[Optional]

Geez Bite. You complain about me putting words in your mouth. "Opti was talking about intense micromanaging of the situation" wtf?

I'm suggesting zero oversight. I'm so confused as it seems like it's you wanting to set up some sort of management system!


And the bar analogy I mentioned before is a perfect example. You say it's different because you pay a membership fee... but is it really? Walk into the members section at a sports club and try asking the barman to make some other paying patron pay back a personal loan or penalize him for you.

You may not like my opinion but I'd appreciate not being written off as some sort of emotional self important mod pushing a company line if you really want to discuss things with me.

But anyway, carry on.

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Sharpy, likewise, I luv ya pal too BUT....

Weren't you being rather vociferous in calling for a certain antfarmer from Houston to be BANNED from last year's poker promo due to his scamming ways?

Ah, yeah... that was either you or the same guy that hacked Draymond Green's account.

BTW... did you pay a fee to become a member of that casino, pool hall or poker room?
I'm gonna guess and say NO you didn't... which makes the analogy you're making specious.

Complete aside, I'm gonna show you this HH from last night cuz I think you'll enjoy it, pal

RIGGED FUKKIN SHITHOLE!!!

***** Hand history (v1.2) *****
Hand ID 5980573
$2/$4 NL Texas Hold'em (No Limit) - 00:13:30 03/08/2016 ET
Table 'Freebird', 10 seats max, Real money
Seat 6 is the button. Small Blind $2, Big Blind $4
Note: seat IDs range from 1 to 10
Seat 1 (sitOut) : sweethook_CONF, amount $660.70, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 3 (playing) : MrKLC, amount $219, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 4 (playing) : boscokid, amount $915.45, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 6 (playing) : turtlejc, amount $355, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 8 (playing) : Blacke, amount $887, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 9 (playing) : nitlogic, amount $108.45, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 10 (playing) : BiTeMeUsAdOj, amount $544.30, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Blacke: Small Blind ($2)
nitlogic: Big Blind ($4)
** Dealing Down Cards **
Dealt to BiTeMeUsAdOj: [Kh, Kd]
BiTeMeUsAdOj: Call [btn] ($4)
MrKLC: Call ($4)
boscokid: Raise ($24)
turtlejc: Call ($24)
Blacke: Fold
nitlogic: Raise ($108.45)
BiTeMeUsAdOj: Raise [btn] ($224)
MrKLC: Fold
boscokid: Fold
turtlejc: Raise ($355)
BiTeMeUsAdOj: Call [btn] ($131)
turtlejc: Show Cards ($0)
nitlogic: Show Cards ($0)
BiTeMeUsAdOj: Show Cards ($0)
** Dealing Flop **
Community cards: [7d, Ks, 2s]
** Dealing Turn **
Community cards: [9s]
** Dealing River **
Community cards: [5s]
** End Round **
** Evaluate **
nitlogic: Show Cards ($0)
BiTeMeUsAdOj: Show Cards ($0)
turtlejc: Show Cards ($0)
** Showdown **
Main pot $352.35, Rake $3
Side pot #1 $493.10, Rake $0
Summary turtlejc: bet $379, won $845.45, net $466.45, HoleCards [7s, 7h], HiHand [a flush, king high] [Ks, 9s, 7s, 5s, 2s], won $352.35 from main pot, won $493.10 from side pot #1
Summary nitlogic: bet $112.45, won $0, net $-112.45
Summary BiTeMeUsAdOj: bet $359, won $0, net $-359, HoleCards [Kh, Kd]

[ArunSh]

Geez Bite. You complain about me putting words in your mouth. "Opti was talking about intense micromanaging of the situation" wtf?

I'm suggesting zero oversight. I'm so confused as it seems like it's you wanting to set up some sort of management system!


And the bar analogy I mentioned before is a perfect example. You say it's different because you pay a membership fee... but is it really? Walk into the members section at a sports club and try asking the barman to make some other paying patron pay back a personal loan or penalize him for you.

You may not like my opinion but I'd appreciate not being written off as some sort of emotional self important mod pushing a company line if you really want to discuss things with me.

