Originally <a href='/showthread.php?p=16770730'>posted</a> on 11/14/2012:

Quote Originally Posted by GoDeViLs View Post
I agree that is unwarranted. But...

When is SBR going to see the results of putting the advertising dollar above the customer's interest? It's not a fluke that SBR's reputation as being a unprejudiced reviewer and arbiter is in question by many bettors and forum users. This thread has only made it more clear to me that when it boils down, SBR has the prerogative of obtaining advertising/affiliate dollars set before actually being an impartial mediator in punter-book disputes.
I appreciate your feedback. I do disagree. I actually think Thremp illustrated pretty clearly why someone wouldn't want to make an exception for him. Like with any business that serves customers, if there is at all a borderline situation where there's gray area and perhaps some fault from both sides, if you are an asshole, you're probably not getting your way. There's no hidden agenda or other facts to it than that.

BetHorizon could have handled it better. Thremp could have heeded the warning and not let his ego get in the way. Life goes on.