Should we ban scammers and cons from the SBR Forum?

[Patrick McIrish]

Surrender noted.

No threats of any kind dipshit, just trying to reason with you. As for you bringing up that issue from 2003 then knock yourself out man, if it wasn't that it would be something else from you. You know it and so do I, this weird obsession has been going on a long time, true or not you will find something to bash me about. Before that took place you would secretly write my boss trying to get me fired. That speaks about what kind of (wo)man you are. In addition as I have posted already, you would write me saying what a great job I did for the players. I noticed you haven't denied that, I wonder why. Not only that, after I told him that I wasn't going to do the job long, Lakers would comment that he sure hoped the next guy would be as effective as I was helping the players. All the while trying to get me fired behind my back. I couldn't believe it when I saw the other emails from this clown.

Bottom line is you are using you position here to help you on your personal agendas, we both know it. They are quoting you at TOW as saying you are upset that RPM, Raiders and so on were banned from here? I don't know the full story but I think it's pathetic you can't back the place you work at but due to your hatred will come running at anyone you don't particularly like. It's not about you Jason, it's about helping the players now. I should have guessed a man running around begging for forum contributions would put himself first when it comes to modding a forum. You can always tell a real scammer, they run around deflecting the issue by accussing everyone else. Raise enough stink elsewhere than no one will look at you huh? Must have been some score on that hurricane/FEMA/insurance/Red Cross scam. 'Nuff said.

[natrass]

Raiders is good for the forum i think. it takes all sorts and he helps the mix a lot.

As for scammers, for me personally, it is only a probvlem when someone posts and then someone else goes "oh, yeah, so what about the Global stiff in '98" and they reply "well, Fat Tony got everything. He never did have a garage" and the reply is "no, Harry X sent me that sheet and it was loaded" ... blah blah blah.

That stuff should be pms .. unless the whole situation is explained ... which would be too long winded ... otrherwise, it becomes more of a personal toe-to-toe thing.

(Not referring to this thread here, as lakerfan is simply trying to protect himself from an 'attack').

[pjesnik24]

I am quite new on this forum but I really do not see any point of baning anybody from here. I mean, who will decide who deserves to be baned?
I just saw on TOW forum that you have even banned their moderators from here and I can only say that your decision to do that only made TOW look better in my eyes than SBR.
I have no idea who Patrick, AK, Raiders are and what they did you get banned but to forbid the competition to post here and to tell us what they think is fascism/communism in its early stage. I mean, what is next? if you are from certain country you cannot post?

[docdekay]

Pat

For the record, I know Lakerfan on a personal level and he is truly one of the more generous people I know. None of this forum bullshit, "he's standup, he's this, he's that." Like I said, my assessment of him is firsthand. He's a very good person and I'm a pretty critical judge of character as I'm inherently skeptic.

I think dragging the storm into this is disgusting. The man's house was completely razed by Katrina and his life was turned upside down. Again, I know this to be a fact. In addition, he never asked for a penny in the wake of the storm. Bobby started a collection and Russ helped facilitate it. Fact. Lakerfan wasnt even aware this was going on as he had no phone/internet.

Ironically, we first met in New Orleans and I now consider him to be a very good friend of mine despite the physical distance which separates our cities.

We have a mutual respect for one another and I even though I rarely post anywhere anymore I thought I should pitch in my two cents. He really is one of the good guys who just went through a very trying time and calling him out on the storm was heartless, at best.

[marc]

I think it depeneds on what the poster is trying to accomplish. If the poster is trying to convince other posters to send money to deposit only books, then, yes they should be banned. If the poster just likes to post, and says stupid things, probabky not. Likely, every person we ban, will got to the other forums, tell everyone how they banned for speaking the truth. And then your left with a situation where the people you banned are now going to seek to poison the minds of the posters at the other forums.

[SBR_John]

Roberto and RPm are close to running a scam with this rookie project. Roberto admits that if they have another book go down they will again try to deflect blame and not tell the players the book is broke.

I dont mind them posting here but they are not posting, they are working. And they are not working some harmless game they are trying to lure players to new books.

