Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
Apparently Lindsey is a nice woman, and is well liked around Vegas. That's what I'm hearing from people, but I never had any interaction with her personally.

I do feel bad about the thread. She was the innocent party in that story (where a dude was rude to her at the table), and I should have just stuck to discussing that element, and not gone into the whole backstory about her lifestyle. I wasn't trying to be malicious or insulting. It was just my habit of trying to give the readers the complete picture of everything going on. However, since she was the victim in this situation, and her reputation in the community was good, I should have stayed away from anything which could come off as judgmental. So I can understand why the thread upset her, and why her friends were upset by it.

I wish I could go back 3 months and have written it differently, and not just because of the mob going after me right now.

The main point of this site is to call out the shitty people/companies in poker and gambling, and to help out the innocent people screwed by them. I don't want to hurt innocent people, so I need to be more mindful regarding what I write sometimes. This doesn't apply to people who purposely post material on social media to cause controversy, or people who write ridiculous shit, but neither of these apply to Lindsey, who was not tweeting for notoriety or clicks.

So I do wish I could take it back, and I'm going to try to avoid doing things like this in the future.

Lindsey, if you read this, I apologize. I am not posting this on Twitter because I don't wish to feed the sanctimonious mob, but I do apologize to you and your friends who were rightfully upset by my post.
Notwithstanding the fact that I still think Veronica Brill is a sanctimonious and virtue signaling opportunist, your post was pretty thoughtless and I consider it a credit to you that you own that fact and apologize.

People simply don't appreciate having their lifestyles discussed in a way that could be perceived as judgmental or negative; that's all. Even if someone, purportedly, opens up the floor to discussion of their lifestyle by bringing it up themselves, I don't know that the floor is opened for anything that could be taken as criticism.*

I will say that the part where you academically compared swinging to polyamory, as if you were discussing a call vs. shove decision on a poker hand, was both clueless and unintentionally hilarious. Not clueless in the sense that what you said was right or wrong, but clueless in the sense of...just, why?

Honestly, this is why non-religious people, such as myself, generally can't tolerate religious people. Of course, by that standard, yours was a minor infraction, at worst.

Religious people seem to be very judgmental when it comes to the lifestyles of the non religious, but let me ask you this: Would it be better to be a religious person who commits infidelity upon his spouse, but outwardly presents as morally virtuous, as so many do...or be open with the fact that you are polyamorous? Myself, I would have no interest in sexually associating with a polyamorous person, or with swingers, so that they make themselves known is a favor to me.

But, the judgment? Naughty, naughty.

You know and I know that your own faith considers you an idler, as a result of your chosen occupation, so why judge others for anything? PFA and yourself, as a sort of self-appointed watchdog in your community, should be here to ensure that there is honor amongst us thieves...not to question whether or not we should be thieves or to judge based on unrelated personal choices.

But, it seems you have taken this lesson, which again, is a credit to you.

*Yes, yes, I know, but only Evangelicals and only because I'm fighting them on their own chosen field using their own chosen weapons. I just happen to be better at it than they are, which is an asset that comes from being functionally intelligent, an attribute that most of them do not enjoy.