[ArunSh]

How would that make it more competitive? Just even further advantages people who play more often rather than having anything to do with skill
I mean it barely makes a difference either way at this point. Top 100 is equivalent to a participation trophy. Even Carseller will make it

Yeah, I'll reiterate that I don't understand this Top 100 thing. The number of people playing daily right now is around 75. Sure it might go up with a promotion but how much higher will it really be? Is one cash going to be enough to qualify you for Top 100??

Not that in one sense I mind easy qualification, nice not to have any stress about making it haha. But does seem counter-intuitive to the site's goal of driving more action there. If people can qualify by just cashing once or twice in a several month span, that will do the opposite of encouraging more folks to play.

[RudyRuetigger]

So that each days set of tourneys complete before midnight and daily scores are correct automatically.

It's not up for discussion. Whatever times are used some group of people will bitch about it. This is what it is.




@Arun, have you ever seen a poker promo you didn't think you could design better?

Just an ounce of positivity for once might see prizes get larger again in future. As has been said many times over years, if SBR Poker does not produce for the site it wont get bigger. And having never seen a positive word about it from anyone here on third party sites, SBR is loudly reminded how the word of mouth part of the plan is a total fail every single time a new promo is announced and you start with your paragraphs of analysis about what is being done wrong. Every single time.




Anyway. Nice job Sam. Sounds like a great design to get more people participating and more points into the SBR ecosystem. Much better idea than winner takes all I think.

I'm not wanting to piss anyone off plus I don't play sbrpoker that much any more but arunsh is correct here

Usually we have a tiebreaker to get into the final tourney (whether it is world cup or something like this)

3. In the event that there are ties for the 25th spot, tiebreaker will be # of Cashes. If still tied, the earlier SBR Forum Join Date.



Arunsh is pointing out that the above should say tiebreaker at the 100th place. In the poker client, the tourney automatically counts your place.

For instance, the person out a split second sooner at another table gets 26th while the other a split second later gets 25th. At the same table, if 2 people lose on the same hand (get knocked out), the person with the higher chip count gets the higher [better] place.

For there to be a tie at 25th and 26th place, I think it would have to be 2 people out on the exact same hand with the exact same chip count. And even then I think the client goes to some other tiebreaker to determine who finishes where

So the rule should actually say its the tiebreaker for 100th place to get into the tourney.I'm sure it was just a typo since the top 25 get paid

[ArunSh]

@Arun, have you ever seen a poker promo you didn't think you could design better?
Just an ounce of positivity for once might see prizes get larger again in future. As has been said many times over years, if SBR Poker does not produce for the site it wont get bigger. And having never seen a positive word about it from anyone here on third party sites, SBR is loudly reminded how the word of mouth part of the plan is a total fail every single time a new promo is announced and you start with your paragraphs of analysis about what is being done wrong. Every single time.

Ok, Optional as you wish. I give my feedback on many issues here (sometimes positive, sometimes negative, and sometimes a mix of the two as I would say it is this time) because I thought the site would generally be interested in hearing opinions, even if they are sometimes somewhat negative in nature.

I know the format won't be changed after it's announced, but I still pointed out something which I felt was flawed (and judging by a lot of the other comments here, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks that) in the hopes that maybe improvements can be made in the future. But I guess from your reaction that the site doesn't appreciate that type of feedback, and that's fine. If that's the case, I won't give it in the future.

[kaliboyz]

Ok, Optional as you wish. I give my feedback on many issues here (sometimes positive, sometimes negative, and sometimes a mix of the two as I would say it is this time) because I thought the site would generally be interested in hearing opinions, even if they are sometimes somewhat negative in nature.

I know the format won't be changed after it's announced, but I still pointed out something which I felt was flawed (and judging by a lot of the other comments here, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks that) in the hopes that maybe improvements can be made in the future. But I guess from your reaction that the site doesn't appreciate that type of feedback, and that's fine. If that's the case, I won't give it in the future.

I think you have a valid feedback here... Don't give up... SBR needs people like you... Great job dude!