So if they want to post..great! But if they want to work they need to find a different forum.

[natrass]

Has raiders been banned? That would be very harsh, bordering on petty.

[bigboydan]

yes, raiders was banned last night. even though i might not agree with all these guys getting banned, it's wasn't my call.


hopefully John will lift the bans sometime in the near future.

[natrass]

Thanks BBD...I didnt know that.

That is very poor. It can only have been the RCS stuff ... and while that has factual elements to it, it did also have a large digree of personal opinion to it.

To ban someone because they dont agree with the "official" opion of a board is plain wrong surely.

I can understand those that were making very stident and personal claims with their first posts and stuff ... but Raiders, AK and so on have been here for ages and, as i said, were part of the mix.

A forum which discusses the industry in which no one disagrees with anyone is going to be very bland Id have thought.

Who else has been banned that may be thought of as a regular? Jay88?

Sorry if there is already a post about this ... just I havent seen it.

[Santo]

Marc: Even with the troubles, I'm not sure RCS meet the definition of a "deposit-only" shop... they did pay several people, and I don't believe their original intention was to extort a scam..

[natrass]

12.30.2005 (12:58 PM CST)
SBR Bill Dozer reports: BetDealers(SBR rating F) is new SCAM book from the failed SunsetSports owners. BetDealers is offering 20% cash sign-up bonuses to join while claiming they are not affiliated with any other sportsbooks.

Thanks to SBRforum poster AK for information contributed.


I think the last sentence is reason enough not to ban people who have contributed for quite some time.

[BAUS]

I agree with Marc.

If people are here posting with no other purpose than to tout shit books, then SBR may have to look at banning them.

Of course, banning a poster may not really solve the problem, as the person may return as a ghost, etc.

AK and Raiders may have been somewhere in the grey on this issue. It does get rather tiring reading the same old meaningless "RCS is solid" or "Betonstars is solid" posts from AK. But at the same time I think most posters here are smart enough to know the difference between touts like AK, and legit posters like Marc, Taco, Pags, etc. So I'm not sure banning is the answer here.

I'm not sure banning TOW is a wise move either. Sure he may be heading down a slipperly slope with some of these books, but as long as he isn't here pushing those books, then I would like to see Roberto's ban removed.

And with regards to the RCS issue, I have grown tired of the "poor newbies" arguement. I doubt that many rookie sportsbettors had accounts with RCS. Cmon. Most of their clients are the hardcore who have been around the block, and know what they are getting into. Risk vs Reward. I doubt that CRIS picked up many "new" clients thru this takeover/bailout (whatever you want to call it).

BAUS

[SBR_John]

Some good post and certainly all opinions are respected and appreciated.

I agree with Baus's post. These guys all own other websites and they are here for business reasons that include a deceptive agenda. SBR has more "new" traffic than all the other forums combined and thats what draws them here. For example, rpm does not post here because he enjoys the forum. He post here to further his business agenda and no other reason.

Does the new guy visiting SBR today know that these guys are working their own gig?

They can't work the SBR boards and posters here. Its not their opinion I mind its their paid and bought opinion that should not be allowed. I ahve told them all they can come back as posters but no 3 card Monty games.

[freebie]

I It does get rather tiring reading the same old meaningless "RCS is solid" or "Betonstars is solid" posts from AK.

BAUS

I agree with Baus. RCS is solid or betonstars is solid are so full of Shit.

[tacomax]

I agree with Baus's post. These guys all own other websites and they are here for business reasons that include a deceptive agenda.

With AK and Raiders, you're looking at a pair of scammers. Raiders has been outed as a tout who's willing to withold information about one of his scams to make sure he escapes with his balance intact. AK rips off credit shops, touts shit books and admits to shilling shit books where he has a balance. He'll even screw people over for baseball cards.

SBR doesn't need people like that.

As I said, it's easier to keep tabs on the scam artists if they keep their handles but sometimes it's a case of enough is enough at some point. Free speech is a good concept but you simply have to draw the line when it's in the benefit of the majority.