But anyway, carry on.

I ask you again Optional: if you are at a sports club and someone is going around pick pocketing other members, are you seriously suggesting the sports club would allow someone who they know to be doing that to remain a member/stay on their grounds? Yes the matter may be a "personal" matter between the two patrons but when the act of theft occurs on the business's property, of course it becomes their concern as well. If I get robbed at a bar and then call the police, aren't the police going to ask the bar to see their security tapes/question their employees about the incident or are they just going to say "well this is a personal matter between you and the thief so we won't involve the bar at all"?

Essentially, when the act of theft occurs on your property, it does affect you whether you'd like it to or not. And the actions you choose to take (or not to take in this case) do reflect upon you whether you'd like them to or not and might well affect your future business. I can't tell you how many times I've heard stories on say 2+2 where someone posts how they were robbed at such and such casino - it's completely naive to believe that such stories do not adversely affect the casino in question's business. How many people will avoid going to a place because they hear that thieves run rampant there without fear of punishment compared to a place where they realize that known criminals will at least be prevented from stepping foot on the property's grounds, lessening the chances of future such offenses being perpetrated against future patrons?

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Yes, Arun... PLUS, Opti is conveniently leaving out the *important* detail that the theft is of "bar bucks"... the currency that is used as members of this analogous bar. AND, all the transactions are in the context of "bar business" that members engage in AT THE BAR. This isn't "outside personal stuff". It's theft within the confines/context of bar business conducted with bar currency. Ah... damn right I'd expect the bar to do something about it. Why did I pay to become a member if other members can steal the bar currency with impunity and nothing reasonable is done to the thief?

And NO, I wouldn't expect the bar to do anything that is personally done between members OUTSIDE THE BAR.

[convick]

You cant have your betpoints stolen if you dont ship them to other posters. Only time I was stiffed was for sending some points for a bet with a guy that took everyones points to the SBR Book. I think yisman lost a few hundred that time too.

Whats the point in banning stiffs and scammers when they can disappear and come back in a few weeks under a new name? Borednaz pulled this off and he may have eventually done the right thing and paid everyone off, but there are some "new" guys around that had previous screen names and left their bad credit with the old names.

[brainfreeze]

I ask you again Optional: if you are at a sports club and someone is going around pick pocketing other members, are you seriously suggesting the sports club would allow someone who they know to be doing that to remain a member/stay on their grounds? Yes the matter may be a "personal" matter between the two patrons but when the act of theft occurs on the business's property, of course it becomes their concern as well. If I get robbed at a bar and then call the police, aren't the police going to ask the bar to see their security tapes/question their employees about the incident or are they just going to say "well this is a personal matter between you and the thief so we won't involve the bar at all"?

Essentially, when the act of theft occurs on your property, it does affect you whether you'd like it to or not. And the actions you choose to take (or not to take in this case) do reflect upon you whether you'd like them to or not and might well affect your future business. I can't tell you how many times I've heard stories on say 2+2 where someone posts how they were robbed at such and such casino - it's completely naive to believe that such stories do not adversely affect the casino in question's business. How many people will avoid going to a place because they hear that thieves run rampant there without fear of punishment compared to a place where they realize that known criminals will at least be prevented from stepping foot on the property's grounds, lessening the chances of future such offenses being perpetrated against future patrons?

It does nothing for them... If anything, giving them a headache reading what's here... They'll just shut it down.. 1. Don't loan to people,that you really can't tell if they're honorable, 2. start small making them establish a credit line and better rates... 3. Make a list of non paying debtors , things like this will improve the credit functions here... Might take a little work to structure who's who...but would be worth it

[ArunSh]

You cant have your betpoints stolen if you dont ship them to other posters. Only time I was stiffed was for sending some points for a bet with a guy that took everyones points to the sbr book. I think yisman lost a few hundred that time too.

Whats the point in banning stiffs and scammers when they can disappear and come back in a few weeks under a new name? Borednaz pulled this off and he may have eventually done the right thing and paid everyone off, but there are some "new" guys around that had previous screen names and left their bad credit with the old names.