[blankoblanco]

So that each days set of tourneys complete before midnight and daily scores are correct automatically.

It's not up for discussion. Whatever times are used some group of people will bitch about it. This is what it is.




@Arun, have you ever seen a poker promo you didn't think you could design better?

Just an ounce of positivity for once might see prizes get larger again in future. As has been said many times over years, if SBR Poker does not produce for the site it wont get bigger. And having never seen a positive word about it from anyone here on third party sites, SBR is loudly reminded how the word of mouth part of the plan is a total fail every single time a new promo is announced and you start with your paragraphs of analysis about what is being done wrong. Every single time.




Anyway. Nice job Sam. Sounds like a great design to get more people participating and more points into the SBR ecosystem. Much better idea than winner takes all I think.

I'll also stand up for ArunSh here. Every time ArunSh has given input it's been very thoughtful. He considers the experience of both the regular poker player and the newer ones that SBR is trying to attract with these promotions. None of it is selfish, just logical and reasonable

Maybe you guys should just hire him? Honestly ridiculous that you're criticizing the guy with consistently the best and most helpful feedback on the forum

"Anyway. Nice job Sam." Yeah, you have to say that. Sorry but no, it hasn't really been a nice job at all. The previous promo idea also sucked. That's the actual truth. Now he's actually gone against the entire point of encouraging people to play. If 100 people are locked into final tourney, I'm gonna get 1 or 2 solid cashes and then stop playing the dailies as soon as possible because it's suddenly pointless! This is the opposite of encouraging people to play

Holy crap, seriously, pay ArunSh or somebody a little to advise you guys on promos if you're this clueless. You're shooting yourself in the foot

[kaliboyz]

I'll also stand up for ArunSh here. Every time ArunSh has given input it's been very thoughtful. He considers the experience of both the regular poker player and the newer ones that SBR is trying to attract with these promotions. None of it is selfish, just logical and reasonable

Maybe you guys should just hire him? Honestly ridiculous that you're criticizing the guy with consistently the best and most helpful feedback on the forum

"Anyway. Nice job Sam." Yeah, you have to say that. Sorry but no, it hasn't really been a nice job at all. The previous promo idea also sucked. That's the actual truth. Now he's actually gone against the entire point of encouraging people to play. If 100 people are locked into final tourney, I'm gonna get 1 or 2 solid cashes and then stop playing the dailies as soon as possible because it's suddenly pointless! This is the opposite of encouraging people to play

Holy crap, seriously, pay ArunSh or somebody a little to advise you guys on promos if you're this clueless. You're shooting yourself in the foot

Well said... I respect you!

[ArunSh]

Thanks a lot kaliboyz + blanko for the kind words! I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here - I obviously enjoy SBR Poker, I wouldn't have been doing it all these years if I didn't!

That said, when I think there is something wrong/that could be improved, I've always spoken up - I assumed that feedback would be appreciated, even if sometimes it's somewhat negative. Sure some folks might not agree with me (the SBR mods included), but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

I've always been of the view that if you give feedback on something the right thing to do is to be honest about it even if the truth might not be what the creators want to hear. Unfortunately, I know from experience that that doesn't always tide over well with some folks who don't react well to receiving criticism.

I remember a situation when a friend asked me for feedback on a project they did, and I was honest with them (which amounted to negative feedback), and they got very offended by it, said that a friend wouldn't say that to them etc. Meanwhile they had some other friends telling them how great it/they are (even though those folks didn't mean it, but they didn't want to risk offending them). I wonder in that situation, who is the real friend? The person who will be honest with you even if it might be tough for you to hear, or the person who will just tell you what you want to hear even if it's not honest?

[Optional]

I know the format won't be changed after it's announced, but I still pointed out something

Well yeah!

Thats what I pointed out.

I bet you can't find a single poker promo in the last 5 years where you have not done exactly the same. Spammed the thread with post after post repeating the same negative criticism.


Ya want a badge for spending 2000 words and half a dozen repeated posts pointing out that Sam made a simple error that makes next to zero difference?