Regarding TOW, however, I think the ban should be reversed. They undertook a project which had all the best intentions, whatever you think about it. It was a novel concept, it was a good concept - even Bill Dozer agreed with this - but it was badly implemented. They understand that they made a mistake but they dug like mad and got themselves out of the hole. And, to give them credit, they appear to have learnt from this lapse of judgment.

As of today, January 1st 2006, we will not admit new members unless they satisfy the following additional selective criteria: being backed or being spin offs of a well established operation.

[Bill Dozer]

Regarding TOW, however, I think the ban should be reversed. They undertook a project which had all the best intentions, whatever you think about it. It was a novel concept, it was a good concept - even Bill Dozer agreed with this - but it was badly implemented. They understand that they made a mistake but they dug like mad and got themselves out of the hole. And, to give them credit, they appear to have learnt from this lapse of judgment.

I don't think the "project" ever had good intentions. Making a list of books to keep an eye on was a good idea that was ruined on promoting whoever paid. Calling it a rookie project was an attempt to create a license to promote unproven shops. Ratings and warnings don't mean anything at that point.

Roberto knew exactly what he was doing. One of the benefits of taking on relatively unknowns like BCN, RCS and the others is that he gets credit for almost all of their growth.

He spammed the forum sites with the 2005 Payout Award thread listing RichCoast Sports. That's promoting. Most of his posts are for the purpose of promoting a book or his site brand. Posting gives TOW visibility so marketing efforts like email promotions (below) convert.

"Sign up with BETED now and receive a 100% bonus TRY THEM OUT NOW!!!"

or

"Currently, betonstars is offering a 100% signup bonus on deposits from $100 to $300 and a 50% signup bonus on deposits of $300 to $1,000. STOP BY AND CHECK THEM OUT!"

We started this forum saying we would be the most liberal and let the forum essentially manage itself. But, the more posters who come to the forum to bet safer and better, the more promoters will show up for the exposure. SBR won't be a vehicle to promote other sites and their books.

There are some good contributors here who have their own sites and they are welcome. Posters with sites are free to enjoy the forum on behalf of themselves.

Posters starting 10 threads on the same topic or chime in on all the big topics with the same one-liners are looking for a stage. If they don't like the way one thread pans out they start another. These guys aren't addressing SBR to converse; they are looking for a fight. We have nothing to gain and it's simply not fun or what the forum is for. They can be civilized or post at their own site.

[onlooker]

Posters starting 10 threads on the same topic or chime in on all the big topics with the same one-liners are looking for a stage. If they don't like the way one thread pans out they start another. These guys aren't addressing SBR to converse; they are looking for a fight. We have nothing to gain and it's simply not fun or what the forum is for. They can be civilized or post at their own site.

Excellent explanation Bill.

[muskatel]

SBR John --

Thanks for the action you took. I appreciate it.

[tacomax]

I don't think the "project" ever had good intentions. Making a list of books to keep an eye on was a good idea that was ruined on promoting whoever paid. Calling it a rookie project was an attempt to create a license to promote unproven shops. Ratings and warnings don't mean anything at that point.

OK, I'll clarify what I meant. From the outset, I personally thought it had good intentions at the start in terms of concept. That is to promote essentially solid but lower profile books then the likes of Pinnacle - competition from financially sound lesser-known enterprises is good for all players.

Unfortunately, it panned out nothing like I thought it would do. Promoting USSportsbook, who within the past 6 months had ripped off the Bodog site, just plain stank. Rushing around everywhere to spin any negativity for the rookie sponsors doesn't smell too nice, either. The RCS farce where a "trusted rookie" can be brought down to a state of collapse due to "ill-health" of the owner was the final nail in the coffin.

Posters starting 10 threads on the same topic or chime in on all the big topics with the same one-liners are looking for a stage. If they don't like the way one thread pans out they start another. These guys aren't addressing SBR to converse; they are looking for a fight. We have nothing to gain and it's simply not fun or what the forum is for. They can be civilized or post at their own site.