This is true to an extent, but the only way scamming points is profitable is if you are a pro and can use them in the store, and it does take some effort/$ to become a pro. If some pro gets banned for whatever reason, yes obviously they can come back under a new handle, but they have to make the effort to become a pro for that to be of any use, which also means working around the issue of their name/email/address to ensure SBR doesn't realize that it's the same person with a new handle.

Obviously it can happen still, but it definitely will require them to jump through several hoops, and that at least could be a deterrent in regards to scamming. If I decide to stiff someone, right now I can stay under my current handle/pro status without any concern. If instead I knew that I likely would get banned for doing so, but I still desired to use SBR profitably, my options would be to pay off my debt or jump through all the hoops of making a new account and getting it to pro status. Given the latter choice would be at least somewhat annoying, it might actually encourage people not otherwise inclined to pay off their debts - why should they at this stage since there are 0 consequences for them if they choose not to do so?

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Borednaz DID NOT make good as chipup... he's still a thief.
All talk... never paid his debts.

He was only allowed back b/c of an admitted SBR fukk up. Shari said if she was around at the time, chipup never would've seen the light of day in his new incarnation. I believe her 100%.

Sure, convict... there's no doubt former thieves ghosting under new names here... BUT, it's not as easy to do as you imply.

[SharpAngles]

Anteater was scamming SBR contests and poker events. Afaik he paid loans he owed so that had nothing to do with why I thought they should ban his ass.

And as far as membership fee, to me the rake is the same for me as it is for the scumbag so that doesn't change the fact the house doesn't get involved. IMO opti is correct that the only sbr action on this would be to end private loans so we'll just agree to disagree since this isn't even the biggest issue around here

P.S. I'll see your Rigged Shat Hole flush miracle and raise you flopping the nuts ,we can only assume, in todays daily yet having RSH decide to instafold for you. I never use the "action" checkboxes so I have no idea why this happened beyond some form of curse..



***** Hand history (v1.2) *****Hand ID 5981030$0 + $6 Texas Hold'em (No Limit) - 15:46:00 03/08/2016 ETTable 'Table 67993', 10 seats max, Real moneySeat 6 is the button.
Small Blind $100, Big Blind $200
Note: seat IDs range from 1 to 10
Seat 2 (playing) : katstale, amount $1723, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 3 (playing) : zwoeins_world, amount $5148, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 4 (playing) : defender, amount $4172, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 6 (playing) : RudyRuetigger, amount $780, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 7 (playing) : SharpAngles, amount $3100, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 8 (playing) : dare, amount $922, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 10 (playing) : JAKEPEAVY21, amount $4050, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
SharpAngles: Small Blind ($100)
dare: Big Blind ($200)
** Dealing Down Cards **
Dealt to SharpAngles: [8d, 8s]
JAKEPEAVY21: Fold
katstale: Call ($200)
zwoeins_world: Fold
defender: Fold
RudyRuetigger: Fold
SharpAngles: Call [btn] ($100)
dare: Check ($0)
** Dealing Flop **
Community cards: [8c, Th, As]
SharpAngles: Fold ($0)
dare: Check ($0)
katstale: Bet ($400)
dare: Fold** End Round **** Evaluate **katstale: Muck ($0)** Showdown **Main pot $600, Rake $0Summary katstale: bet $600, won $1000, net $400, won $600 from main pot

[Optional]

I ask you again Optional: if you are at a sports club and someone is going around pick pocketing other members, are you seriously suggesting the sports club would allow someone who they know to be doing that to remain a member/stay on their grounds? Yes the matter may be a "personal" matter between the two patrons but when the act of theft occurs on the business's property, of course it becomes their concern as well. If I get robbed at a bar and then call the police, aren't the police going to ask the bar to see their security tapes/question their employees about the incident or are they just going to say "well this is a personal matter between you and the thief so we won't involve the bar at all"?