Or a chest to pin it on?


You and the constant negative nancies that cant stop yourself doing the same thing every time is why you dont get 5 x $1500 seats to a millionaire maker tourney. Own it.

But go ahead and make another dissertation about how you are right about whatever waffle you are going on about... you should be just banned from poker IMHO. You work against its success so diligently. Almost as negative for the program as bobbywaves was I think.

And it's not like you have not been told a bunch of times either. So it's willfull damage now IMHO.

[Optional]

Why do we continue to support these serial abusers of poker promos Sam?

Seriously, let's just block them all from poker and move on if they dislike every single promo ever offered. Why would they want to play anyway?

Eventually we may end up with a decent and useful poker program for SBR if we rid ourselves of this?

Its been going on for years. It obviously wont stop any other way,


Let's make SBR poker great again and start by draining the swamp.

[fried cheese]

this escalated quickly.

[Optional]

Interesting! But a few things which are confusing. You say the Top 100 advance to the Championship on May 30? But then you say:

3. In the event that there are ties for the 25th spot, tiebreaker will be # of Cashes. If still tied, the earlier SBR Forum Join Date.

If Top 100 qualify, why would there be the need for a tiebreaker for 25th??

But generally I would say it's a good format, spread out reasonably evenly. My only suggestion would probably be not to make it Top 100 (instead like Top 50). Given the number of people that play per day for making Top 100, pretty much everyone who plays consistently will probably make it then no? Right now fewer than 100 people play per day (perhaps average of 25-30 per tourney in three tourneys!). Granted it should go up with a promotion, but still seems too easy in that regard for everyone who plays consistently to make it.

Heck, maybe shouldn't say that - after all I've missed these things before when the # of qualifiers was lower so I might be arguing against my own self-interest! But again, just being objective does seem like Top 100 might make it a bit too easy.

Sam - sorry am still totally confused. You say Top 100 qualify for Championship. I understand only 25 will get paid in it.

What I don't understand is why there would be a need to potentially tiebreak for 25th. If you were paying based on qualification standings that would make sense, but if Top 100 play Championship why would you need to tiebreak for 25th??

As I said, two people almost never tie in some single event. If this was based on qualification standings again that would make total sense. But for final event, ties do not occur per say.

Then if it "two people almost never tie" then what is that has you so concerned about it.

Well seemed inconsistent. It was talked about that maybe the format would be paying people based on leaderboard standings - no final tourney. And the fact that you said tiebreak for 25th place was consistent with that being the way it would work.

But then you say Final tourney with 100 people, meaning you are not paying out based on leaderboard standings. And if that's the case, tiebreak for 25th doesn't make sense - that will automatically be decided by the tourney. I think you might have meant tie for 100th place in that regard.

Yeah, I'll reiterate that I don't understand this Top 100 thing. The number of people playing daily right now is around 75. Sure it might go up with a promotion but how much higher will it really be? Is one cash going to be enough to qualify you for Top 100??

Not that in one sense I mind easy qualification, nice not to have any stress about making it haha. But does seem counter-intuitive to the site's goal of driving more action there. If people can qualify by just cashing once or twice in a several month span, that will do the opposite of encouraging more folks to play.

Ok, Optional as you wish. I give my feedback on many issues here (sometimes positive, sometimes negative, and sometimes a mix of the two as I would say it is this time) because I thought the site would generally be interested in hearing opinions, even if they are sometimes somewhat negative in nature.

I know the format won't be changed after it's announced, but I still pointed out something which I felt was flawed (and judging by a lot of the other comments here, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks that) in the hopes that maybe improvements can be made in the future. But I guess from your reaction that the site doesn't appreciate that type of feedback, and that's fine. If that's the case, I won't give it in the future.

Thanks a lot kaliboyz + blanko for the kind words! I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here - I obviously enjoy SBR Poker, I wouldn't have been doing it all these years if I didn't!