Indeed.

[tacomax]

Sorry for swiping from EOG but this was too funny not to share.

SBR John banned all that disagreed with them on the RCS case. I was banned as was Roberto, RPM and a few others. This just enforces that SBR is wrong.

NO RAIDERS THAT JUST PROVES HE DOESNT WANT A BUNCH OF ASSHOLES IN HIS FORUM.

[quarm_]

Raiders is banned? That would be the right step, i always knew SBR is the best...and i wholeheartly agree with Bill and John on everything concerning the RCS case.

SBR is the highest quality site about sportsbooks on the net BY FAR, i look at the main page every day - and the forum should be of a similiar quality. That wasnt possible with those morons.
Thanks guys, maybe i will bother you with my posts again soon

[pier0]

I don't think the "project" ever had good intentions. Making a list of books to keep an eye on was a good idea that was ruined on promoting whoever paid. Calling it a rookie project was an attempt to create a license to promote unproven shops. Ratings and warnings don't mean anything at that point.

Roberto knew exactly what he was doing. One of the benefits of taking on relatively unknowns like BCN, RCS and the others is that he gets credit for almost all of their growth.

He spammed the forum sites with the 2005 Payout Award thread listing RichCoast Sports. That's promoting. Most of his posts are for the purpose of promoting a book or his site brand. Posting gives TOW visibility so marketing efforts like email promotions (below) convert.

"Sign up with BETED now and receive a 100% bonus TRY THEM OUT NOW!!!"

or

"Currently, betonstars is offering a 100% signup bonus on deposits from $100 to $300 and a 50% signup bonus on deposits of $300 to $1,000. STOP BY AND CHECK THEM OUT!"

We started this forum saying we would be the most liberal and let the forum essentially manage itself. But, the more posters who come to the forum to bet safer and better, the more promoters will show up for the exposure. SBR won't be a vehicle to promote other sites and their books.

There are some good contributors here who have their own sites and they are welcome. Posters with sites are free to enjoy the forum on behalf of themselves.

Posters starting 10 threads on the same topic or chime in on all the big topics with the same one-liners are looking for a stage. If they don't like the way one thread pans out they start another. These guys aren't addressing SBR to converse; they are looking for a fight. We have nothing to gain and it's simply not fun or what the forum is for. They can be civilized or post at their own site.

Bill,

I didn't expect you to be an hypocrite as well...but I guess it was too much to ask after seeing your boss in action...

I don't like the rookie project and I expressed my view from the beginning. How come you didn't say anything about TOW "working" the forum two weeks ago?
Maybe because he was a paid advertiser?

Now I know that as I own a website I must have an agenda against SBR, which is BTW what SBR has against every and each of its major competitors (TOW, MW).

But I don't have an agenda, at this point I still believe (maybe hope is the right word) SBR is good for players, even if in the RCS situation SBR would have rather seen a complete failure to say "I told you so, TOW is evil."

While the correct version should have been "I told you so yesterday after the ad contract expired, TOW is evil."

One thing you're right though: "is simply not fun or what a forum should be for," but the fight is not always coming from guys external to SBR.

[slash]

nm...

[BadAzz]

The whole debate around RCS has come down to such a personal level that I doubt if it has helped anyone. So far I think everyone except BBD working for SBR or TOW has been labeled as scammer by someone. Oh well, Dozer has only been called a hypocrite and a regular scumbag.

Dozer gave the warning and issued a downgrade when SBR found out RCS was in crisis. That was the right thing to do, but everything after that has been needless. SBR did not handle this professionally on the forum and neither did TOW. You guys know each other too well, and all the personal stuff is blurring the real issue. I as a newish Euro bettor am totally lost at whom to believe or trust, but since Dozer helped me once I'll stick with SBR. Just warn players with a sticky thread, issue downgrade and let the others do the name calling.

About the bans, I do not agree with them. Raiders, AK and TOW all have some good posts as well. SBR has quality mods, that can remove unwanted posts if needed and the bottom line is that you cannot protect us readers from everything anyways.

