finally chime in, if he ever does. Seems to me I have an extremely large majority agreeing with me here, something eventually will get done, or not, we'll see.
wake up druff
I am still thinking about this one.
Some people feel that I am afraid to ban jsearles because he actively posts here. While I admit it would be easier to ban him if he was either an infrequent poster or if all of his posts were terrible, that's not what this is about.
As I said earlier, this site was founded as a place to have a dedicated forum where poker-related scandals and scams could be discussed. It was never billed as a place where all members were going to be held to the highest moral standards, nor did I ever promise to intervene in people's personal disputes regarding bet welching.
With that said, I do understand the arguments as to why jsearles22 should be banned, and I am strongly considering doing so.
Sorry, I only deal with shenanigans and the occasional bouts of childhood mischief!
No I understand precisely what you want, and I think you did in fact win the bet. The fact that the bet was flawed cannot be overlooked though. A number of reasonable people all see it (even Druff has said as much). Being scummy is not being a scammer anymore than a person seeing you drop a $100 bill and pocketing it after you walk off is a theif. They are both scumbags, but you have to protect yourself from these scumbags too, not cry foul when you fall victim to their scumminess.Dude, I don't think you are getting this. Do you not see that all I am asking for is for Druff to give him the ultimatum of either paying me, or being banned? It's not about him being punished, it's about Druff doing what he can do to help me get paid. There is no doubt that he owes me $500, so I would think this would be PFA's move, and nothing else.
I really don't get what the hold up is TBH.
All along (before the bet took place) you have said this kid is a scumbag, yet you entered into a bet with him??? with no preconditions and without being absolutely clear regarding the terms. If I were you i would keep griping about not being paid and demanding he pay, but I don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA. To keep with my analogy it would be like going back to the store where you dropped the $100 and demanding they ban the guy who pocketed your dropped bill from shopping there.
I couldn't care less about who "wins" in this situation, but this still makes me laugh. Dude, you were making a bet dealing with his grammar, and usage of words. You can't fuck up your own grammar and then say..."oh, well he knew what I meant".
I couldn't care less about who "wins" in this situation, but this still makes me laugh. Dude, you were making a bet dealing with his grammar, and usage of words. You can't fuck up your own grammar and then say..."oh, well he knew what I meant".
This is seemingly my entire argument......
If I am to be banned it would seemingly be the weakest ban in Druffs history. There are multiple respected members here who will at a minimum acknowledge that there was issues with the wager. Using others words, is a scummy angleshot really ban worthy? People are taking their hatred for me and trying to morph that into a ban where it simply isnt justified.
Oh, and Limitles claims he wont post here until Druff bans me. I could make a very compelling argument that I am a way better post then he is, if need be. No one believes that drunk tilt monkey wont actually continue to post, but he said he wouldnt.
And lastly, Druff, if you ban me you are obligated to ban both 408mike and Vwls at a minimum. Both have very publicly scammed in the past. Dont misread this trolls, im not acknowledging that I am in the wrong here, im simply stating that others have been in my very same position and they freely post.
It's hilarious that we as a society think everyone can be a dr, a lawyer, an engineer. Some people are just fucking stupid. Why can't we just accept that?
Can someone please explain to me when 408Mike and Vwls scammed on this forum?
Of all the money e'er I had, I spent it in good company
You're putting words in my mouth or misunderstanding my meaning. Druff has CLEARLY said that he didn't scam you, it was a semi-scam/angle-shot.The bet was flawed and that can't be over looked? Even Druff said it was flawed? Please show me that quote, cause either you are just making shit up now, or I missed something Druff said. This is what I remember Druff saying, and unlike our asshole welching friend here, this is not taken out of context...
Wow dude... You read Jsearles' bullshit enough over 30 pages and you start to believe it. Unbelievable. I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy. Do you really believe the shit you just typed?jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.
I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.
Make no mistake, this asshole knew exactly what the bet was, but then tried to find some bullshit technicality in the wording to get out of it. I seriously can't believe you are buying into that crap now.
Also, you don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA? Are you fucking kidding me? The site is called pokerFRAUDalert for Christs sake, and it's a forum based on gambling. If you can't see how this has EVERYTHING to do with Searles place on PFA, we really don't have anything left to discuss.