That said, when I think there is something wrong/that could be improved, I've always spoken up - I assumed that feedback would be appreciated, even if sometimes it's somewhat negative. Sure some folks might not agree with me (the SBR mods included), but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

I've always been of the view that if you give feedback on something the right thing to do is to be honest about it even if the truth might not be what the creators want to hear. Unfortunately, I know from experience that that doesn't always tide over well with some folks who don't react well to receiving criticism.

I remember a situation when a friend asked me for feedback on a project they did, and I was honest with them (which amounted to negative feedback), and they got very offended by it, said that a friend wouldn't say that to them etc. Meanwhile they had some other friends telling them how great it/they are (even though those folks didn't mean it, but they didn't want to risk offending them). I wonder in that situation, who is the real friend? The person who will be honest with you even if it might be tough for you to hear, or the person who will just tell you what you want to hear even if it's not honest?

Thanks Arun.

Lucky you are here to make sure that isn't missed

[ArunSh]

this escalated quickly.

Eh, it's cool - as I said I'm done. I in general have given my feedback since I thought people in general would like to hear others' (including my) opinions (whether positive or negative). Yes I tend to be more verbose than most, but that's just my writing style, not intended to be spamming, just intended to try to be "complete".

Some posters, based on their comments above, seem to appreciate my feedback, but it seems SBR itself (assuming Optional speaks for them) doesn't want to hear it.

And since this is their site + their promotion, obviously they are the important ones in this so if they don't want to hear it, then no point. Easier on me, more hours in the day for me to spend on more important things!

Best of luck to everyone in the promotion - will see you at the tables!

[Optional]

Interesting! But a few things which are confusing. You say the Top 100 advance to the Championship on May 30? But then you say:

3. In the event that there are ties for the 25th spot, tiebreaker will be # of Cashes. If still tied, the earlier SBR Forum Join Date.

If Top 100 qualify, why would there be the need for a tiebreaker for 25th??

But generally I would say it's a good format, spread out reasonably evenly. My only suggestion would probably be not to make it Top 100 (instead like Top 50). Given the number of people that play per day for making Top 100, pretty much everyone who plays consistently will probably make it then no? Right now fewer than 100 people play per day (perhaps average of 25-30 per tourney in three tourneys!). Granted it should go up with a promotion, but still seems too easy in that regard for everyone who plays consistently to make it.

Heck, maybe shouldn't say that - after all I've missed these things before when the # of qualifiers was lower so I might be arguing against my own self-interest! But again, just being objective does seem like Top 100 might make it a bit too easy.

Sam - sorry am still totally confused. You say Top 100 qualify for Championship. I understand only 25 will get paid in it.

What I don't understand is why there would be a need to potentially tiebreak for 25th. If you were paying based on qualification standings that would make sense, but if Top 100 play Championship why would you need to tiebreak for 25th??

As I said, two people almost never tie in some single event. If this was based on qualification standings again that would make total sense. But for final event, ties do not occur per say.

Then if it "two people almost never tie" then what is that has you so concerned about it.

Well seemed inconsistent. It was talked about that maybe the format would be paying people based on leaderboard standings - no final tourney. And the fact that you said tiebreak for 25th place was consistent with that being the way it would work.

But then you say Final tourney with 100 people, meaning you are not paying out based on leaderboard standings. And if that's the case, tiebreak for 25th doesn't make sense - that will automatically be decided by the tourney. I think you might have meant tie for 100th place in that regard.

Yeah, I'll reiterate that I don't understand this Top 100 thing. The number of people playing daily right now is around 75. Sure it might go up with a promotion but how much higher will it really be? Is one cash going to be enough to qualify you for Top 100??

Not that in one sense I mind easy qualification, nice not to have any stress about making it haha. But does seem counter-intuitive to the site's goal of driving more action there. If people can qualify by just cashing once or twice in a several month span, that will do the opposite of encouraging more folks to play.

Ok, Optional as you wish. I give my feedback on many issues here (sometimes positive, sometimes negative, and sometimes a mix of the two as I would say it is this time) because I thought the site would generally be interested in hearing opinions, even if they are sometimes somewhat negative in nature.