Essentially, when the act of theft occurs on your property, it does affect you whether you'd like it to or not. And the actions you choose to take (or not to take in this case) do reflect upon you whether you'd like them to or not and might well affect your future business. I can't tell you how many times I've heard stories on say 2+2 where someone posts how they were robbed at such and such casino - it's completely naive to believe that such stories do not adversely affect the casino in question's business. How many people will avoid going to a place because they hear that thieves run rampant there without fear of punishment compared to a place where they realize that known criminals will at least be prevented from stepping foot on the property's grounds, lessening the chances of future such offenses being perpetrated against future patrons?

How has anyone here been pick pocketed Arun?

Lenders click the button to send the points of their own free will.

It's exactly the same as loaning money to someone at a bar and then asking the bar owner to kick them out if they dont pay you back. No pick pocketing, no difference if it is a member bar or a public bar... no one has been 'pick pocketed' and there hasn't even been any 'theft'. Just a breach of a private agreement between two people who need to sort out their own problem.

[shaunovery]

This thread clearly shows why sbr doesn't get involved in points disputes

[ArunSh]

How has anyone here been pick pocketed Arun?

Lenders click the button to send the points of their own free will.

It's exactly the same as loaning money to someone at a bar and then asking the bar owner to kick them out if they dont pay you back. No pick pocketing, no difference if it is a member bar or a public bar... no one has been 'pick pocketed' and there hasn't even been any 'theft'. Just a breach of a private agreement between two people who need to sort out their own problem.

As I said, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this issue. Yes it's not the same thing as being pick pocketed, but theft is theft at the end of the day (and borrowing something and not giving it back is most definitely theft). Yes a person who robs a bank may not be the same as someone who borrows $ from a bank and doesn't pay it back, but at the end of the day both will receive punishment from the governing authority.

I've seen multiple instances in gaming stores where people (mostly young kids) steal from other patrons (and once again keeping something that does not belong to you still constitutes theft even if it was loaned to your originally). And whenever they are caught, they are most definitely banned from the establishment for an extended period of time. Why would the store do that when the thief committed no act against the store? Because it's the right thing to do both for business reasons and moral reasons. They want to punish the thief, hopefully teaching them a lesson and also to try to send a message to their other patrons that they do not tolerate such behavior, making them feel more secure about returning to the store in the future. As Biteme states, does SBR want to send a message that you can scam anyone you want here (other than SBR themselves) and face no repercussions? That's obviously your choice to make, but that's not the way I would want to run a business/have my good customers perceive that they will be treated no differently than scammers - I guess it's a matter of priorities. Once again, we'll have to agree to disagree about that.

[pavyracer]

The real question is why isn't SBR in the betpoints loan business?

They issue 12 pts per day to Pros when they log in.

They can originate the loans and then withheld the daily points until loan is paid.

[brainfreeze]

The real question is why isn't SBR in the betpoints loan business?

They issue 12 pts per day to Pros when they log in.

They can originate the loans and then withheld the daily points until loan is paid.

Because as a debtor I don't want them taking my points daily, and we will take the humanity out of it, it will go from being between two people, to business vs person type of deal ...with no slack, and I'm sure the interest will make you think twice of taking a loan to begin with...

as a lender ...I like making a few points interest here and there, where I know the person will honor the agreement... Those I don't know, I don't even have the points to find out, but if I did...it wouldn't be more then a couple hundred pts to minimize risk

[brainfreeze]

But we do run the risk of taking a few small loans ...then someone stiffs for a few thousand points after earning trust or taking a points wager.. These people should go on a list, and be blacklisted from borrowing from anyone ... and they will be looked at differently ..

i seen mp (the one who owes yis) at a table ..I wasn't going to play him just on the strength of what he's doing, but then my own selfish reasons kicked in that I need to pay off a loan and had to roll points one way or the other, so i guess I caved to my own standards a bit... but if the guy wants to live like that, shrugs ...whatever, on a day to day ...I wouldn't sit and play with'um or anyone like that

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Anteater was scamming SBR contests and poker events. Afaik he paid loans he owed so that had nothing to do with why I thought they should ban his ass.

Hmm, so you wanted to impose the same punishment as me... but, YOU get to decide what scam is more 'criminally valid' than the other.

