Originally Posted by scottyclark
I WANT TO APOLOGIZE...
for somehow leading you to believe I would ever care what you...or this forum of 300 or so members would ever think. I never posted my blog here, one of your members did. And I am a bit offended, as the owner of the site, you made this post...
I must question your motivation. Still looking to break the next big scandal huh? And as you try to get this forum off the ground, do you actually encourage the tone of the posters above and their posts? Seriously? I'm a fish, switch to the site I am an affiliate for, etc. Is this what you are doing over here? You are no better than the guys over at 2+2, and you are imposing your will, your interests and your opinions on your herd, albeit a VERY, VERY SMALL HERD.
And rationalizing my defense of Lock as about "my bottom-line". Fuck you, you're not even close. I defended Lock, because I pretty well disagree with you and your designation of Lock as a "scam site". I was just man enough to admit they are incompetent at times. An example you can understand, I disagreed with your spot on 60 minutes, but I never condemned you or your opinion, like 2+2. I would simply say, "Opinions are like assholes, every asshole has an opinion".
This experience here has been an ABSOLUTE waste of my valuable time. You can call it a meltdown, or tilt, or whatever you bitches wanna call it....just do not bother me and take me off your email list. It's that simple Ace. I honestly don't care if this forum of misfits reads my shit, approves of my shit, or supports my associations.
I just stopped by to say thanks...
I stand by my original assessment that your blog about Annie was very good and well laid out.
I also stand by my current assessment that you are a forum tilt monkey and have no ability to take the slightest bit of criticism.
You say that you disagree with me about Lock, yet your original defense of them was weak and full of holes.
For example, you blame the Girah scandal on Jose Macedo tricking them. You ignore the fact that they purposely overlooked his cheating and declared him the winner of the contest. In response to my criticism of their highly dishonest press release (which came after public scorn finally forced them to disqualify him), you simply called it "damage control". Bullshit. It wasn't damage control -- it was flat-out lying AFTER they were already caught trying to let one of their own pros get away with cheating in their own contest.
But even if you want to give Lock the benefit of the doubt on that terrible situation, we have the Casino Bonus scam, where they outright stole hundreds of thousands of rakeback dollars from their own players. Even you were unable to come up with an excuse on that one, other than praising Rizen (who was complicit in the whole thing, and stalling people for 10 months) for being such a great guy.
So considering the Casino Bonus mess and how it was handled, which is more likely? That Lock was the innocent victim of Jose Macedo and had no ill intentions with the Girah contest, or that Lock conspired to cover up Macedo's cheating and award him the prize anyway, because it ultimately benefited them for him to win?
I just can't imagine how a guy who is angry about Annie and Phil's role in promoting UB can promote Lock Poker, which is pretty much 2012's UB.
I think it's time for you to simply admit that Lock is giving you some kind of insane rakeback and you are making some good money on their affiliate program, and you can't bring yourself to turn down that extra money in today's bad poker economy.
It would be a hell of a lot more honest than pretending you think everything is fine with Lock, other than some occasional incompetence and mismanagement.
BOTTOM LINE: You can't become a self-righteous poker investigative reporter about UB, Full Tilt, and other shady matters while promoting another site that cheats people.
Reply With Quote