[EBone]

Nobody asked me but I have an opinion about this.....

I find it a bit distressing that people are banned because of an apparent difference of opinion. Of course, I am not "in the know" on all the things going on behind the scenes. My posting experience is limited (5-6 months) but I think a good forum is where opinions are expressed freely without thinking that repurcussions are eminent down the line. I may be a bit "green" in thinking that is how these forums should be handled but that's my opinion.


While I agree that the AK's "solid" posts lend nothing to the content of this forum and JJ's sometimes off-beat opinions lend itself to a dramatic-soap opera type atmosphere, I think that you, as a poster, have every right not to read someone's opinions. If you think raiders opinions are useless, then don't read them. Same with AK or JJ. Just my two cents......not trying to pick a fight here......I'm just a little concerned with, what I perceive to be, a "quick hook".

Also, for the record, I went on raiders site (I have about 30 posts at his site so I have been there before and frequent there) and posted in his "Looney Bin" section that I thought it was a bit unfair to be banned. If I have a perceived "agenda", my agenda would be for everyone to be able to say what they need to say, to a point, without being booted.

My two cents......



E

[pier0]

The whole debate around RCS has come down to such a personal level that I doubt if it has helped anyone. So far I think everyone except BBD working for SBR or TOW has been labeled as scammer by someone. Oh well, Dozer has only been called a hypocrite and a regular scumbag.

Dozer gave the warning and issued a downgrade when SBR found out RCS was in crisis. That was the right thing to do, but everything after that has been needless. SBR did not handle this professionally on the forum and neither did TOW. You guys know each other too well, and all the personal stuff is blurring the real issue. I as a newish Euro bettor am totally lost at whom to believe or trust, but since Dozer helped me once I'll stick with SBR. Just warn players with a sticky thread, issue downgrade and let the others do the name calling.

About the bans, I do not agree with them. Raiders, AK and TOW all have some good posts as well. SBR has quality mods, that can remove unwanted posts if needed and the bottom line is that you cannot protect us readers from everything anyways.

I just want to clear why I said Bill is an hypocrite, which in his case has nothing to do with the fact that SBR handled all the RCS situation more as a personal vendetta to TOW, but because he's now saying the rookie project" never had good intentions, that it is an attempt to promote unproven books, etc...

All these considerations may well be true, but how come he never said a word during the time TOW was paying SBR to have its ad on the frontpage?

Surely players were at risk back then as well and as I said in multiple occasions in the last week, many players signed up with the "rookies" because of that ad.

[Dead Money]

Who determines who is scamming and conning people??

I do not want to pick sides or anything but this whole list of people who were banned seemed to follow suit with the whole RCS failure.

Seems to me that nobody lost any money on the deal except CRIS, but I am sure in the long run with all of the new customers they will be ok.


What is the policy of being banned? Is it if you piss off one of the mods they can ban you?

Do you guys talk about it first or put it to a vote, or is it just one mans take on a particular poster?

Just curious I have been on this forum for a few months and never seen anyone banned before, but in the last week or so seem like there has been alot.

Raiders
AK
Rpm
that Vegas line maker person
Some Women, ( forgot her name)

Were all of those people cons and scammers?

[bigboydan]

my final words on this whole ordeal are the following:

#1.
I DON'T FEEL ANYONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN BANNED !!! (can't express that enough)

#2.
i'm glad cris stepped upto the plate and helped out the players and assured the players funds (thats whats most important to me) because, if they didn't. i would have worked my ass off, in order to make sure each and everyone of those players would have got some kind of bailout offer. i don't know if i would have been successful or not, but i would have tried my best, even though it's not really in my job description.

but, i don't mind going the extra mile if need be. especially when it comes to making sure players are helped out, isn't that what were all here for anyways (helping to make sure the players money is safe)

#3.
i guess only a few people really know the real story behind this mess. and, even though everyone has there views on this matter. with all this spinning/twisting shit comming from both sides of the fence, who really knows what to believe.