Interesting...

that the only sbr action on this would be to end private loans

Not a binary choice.
Few things ever are... and certainly this issue isn't.
I believe what I presented was reasonable, addresses the issue, and is easy to discern and implement.

so we'll just agree to disagree since this isn't even the biggest issue around here

Agree w/this.

in todays daily yet having RSH decide to instafold for you. I never use the "action" checkboxes so I have no idea why this happened beyond some form of curse..

Ahh, that really sux. The ol instafold with da monster hand. 8's are WILD!

It's happened to next to everyone at one time or another that's played a lot of SBR poker. Just another SBR poker software glitch that rears its ugly head from time to time. Last night I was auto-called on the flop... thankfully it wasn't a big bet. (I've had AA autofolded pre before... and yep, like you, no action box was checked.)

BTW, Sharpy... it's obvious SBR has taken my views here personally and is out to pay me back... as I lasted all of ~6 minutes in the 9pm when my flopped set of 4's got buttfukked by yet another riv'd flush.

I'm so pissed right now that I'm gonna kick tt's ass so bad tonight on Facebook poker that the Kentucky tranny won't know what hit him.

[Triple_D_Bet]

I saw jeffdane in poker a few months ago

pretty sure he stiffed someone

How about that clown, Goat Milk?

jeffdane is actually all good, he paid most everything back last July. Although it took a while, he pretty much made it right, doesn't owe me anything.

Id	Date	Transaction	From	To	Type	Gross
B1261C	7/26/2015 6:22 PM	jeffdane gave Triple_D_Bet 2000 Betpoint(s) for this post.	jeffdane	Triple_D_Bet	Post Point	+2,000 [COLOR=#000000 !important]4,498.00[/COLOR]
B0FC29	7/22/2015 2:47 PM	jeffdane gave Triple_D_Bet 700 Betpoint(s) for this post.	jeffdane	Triple_D_Bet	Post Point	+700 [COLOR=#000000 !important]4,841.00[/COLOR]
B0EB5F	7/21/2015 12:32 AM	jeffdane gave Triple_D_Bet 600 Betpoint(s) for this post.	jeffdane	Triple_D_Bet	Post Point	+600 [COLOR=#000000 !important]4,081.00[/COLOR]
B09E73	7/13/2015 12:32 AM	jeffdane gave Triple_D_Bet 2100 Betpoint(s) for this post.	jeffdane	Triple_D_Bet	Post Point	+2,100 [COLOR=#000000 !important]3,515.00[/COLOR]
995D1A	5/07/2014 12:27 AM	jeffdane gave Triple_D_Bet 2 Betpoint(s) for this post.	jeffdane	Triple_D_Bet	Post Point	+2 [COLOR=#000000 !important]6,545.00[/COLOR]

[Triple_D_Bet]

Do lenders know the risk they're taking when they lend, given SBR's policy of non-intervention? Sure they do...but that doesn't change the fact that stiffs are still bad members of the community. If SBR is concerned about the quality of the community, as many private organizations are, it's in their best interests to punish or remove bad members. SBR bans people who take other actions, so they clearly are interested in taking action to maintain standards in membership; the inescapable conclusion is that they don't consider a broken points agreement to be as important as these other, ban-worthy actions. The real question though: should they believe otherwise?

While I consider broken repayment promises to be more significant than incendiary statements which routinely get people banned, I can understand that SBR's perspective is different, and they care about different things. From a marketing perspective, outsiders aren't likely to make a snap judgement on broken loan repayments, or even care very much; derogatory language is much more toxic to their brand to the casual observer who considers joining the community.

Could SBR add some code to allow people to enter website-enforced loans? Sure they could, and it would arguably be a neat service to offer members...but being a community of degenerates, making lending less risky would probably encourage folks to leverage their future betpoint earnings in a hurry. Compared to slowly doling them out over the membership period, that would probably lead to most people losing their years worth of points in well under a week, and not coming back to the site for a year if at all.