Steve-O, during my time as a mod at DD I have dealt with this type of situation many times, and the protocol has ALWAYS been to ban unless the guilty party pays up, and Druff ALWAYS backed me on those decisions. This is one of the main reasons why I am pretty surprised no action has been taken.
At any rate, I've said all I can say about this, I am done talking about it, at least till Druff decides to finally chime in, if he ever does. Seems to me I have an extremely large majority agreeing with me here, something eventually will get done, or not, we'll see.
I'll just leave it at this: My feeling is that collecting money from this guy is YOUR problem; if Druff wants to ban him it should be for what he already did not tgo help you get paid. You were trying to get one over on someone you feel is a scumbag and you fell victim to their scumminess. You should have been more careful. It's like picking up a gun someone tells you isn't loaded, you check it and then you check it again.
If you want to shame him about go right ahead, I'm completely on your side that you won the bet; if Druff bans him it should be for actions not as a way to get him to pay. Banning him unless he pays solves nothing you are asking for or questioning Druff about. Even if he pays at this point what he did was still the same level of scummyness, so he should be banned anyway based on your line of thinking that all dishonorable poeple should be banned from PFA because of the name --which would preclude someoned like Travis Makar or Russ Hamilton from posting here, I don't think you would be calling for them to be banned. Like I said earlier, I'm pretty ambivelant when it comes to him getting banned, I'm not defending him or saying "Druff don't ban this kid".
I try to be, which is why I gave my reasonable, semi-informed opinion on that matter, whether you agree with my opinion or not is up to you. Just because you don't like what I posted doesn't make it unintelligent or unreasonable. I would argue that I have been one of the most reasonable people throughout this entire discussion.I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy.
When you deal with untrustworthy individuals you can't leave them any wiggle room, and the better option is to just not deal with them at all.
I write things about poker at my Poker Blog and elsewhere on the Internets
How I read it, Vegas referred to how things were handled on DD, referencing it to how it should be done here. Searles was relating those times to the here and now
This is seemingly my entire argument......
If I am to be banned it would seemingly be the weakest ban in Druffs history. There are multiple respected members here who will at a minimum acknowledge that there was issues with the wager. Using others words, is a scummy angleshot really ban worthy? People are taking their hatred for me and trying to morph that into a ban where it simply isnt justified.
Oh, and Limitles claims he wont post here until Druff bans me. I could make a very compelling argument that I am a way better post then he is, if need be. No one believes that drunk tilt monkey wont actually continue to post, but he said he wouldnt.
And lastly, Druff, if you ban me you are obligated to ban both 408mike and Vwls at a minimum. Both have very publicly scammed in the past. Dont misread this trolls, im not acknowledging that I am in the wrong here, im simply stating that others have been in my very same position and they freely post.
You idiot, I said that while under the influence and to add a bit of drama. For me, the nail in the coffin was your, "help me to decide what to do with this extra money I just won" thread. How pitiful was that? You and everyone here is a better poster than me when I've been drinking. But that's not all day everyday. In fact I'd like to take this opportunity to announce that I am now sober and will soon become ordained as a Minister in the Church of our Lord and Saviour. thank-you
Mike scammed Vegas on this forum. It was over the napkin/cocaine bet when Vegas posted the HOF video. Vwls has a long history in the past of taking money from a guy and never paying it back. Vwls and Vegas are friends and Vegas even threatened to leave DD because people were being mean to his friend. Vegas also has never publicly called for Mike to be banned here even though both parties acknowledge that Vegas won the bet and Mike never paid.
So why are you sitting up on your high horse Vegas? Your own inaction regarding the 408mike situation here just makes you look scummy. You never publically admonished him or called for him to be banned? Which is it, are all scammers banned or just the ones you dont like?
It's hilarious that we as a society think everyone can be a dr, a lawyer, an engineer. Some people are just fucking stupid. Why can't we just accept that?
Searles, I'll bet you 500 Bootsy Bucks you cant find 3 grammatical errors in this post.....Bootsy escrow?The bet was flawed and that can't be over looked? Even Druff said it was flawed? Please show me that quote, cause either you are just making shit up now, or I missed something Druff said. This is what I remember Druff saying, and unlike our asshole welching friend here, this is not taken out of context...