I know the format won't be changed after it's announced, but I still pointed out something which I felt was flawed (and judging by a lot of the other comments here, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks that) in the hopes that maybe improvements can be made in the future. But I guess from your reaction that the site doesn't appreciate that type of feedback, and that's fine. If that's the case, I won't give it in the future.

Thanks a lot kaliboyz + blanko for the kind words! I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here - I obviously enjoy SBR Poker, I wouldn't have been doing it all these years if I didn't!

That said, when I think there is something wrong/that could be improved, I've always spoken up - I assumed that feedback would be appreciated, even if sometimes it's somewhat negative. Sure some folks might not agree with me (the SBR mods included), but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

I've always been of the view that if you give feedback on something the right thing to do is to be honest about it even if the truth might not be what the creators want to hear. Unfortunately, I know from experience that that doesn't always tide over well with some folks who don't react well to receiving criticism.

I remember a situation when a friend asked me for feedback on a project they did, and I was honest with them (which amounted to negative feedback), and they got very offended by it, said that a friend wouldn't say that to them etc. Meanwhile they had some other friends telling them how great it/they are (even though those folks didn't mean it, but they didn't want to risk offending them). I wonder in that situation, who is the real friend? The person who will be honest with you even if it might be tough for you to hear, or the person who will just tell you what you want to hear even if it's not honest?

Eh, it's cool - as I said I'm done. I in general have given my feedback since I thought people in general would like to hear others' (including my) opinions (whether positive or negative). Yes I tend to be more verbose than most, but that's just my writing style, not intended to be spamming, just intended to try to be "complete".

Some posters, based on their comments above, seem to appreciate my feedback, but it seems SBR itself (assuming Optional speaks for them) doesn't want to hear it.

And since this is their site + their promotion, obviously they are the important ones in this so if they don't want to hear it, then no point. Easier on me, more hours in the day for me to spend on more important things!

Best of luck to everyone in the promotion - will see you at the tables!

You do this in every single poker promotion announcement thread.

I dare you to find a single one in the last 5 years, that's between 15 and 20 promotions in a row, where you do not have the same post percentage of repeating your negative "feedback" like you have here.

[ArunSh]

You do this in every single poker promotion announcement thread.

I dare you to find a single one in the last 5 years, that's between 15 and 20 promotions in a row, where you do not have the same post percentage of repeating your negative "feedback" like you have here.

As I basically alluded Optional - please just drop it. You don't like my way of doing things, that's cool - we all have folks that we don't get along with. I have told you that I'll stop posting "negative" feedback since that seems to be what you want - so please leave it at that, ok?

This is my final post on this thread - feel free to have the last word since that seems to be what you want.

[Optional]

What I would like is to see is the poker program flourish.

The powers that be notice these threads. You personally ensure every single one of them is not positive all on your own. And it has been pointed out more than a few times in the past.

Educate yourself and go and try and find one where you have not.

[Enkhbat]

I agree with Opti on this one, Arunsh is talking too much about the tiebreaker for 25th thing. We get it, no need to bring up the tiebreak thing again, lets move on.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

Optional, I think you are being a bit harsh on Arun. The way I'm reading it, he was just trying to get clarification on something and was not necessarily being negative. The promo looks pretty good to me. My only complaint would be that 100 qualifiers seems like too many, 50 or even 25 would probably be better. Just my .02, thanks SBR!

[USCPHILLYGUY]

Optional, I think you are being a bit harsh on Arun. The way I'm reading it, he was just trying to get clarification on something and was not necessarily being negative. The promo looks pretty good to me. My only complaint would be that 100 qualifiers seems like too many, 50 or even 25 would probably be better. Just my .02, thanks SBR!

Disagree Jake. Stupid response that I’m sure someone could have figured out down the road

Say what you want about Opti but he always has SBR’s best interest in mind.

Quite positive that 99% of the people bitching will be lining up to play once this starts.

[RudyRuetigger]

Disagree Jake. Stupid response that I’m sure someone could have figured out down the road

Say what you want about Opti but he always has SBR’s best interest in mind.