All that aside, if SBR tries to regulate points, they run the very real risk of having the US determine that betpoints are a consideration which satisfies the legal definition of gambling, and trying to take action to shut down SBR for running a US-facing gambling operation. It's hypocritical and violates all sorts of international trade agreements, but the US has repeatedly shown it doesn't care and will do it anyways.

Weigh the benefits (a small amount of already-paying members would be more satisfied but won't provide any more profit) to the downsides (added coding/personnel cost for enforcement, negatively impacting traffic and associated appeal to business partners, very real threat of US action), and it's no surprise SBR won't take action on bad betpoint debts. If I was in their shoes I'd like to think I'd regulate it with some changes to mitigate the downsides, but it would still probably be a bad business decision. Grumble about it as I do occasionally, I don't think SBR's stance is unwise.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Although it probably goes without saying, in the current environment, calling out stiffs should certainly be done...both to impose some kind of credibility cost and to warn others who the stiffs might scam.

[beefcake]

Yisman.I owed secretstash some points from way back .I just paid back I think all of it.I just went pro again so no excuse.I can't find the thread so if someone does please let me know and I will pay more with interest

[Triple_D_Bet]

Yisman.I owed secretstash some points from way back .I just paid back I think all of it.I just went pro again so no excuse.I can't find the thread so if someone does please let me know and I will pay more with interest

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/foru...credit-p3.html

search your points history filtered for "secretstash"

[stuler]

I enjoy getting loans from people willing to give them. I can't buy points here like other posters (which is probably a good thing) I like to gamble in the casino because it is a great form of entertainment for me. I like doing it here because at the end of the day I'm not out anything and the fact that i maybe could have bought a bunch of stuff at the store makes it seem real for me without the actual butt hurt of losing a ton of real money in the real world. some days I get lucky and pay them back ASAP and other days it takes months, but to not pay someone back points or anything for that matter that you borrow is just plain wrong.

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Trip, I miss ya buddy, wish you were around more... but certainly understand the reasons why you're not. Hope all has been going well for ya personally and in your biz ventures.

I appreciate you chiming in w/your views here... BUT... I'm gonna take the liberty to set ya straight a lil bit.

*There isn't any need for a big rigmarole here (i.e. -- added coding, added $ costs to SBR for enforcement, etc.).

As mentiond earlier in thread, I'm willing to set up a tracking mechanism (via thread)... a little "community watch program", if you will. Think Curtis Sliwa, but w/o the silly berets, as I'd rather wear SBR condoms, if anything.

Rough outline: I ask all harmed lenders to post their egregious stiff cases to the thread with all the details (how long has stiff job been, how much still owed, ~time last payment was made, details like that. I'll cull all the available info via pts histories/threads of parties involved. REMEMBER... we're targeting overt, egregious and verifiable thefts here... not posters like onerous that forgot he owed 25pts last Christmas to someone. OBVIOUS STIFF JOB THEFTS, verifiable through posts & pt histories & very importantly, TIME (TxAaron admits his stiff job theft and it's been 2 years, mp's theft was ~4 years ago...cases similar to these).

I volunteered to do all the legwork/communication between the parties and cull all the info in a "case file"... free of charge. Cost SBR nada. Only thing needed from SBR is cooperation and a "contact mod" to send the case file to prove the egregious and obvious theft by a scumbag of another member. (I'd even send the thief a "warning letter/PM" telling them a case file is in process of being built and sent to SBR and they have 2 weeks to start making payments on the debt or they risk getting banned from all SBR contests, promos, or even the site. The PM alone could start the thief paying if he actually knew he could, in fact, be banned from BTP, etc.. and there was some real consequence to his stealing.)

I make clear that anyone that wants a new loan looked at/tracked to post in the special thread set up for it and if cases/loans aren't specifically posted to that thread... nothing can or will be done. THAT THREAD ALONE WOULD BE THE MECHANISM FOR REDRESS. Must be posted there. (btw, in case file I'd also include communications between parties and anything else pertinent to proving the theft case. Mod would simply have to read it. Nothing more fancy or intensive than that from SBR's end; and cooperation that they would, in fact, ban the thief if the case has been concretely proved and the thief had done nothing to attempt to make things right even after the "warning case file letter/PM" was sent.)