Wow dude... You read Jsearles' bullshit enough over 30 pages and you start to believe it. Unbelievable. I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy. Do you really believe the shit you just typed?jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.
I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.
Make no mistake, this asshole knew exactly what the bet was, but then tried to find some bullshit technicality in the wording to get out of it. I seriously can't believe you are buying into that crap now.
Also, you don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA? Are you fucking kidding me? The site is called pokerFRAUDalert for Christs sake, and it's a forum based on gambling. If you can't see how this has EVERYTHING to do with Searles place on PFA, we really don't have anything left to discuss.
Steve-O, during my time as a mod at DD I have dealt with this type of situation many times, and the protocol has ALWAYS been to ban unless the guilty party pays up, and Druff ALWAYS backed me on those decisions. This is one of the main reasons why I am pretty surprised no action has been taken.
At any rate, I've said all I can say about this, I am done talking about it, at least till Druff decides to finally chime in, if he ever does. Seems to me I have an extremely large majority agreeing with me here, something eventually will get done, or not, we'll see.
You idiot, I said that while under the influence and to add a bit of drama. For me, the nail in the coffin was your, "help me to decide what to do with this extra money I just won" thread. How pitiful was that? You and everyone here is a better poster than me when I've been drinking. But that's not all day everyday. In fact I'd like to take this opportunity to announce that I am now sober and will soon become ordained as a Minister in the Church of our Lord and Saviour. thank-you
I have already acknowledged the deer and gambling posts that I made. I made them because I think its funny to tilt Vegas over all of this. He is sitting in his Ivory tower looking down upon us and just cant fathom that he doesnt have any e-rep over here. The tilt monkey cant wait to get his own forum open where he can do whatever he wants. Its all the dude has going on in his life.
It's hilarious that we as a society think everyone can be a dr, a lawyer, an engineer. Some people are just fucking stupid. Why can't we just accept that?
I would take that bet, but I must admit to you that i read through the post and already know the outcome ahead. Thats is allowed right?Searles, I'll bet you 500 Bootsy Bucks you cant find 3 grammatical errors in this post.....Bootsy escrow?The bet was flawed and that can't be over looked? Even Druff said it was flawed? Please show me that quote, cause either you are just making shit up now, or I missed something Druff said. This is what I remember Druff saying, and unlike our asshole welching friend here, this is not taken out of context...
Wow dude... You read Jsearles' bullshit enough over 30 pages and you start to believe it. Unbelievable. I thought you were pretty reasonable, intelligent guy. Do you really believe the shit you just typed?jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.
I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.
Make no mistake, this asshole knew exactly what the bet was, but then tried to find some bullshit technicality in the wording to get out of it. I seriously can't believe you are buying into that crap now.
Also, you don't see how this has anything to do with Druff or Searles place on PFA? Are you fucking kidding me? The site is called pokerFRAUDalert for Christs sake, and it's a forum based on gambling. If you can't see how this has EVERYTHING to do with Searles place on PFA, we really don't have anything left to discuss.
Steve-O, during my time as a mod at DD I have dealt with this type of situation many times, and the protocol has ALWAYS been to ban unless the guilty party pays up, and Druff ALWAYS backed me on those decisions. This is one of the main reasons why I am pretty surprised no action has been taken.
At any rate, I've said all I can say about this, I am done talking about it, at least till Druff decides to finally chime in, if he ever does. Seems to me I have an extremely large majority agreeing with me here, something eventually will get done, or not, we'll see.
It's hilarious that we as a society think everyone can be a dr, a lawyer, an engineer. Some people are just fucking stupid. Why can't we just accept that?
Does everyone have to use the "reply with quote" feature every time? It's getting so jumbled I don't know who is referring or saying what to anyone.
well if you were a popular member here than yes. but you're not, so you're a scamming pos and i'm not paying you.I would take that bet, but I must admit to you that i read through the post and already know the outcome ahead. Thats is allowed right?Searles, I'll bet you 500 Bootsy Bucks you cant find 3 grammatical errors in this post.....Bootsy escrow?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