Quite positive that 99% of the people bitching will be lining up to play once this starts.

the format and all that, people dont need to complain about because the tourney is set and looks good...the time change makes perfect sense


sam listened and changed it from a winner take all


the only thing im saying is the tiebreaker is needed at the 100th place, not 25th


it wont make a difference to anyone except those at 100th and 101st place

[franklee168]

Can someone explain the tie breaker to me?

Calm down guys. It's not that serious. Most of us are good with each other.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

Can someone explain the tie breaker to me?

Calm down guys. It's not that serious. Most of us are good with each other.

[Carseller4]

As I basically alluded Optional - please just drop it. You don't like my way of doing things, that's cool - we all have folks that we don't get along with. I have told you that I'll stop posting "negative" feedback since that seems to be what you want - so please leave it at that, ok?

This is my final post on this thread - feel free to have the last word since that seems to be what you want.

Stay strong.

It's just criticism.

Some will forgive. Most won't.

Some will never forgive or forget you costing them a seat to the WSOP.

I know exactly what you are going through buddy.

[Carseller4]

BTW Arunsh:

I forgive you for costing someone a seat to the WSOP. My chances would have been very slim anyways.

[Crusherrr]

Stay strong.

It's just criticism.

Some will forgive. Most won't.

Some will never forgive or forget you costing them a seat to the WSOP.

I know exactly what you are going through buddy.

Put a sock in it. Shouldn't you be busy trying to scrounge up some betpoints for the casino and poker tournaments today?

[Carseller4]

Put a sock in it. Shouldn't you be busy trying to scrounge up some betpoints for the casino and poker tournaments today?

The way you have been playing poker lately it might have been you representing SBR.

Stay strong Arunsh. Posters on here have a very long memory and most are unforgiving no matter what you do to make up for it.

[Sam Losco]

Well yeah!

Thats what I pointed out.

I bet you can't find a single poker promo in the last 5 years where you have not done exactly the same. Spammed the thread with post after post repeating the same negative criticism.


Ya want a badge for spending 2000 words and half a dozen repeated posts pointing out that Sam made a simple error that makes next to zero difference?

Or a chest to pin it on?


You and the constant negative nancies that cant stop yourself doing the same thing every time is why you dont get 5 x $1500 seats to a millionaire maker tourney. Own it.

But go ahead and make another dissertation about how you are right about whatever waffle you are going on about... you should be just banned from poker IMHO. You work against its success so diligently. Almost as negative for the program as bobbywaves was I think.

And it's not like you have not been told a bunch of times either. So it's willfull damage now IMHO.

criticizing is almost as bad as scamming in your mind?

[Carseller4]

criticizing is almost as bad as scamming in your mind?

Costing someone on SBR getting a WSOP seat is pretty bad.

But ArunSh will get his forgiveness.

[Al Masters]

Im noticing a big Shari influence in Opti’s posting these days.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

Costing someone on SBR getting a WSOP seat is pretty bad.

But ArunSh will get his forgiveness.

Not many seem to care.

Try focusing on paying off your debts before throwing stones at others.

Thanks!

[cincinnatikid513]

Costing someone on SBR getting a WSOP seat is pretty bad.

But ArunSh will get his forgiveness.

like u had a chance

[Optional]

Im noticing a big Shari influence in Opti’s posting these days.

I've noticed a distinct Firedawg/Ronald tone to your posts lately.


Arun has history with this. A long history of throwing a wet blanket over every poker promotion. He is like a smiling white ant "I like poker, BUUUUT here is my problems with this promotion".

He wont go back and try to find one announcement thread where he has not done the same, but if you do you will see an escalating tone to my posts encouraging him to stop doing it over the years.

And quite frankly, the time has come to boot people who actively troll poker with negativity.

Sam tried to start a positive thread about a great new promo and post #2 is Arun being the same negative nancy.

Same as usual.

One post might be ok, but he has to repeat his crap every 5 or 6 posts in every poker promotion thread.