More details would be fleshed out in this Community Watch Program to deal with these thieves, but that's kinda the basic premise. And as described, if implemented, there would be ZERO chance the US gov't would take any action b/c it wouldn't change anything that SBR already does, i.e., they dispense pts already, members already gamble those pts in a sportsbook set up for it and redeem merchandise and most pertinent to this issue: they already ban peeps for all kinds of reasons (and some bannings are for things far less egregious than theft from other members.)

DOJ guy: "Hey, did you see they started a Community Watch Program on that site that gives pts and their members gamble to win more points in a sportsbook they set up to redeem merchandise w/those pts?"

DOJ supervisor: "Oh really? Shit... we've wanted to bust those guys for years but now that they have set up a Community Watch Program to ban some peeps for theft instead of just banning for ianappropraite language and shit... WE GOT EM BY THE SHORT HAIRS, NOW! LET'S BUST THEIR ASS! I'll prepare the injunction personally! MUAHAHAHAHA!!!!"

Respectfully, Tripper... ain't gonna happen, buddy.

Also, regarding this from your post: "Weigh the benefits (a small amount of already-paying members would be more satisfied but won't provide any more profit)"

As I previously implied/stated in this thread, I think the subtle consequences to SBR are underestimated: I know I purposely posted less at the height of the Carseller shenanigans b/c I was pissed at what SBR allowed him to get away with and figured "why waste my time contributing my time and energy to assist in making SBR Forum better?" (and yes, I consider myself a good poster for various reasons and a good contributing SBR member)... why waste that time and energy when I see him pulling his shit w/ no consequences and he's sitting at the same poker contests as me and and has all the same benefits as me with no repurcussions for his actions in the Forum Community. AND BTW, THESE THIEVES ARE 100x WORSE THAN CARSELLER!

I know a couple solid posters that have slowed down their posting/contributions for similar thinking because of things they're unhappy w/SBR about. This "hurts" SBR profits in the long run. A Forum is only good as their posters, ultimately. No customers... no business. (Or, less contributing good posters in a forum, less profits for SBR, eventually.) Let's weed out the disrespecting thieves... they never contribute anything of value to the forum, anyway. Don't lose good posters b/c of the thieves. Like I previously mentioned, few things piss me off as much 'round here as sitting next to a thief at a SBR poker table or seeing a thief in BTP.

Now... squeeze in some time so you can play your buddy like old times in the ol' RS! (or RSH, as you prefer)

[Triple_D_Bet]

Sounds like a good plan to me Biter, I'd support that

As for the time to play, I'll see what I can do...I guess these points ain't gonna lose themselves

[pavyracer]

If you're a lender you have to do your due diligence before issuing a loan.

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

YIS... clear your PM's, pal.


Also, please summarize the nature of TxAaron's stiff job in this thread I've linked, please (read from here down).

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/foru...l#post26106928

Asshat is now trying to play it off since I called him out on it.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

I nominate Bite

get rid of the scumbags

[bobbywaves]

Tripe, DullAngles, & Opti way off base on this issue in my humble opinion. Bite has offered his services free of charge to clean up this forum, SBR would be absolutely foolish not to take Bite up on his generous & time consuming offer.

I love how SBR bans a known thief for ghosting & then steals themselves, by basically confiscating the ghost/thief's pts instead of returning stolen pts to the victim. One less poster at the Bash for this reason alone:

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/poker/3261910-loan-w-juice.html

[gauchojake]

Get those Tico programmers to set up an automated escrow/payback system. Problem solved

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

Get those Tico programmers to set up an automated escrow/payback system. Problem solved

The Ticos can't get the BUTTON to move properly on SBR poker tables when getting back-to-back-to-back smacked with the BB when they move ya, so.... you think they can handle THAT?

C'mon, pal!!!

[TxAaron]

I bet BiteMe was a great fukkin hall monitor when he was a kid.

[BiTeMe UsAdOj]

I bet BiteMe was a great fukkin hall monitor when he was a kid.