#4.
i've worked for both parties involved in this mess. and, both parties (sbr & tow) would bend over backwards to help you out with disputes. (i've seen it with my own eyes, so it's the truth)

#5.
all of the site owners should make sure they really do research on the books they take advertising money from.

yes, i understand everyone has there different views on there advertiser rating, and i think most people understand that. it's not only upto the site owners, it's upto the players to do there homework to assure stuff like don't happen again.

[quarm_]

Weird that the mods think noone should have been banned, after all the crap that happened.
But they are no real mods anyway in my eyes, it was very cool to watch John cleaning the house - you can see that he cares about the quality at SBR *hint for bbd, illusion & Co.* :-P

[Bill Dozer]

Bill,

I didn't expect you to be an hypocrite as well...but I guess it was too much to ask after seeing your boss in action...

I don't like the rookie project and I expressed my view from the beginning. How come you didn't say anything about TOW "working" the forum two weeks ago?
Maybe because he was a paid advertiser?

I, and SBR, have said plenty about those books and said it while he was an advertiser here, not only here but at his own forum where the readers were less likely to see both site ratings. Maybe I should have emailed them to you directly.

Before his banner was here we had a button on the rating guide where users could see "competitor" ratings. That was before he restructured the ratings for advertisers. If you would argue that players come to SportsbookREVIEW and skip the reviews and go to TOW then you may have a point. We want players to have as much information as possible and make their own decisions but if TOW had been blatantly promoting no-name books from the beginning they wouldn't have been here.

Now I know that as I own a website I must have an agenda against SBR, which is BTW what SBR has against every and each of its major competitors (TOW, MW).

As far as I know your posting handle is still active isn't it? You have mentioned to me that you copied SBR which is obvious but you have always separated your personal posting from your site. As long as you continue to do that and do not flood the forum with name calling and attacks, you are welcome to post what you like like everyone else.

But I don't have an agenda, at this point I still believe (maybe hope is the right word) SBR is good for players, even if in the RCS situation SBR would have rather seen a complete failure to say "I told you so, TOW is evil.").

Do players have to get stiffed for a book to fail? Being off-line without all of player funds isn't failing? Issues on the forum are every bit as important as those not talked about on them but make up a tiny percentage of what is currently being addressed. So, I have made my last comments on the concluded RCS matter.

As far as banning promoters and spotlight seekers, I think we have made the guidelines as clear as possible and made the best decision for the majority of the posters and long term health of the forum. Anyone who doesn't like it can go to their forums.

[pier0]

As far as I know your posting handle is still active isn't it? You have mentioned to me that you copied SBR which is obvious but you have always separated your personal posting from your site. As long as you continue to do that and do not flood the forum with name calling and attacks, you are welcome to post what you like like everyone else.

I never said that I copied SBR...I said that SBR's model inspired me and then I made a joke "where do you think I've got the name?"

This was during a friendly conversation when you were asking me if I was interested (eventually) in working for you.

Remember?

Maybe you remember as well that even then (what was that, six months ago?) I said I didn't like how your boss was acting on the forums.

PS I did a quick search on the forums and I couldn't find any negative remarks about the rookie project made by you before the last happenings...

[Bill Dozer]

I'd suggest searching the posting name as well as names of the individual books.

I remember well. You accepted and had a change of heart days before the forum launched.

BTW, REAL Group was acquired by SBT Plc. ; )

[pier0]

REAL was acquired by World Gaming not Sportingbet

[Bill Dozer]

touche

[SBR_John]

Weird that the mods think noone should have been banned, after all the crap that happened.
But they are no real mods anyway in my eyes, it was very cool to watch John cleaning the house - you can see that he cares about the quality at SBR *hint for bbd, illusion & Co.*

Thanks Quarm but I think it is refreshing to have a forum where the mods can state their opinions.

We will give great leeway to posters that are not here working the forum for their own personal financial gain or to just smear this site or other sites to make a name for themselves and/or just to get attention.

Those that were banned are not real posters, they are manipulators working their own 3- card Monty. Every single one was working a lie paid by Rich Coast or tow or both. Now they can work their monty elsewhere.