After his third or fourth useless whine about the same technical point, Sam kind of made it clear that he got it and why was Arun still going on.

Like "I got it the first 3 times Arun! How about you move on now?".

In response Arun chose to keep arguing he is right, and then when he didnt get any further repsonses, tried to drag it up again on the next page!



If you think I sound mad, or unreasonable, or unfair, GOOD!

Maybe banning Arun will get the few bad apples to see time where you can stick our your hand and take whilst undermining the poker program have ended.

[kaliboyz]

I've noticed a distinct Firedawg/Ronald tone to your posts lately.


Arun has history with this. A long history of throwing a wet blanket over every poker promotion. He is like a smiling white ant "I like poker, BUUUUT here is my problems with this promotion".

He wont go back and try to find one announcement thread where he has not done the same, but if you do you will see an escalating tone to my posts encouraging him to stop doing it over the years.

And quite frankly, the time has come to boot people who actively troll poker with negativity.

Sam tried to start a positive thread about a great new promo and post #2 is Arun being the same negative nancy.

Same as usual.

One post might be ok, but he has to repeat his crap every 5 or 6 posts in every poker promotion thread.



After his third or fourth useless whine about the same technical point, Sam kind of made it clear that he got it and why was Arun still going on.

Like "I got it the first 3 times Arun! How about you move on now?".

In response Arun chose to keep arguing he is right, and then when he didnt get any further repsonses, tried to drag it up again on the next page!



If you think I sound mad, or unreasonable, or unfair, GOOD!

Maybe banning Arun will get the few bad apples to see time where you can stick our your hand and take whilst undermining the poker program have ended.

Opti... Sometimes using your authorities to shutdown or ban a member is not a nice way to solve an issue. Just because he/she has a different angle or look on an issue then we have to make them disappear. We are living in a democracy country then we should treat each one fairly. Let sit down and bring all the negative/positive out so we all can discuss.. If we can't come up with a solution today, then bring it up tomorrow. Until we all can agree on the outcomes and work together as a team. I believe by doing that, we'll make SBR great again... #MSGA.

[Al Masters]

I've noticed a distinct Firedawg/Ronald tone to your posts lately.


Arun has history with this. A long history of throwing a wet blanket over every poker promotion. He is like a smiling white ant "I like poker, BUUUUT here is my problems with this promotion".

He wont go back and try to find one announcement thread where he has not done the same, but if you do you will see an escalating tone to my posts encouraging him to stop doing it over the years.

And quite frankly, the time has come to boot people who actively troll poker with negativity.

Sam tried to start a positive thread about a great new promo and post #2 is Arun being the same negative nancy.

Same as usual.

One post might be ok, but he has to repeat his crap every 5 or 6 posts in every poker promotion thread.



After his third or fourth useless whine about the same technical point, Sam kind of made it clear that he got it and why was Arun still going on.

Like "I got it the first 3 times Arun! How about you move on now?".

In response Arun chose to keep arguing he is right, and then when he didnt get any further repsonses, tried to drag it up again on the next page!



If you think I sound mad, or unreasonable, or unfair, GOOD!

Maybe banning Arun will get the few bad apples to see time where you can stick our your hand and take whilst undermining the poker program have ended.

Guys always been a big complainer... no doubt.

[Optional]

Opti... Sometimes using your authorities to shutdown or ban a member is not a nice way to solve an issue. Just because he/she has a different angle or look on an issue then we have to make them disappear. We are living in a democracy country then we should treat each one fairly. Let sit down and bring all the negative/positive out so we all can discuss.. If we can't come up with a solution today, then bring it up tomorrow. Until we all can agree on the outcomes and work together as a team. I believe by doing that, we'll make SBR great again... #MSGA.

Good post. I'll do as you say.

[Al Masters]

I've noticed a distinct Firedawg/Ronald tone to your posts

Funny I never really saw firedawg and Ronald as having similar posting styles.
or the same tone.

Ones a college football guy/ex tout the other is looking to hook
up with guys on a sports forum.