Wow... such a clever comeback... that's gonna sting for awhile.
Lemme guess, with those kinda witty comebacks, they called you "Potsie" a lot when you were a kid... right?
Oh wait.. still do, maybe?

Truth be told... I was too busy acquiring Letterman status to be a hall monitor... BUT, if I were one back then, I would've been the guy stuffing you in your locker like you see in the movies, as I had a low tolerance for assclowns even back then.

NOW... none of this has anything to do with you being a lowlife thieving STIFF, however, SO......

Time to put your Big Boy pants on and PAY WHAT YOU OWE, STIFFY.
Trying so hard to convince peeps on the Interwebs that you're a Baller while stiffing ain't really a good look, Playa. Go ask whomever in your cabana crew you call Fonzie... he'll tell ya the same thing.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Tripe, DullAngles, & Opti way off base on this issue in my humble opinion. Bite has offered his services free of charge to clean up this forum, SBR would be absolutely foolish not to take Bite up on his generous & time consuming offer.

I love how SBR bans a known thief for ghosting & then steals themselves, by basically confiscating the ghost/thief's pts instead of returning stolen pts to the victim. One less poster at the Bash for this reason alone:

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/poker/3261910-loan-w-juice.html

Try that reading thing buddy:

Sounds like a good plan to me Biter, I'd support that

As for the time to play, I'll see what I can do...I guess these points ain't gonna lose themselves

Also, despite Biter volunteering to help out and removing many of the downsides, it's still not foolish for SBR to pass on his plan. They don't see enough gain to be worth even the small bother; it is what it is, and will likely remain that way until/unless a bottom line is affected. I understand you don't have a good grasp on cost/benefit analysis, ROI or any other standard business/analytical practices...but SBR is more complex model than trying to nickel and dime low-income subsidies to cover the mortgage on a dilapidated house. Especially given you repeatedly fail to back up your stated views with action, you shouldn't expect to be taken seriously. I'm sure you're just here to see yourself post and to indirectly pretend you're smarter than a few others, so take all of this wisdom with a grain of salt, and feel free to make another inane reply claiming everyone else is wrong according to some 'evidence' you made up

Last nougat of wisdom for ya: If you want to motivate SBR to take action, you should probably refrain from mentioning that their inaction is causing them to not have to foot the Bash bill for a guy who does little but dumb down their community....you might be more successful if you threatened to stick around here and go to the Bash UNLESS they did something about stiffs

One more tip: if you somehow got SBR to ban people who break their word, it might be the last thing you do around here: http://www.sportsbookreview.com/foru...ng-me-72k.html

[Triple_D_Bet]

On to the solution side of things...

YIS... clear your PM's, pal.


Also, please summarize the nature of TxAaron's stiff job in this thread I've linked, please (read from here down).

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/foru...l#post26106928

Asshat is now trying to play it off since I called him out on it.

Bite, any chance you'd wanna just go ahead and try to implement your idea? Would be a little tougher without it being a sticky or editable, but nothing some bumping or reposting updates wouldn't solve, right? I know it would be a whole lot less effective with SBR not enforcing timeouts because of it, but the warning aspect of it would be handy. If we could get SBR to post some kind of sticky regarding loans (at your own risk, check with community to see if borrower has reputation, etc) that would help, and it seems like a small change that would be far easier for SBR to do without taking any active role.

If you need any help, let us know...my time's a bit limited, but I can find some for a good cause

[bobbywaves]

Try that reading thing buddy:

I read your off base comment again:

Grumble about it as I do occasionally, I don't think SBR's stance is unwise.

despite Biter volunteering to help out and removing many of the downsides, it's still not foolish for SBR to pass on his plan.

Of course its foolish, you're just too ignorant to realize it. Surprising attitude you have Tripe, considering how many times you've been stiffed.

I understand you don't have a good grasp on cost/benefit analysis, ROI or any other standard business/analytical practices.

My superior grasp on ROI is why I can confidently say my poker ROI is a stellar 937%, compared to your embarrassing 133%. It's understandable why you went into hibernation, after losing a 29k poker bet to me. You're better off staying in hibernation, as your off base comments contribute nothing.