No I don't Chips, if you stiff one person your a stiff in my book. Period. I had players that stiffed us but paid out other outs (until they found a "reason" to stiff them too) but like them you are a stiff from day one when you stiff the first person. You don't become one when you stiff 100% of the people.
Where do they come up with this? You're not really a stiff if you only pick and choose who you don't pay? Incredible. Would they be a rat if they just dropped a dime on one place? Or if they remain silent on others not really a rat until they report everyone? Give it up.
Where do they come up with this? You're not really a stiff if you only pick and choose who you don't pay? Incredible. Would they be a rat if they just dropped a dime on one place? Or if they remain silent on others not really a rat until they report everyone? Give it up.
Patrick, get a clue man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know this site has taken a stand on this issue and your working here affects your judgement but:
SCAMMERS GOT STIFFED, NOT PLAYERS!!!!!!!!!!
Big Difference here!!!!
I agree with your statement, that if you stiff one player you are a stiff, but there is more to the story than anybody knows, if I ran the book they get paid every penny with the exception of the bonus money, but I dont and I need to know more about the situation before I call anyone a Stiff Book, those are harsh words and you are using them wrong here!
I know this site has taken a stand on this issue and your working here affects your judgement but:
SCAMMERS GOT STIFFED, NOT PLAYERS!!!!!!!!!!
Big Difference here!!!!
I agree with your statement, that if you stiff one player you are a stiff, but there is more to the story than anybody knows, if I ran the book they get paid every penny with the exception of the bonus money, but I dont and I need to know more about the situation before I call anyone a Stiff Book, those are harsh words and you are using them wrong here!
Lander - if you have money there get it out, but don't try and play the "everything is fine and dandy" card. If you really believe all is fine give Shrink a call, seriously. You're not a dumb guy.
It's a bad feeling when you lead lambs to the slaughter. You don't want to do it twice.
It's a bad feeling when you lead lambs to the slaughter. You don't want to do it twice.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patrick McIrish:
No I don't Chips, if you stiff _one_ person your a stiff in my book. Period.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Patrick, let's at least try to be fair here. Whether or not these players were actually stiffed appears to be a "judgement call" right now based on what has been proven-which, best I can tell, isn't shit.
We have no proof that there are any financial problems with the book, and that's a problem given the accusations that have been made by this site. Regardless, a player\group\syndicate dispute DOES NOT necessarily mean that a book is in the red-which is what this site has publicly stated.
Is it wrong to want proof to back some pretty damn serious claims?
No I don't Chips, if you stiff _one_ person your a stiff in my book. Period.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Patrick, let's at least try to be fair here. Whether or not these players were actually stiffed appears to be a "judgement call" right now based on what has been proven-which, best I can tell, isn't shit.
We have no proof that there are any financial problems with the book, and that's a problem given the accusations that have been made by this site. Regardless, a player\group\syndicate dispute DOES NOT necessarily mean that a book is in the red-which is what this site has publicly stated.
Is it wrong to want proof to back some pretty damn serious claims?
Chips - I've hated rats and stiffs LONG before I worked here and will hate them long after I leave. At least now you admit they are stiffs, just the players "deserved" it according to you. First it was they can't be stiffs if they don't stiff everyone, now it's yes they are stiffs but only certain players. LOL.
I've never been stiffed where I didn't "deserve" it according to the player. I think I understand your position now.
I've never been stiffed where I didn't "deserve" it according to the player. I think I understand your position now.
Patrick, please listen to yourself, you sound like a fool, THIS IS NOT A STIFF AS FAR AS WE KNOW, but yet you labled them a stiff book, how is that possible??? Also where did I say they deserved to be stiffed???? If I run a book and a guy past posts me on a baseball game on the net and bets 10k on a team leading 7-0 top of the 1st and I take his money AM I A STIFF BOOK AS WELL???? If I put 10,000 into the wrong account in my book, lets say 5543 sent 10,000 thru Neteller and I credited 5544 with 10,000 and he bets it all and wins, and I dont pay him, AM I A STIFF BOOK????? There is far more to this story than you want to admit, and you want to call them a stiff book which is wrong and you come with the old stiff one player and you are a stiff book, wrong arguemnet here Patrick!
Tin - there is not proof enough in the world for some people. If Jesus showed up on the home page and said yes EWinner is broke, some wouldn't believe it. Shrink paid Scotty to beam down a dressed up Dr Spock they would say.
You have to read between the lines a little, if you can't or won't do that then continue playing there. What else can I say. A self described watchdog site pulls them off the site with a paid up contract. A source very close informs us they are busted and waiting on money. The source tells of a player dispute which the book couldn't pay if they wanted to. Another book steps up to take on the players who were not paid in the dispute. Owner of watchdog site practically begs owner of EWinner to call. Owner of book vehemetly refuses to pick up phone. Each time is there some "justification" for why it might be the RX's fault. You said "if they pulled my banners wouldn't you be mad Patrick"? Damn right I would be mad but if I hadn't did anything wrong I couldn't wait to get to a phone to straighten this out!!! What would you do Tin? Your paid up and did nothing wrong but your banners disappear. Say oh well thats the way it goes, or pick up the phone and call the Shrink? Come on guys, give it up.
I'm done with the issue anyway. I don't have time to carry on any longer. If this is the Shrink or some popular conspiracy theory then so be it. Our responsibility is done and I feel good about my actions. I hope they get funds and continue to pay everyone, I really do. They've only stiffed certain players so far. Beam me up Scotty.....
You have to read between the lines a little, if you can't or won't do that then continue playing there. What else can I say. A self described watchdog site pulls them off the site with a paid up contract. A source very close informs us they are busted and waiting on money. The source tells of a player dispute which the book couldn't pay if they wanted to. Another book steps up to take on the players who were not paid in the dispute. Owner of watchdog site practically begs owner of EWinner to call. Owner of book vehemetly refuses to pick up phone. Each time is there some "justification" for why it might be the RX's fault. You said "if they pulled my banners wouldn't you be mad Patrick"? Damn right I would be mad but if I hadn't did anything wrong I couldn't wait to get to a phone to straighten this out!!! What would you do Tin? Your paid up and did nothing wrong but your banners disappear. Say oh well thats the way it goes, or pick up the phone and call the Shrink? Come on guys, give it up.
I'm done with the issue anyway. I don't have time to carry on any longer. If this is the Shrink or some popular conspiracy theory then so be it. Our responsibility is done and I feel good about my actions. I hope they get funds and continue to pay everyone, I really do. They've only stiffed certain players so far. Beam me up Scotty.....
Patrick:
Firstly, I have no idea what the real situation is with e-winner, and I won't pretend that I do.
Having said that, let's assume for a moment that what The Rx says about e-winner is true.
2 questions:
1. Shouldn't you be on Sirbet's ass for hosting, and continuing to host, a stiff book ? You certainly were livid with Buckeye, back in the day, for hosting Wagers Paradise - remember ?
2. Have you considered removing Sirbet as an advertiser until they boot e-winner ?
Firstly, I have no idea what the real situation is with e-winner, and I won't pretend that I do.
Having said that, let's assume for a moment that what The Rx says about e-winner is true.
2 questions:
1. Shouldn't you be on Sirbet's ass for hosting, and continuing to host, a stiff book ? You certainly were livid with Buckeye, back in the day, for hosting Wagers Paradise - remember ?
2. Have you considered removing Sirbet as an advertiser until they boot e-winner ?
Lander - if you have money there get it out, but don't try and play the "everything is fine and dandy" card.
I DO NOT have money there. I did for 2 days when Sirbet was down & EWinner wasn't ONLY because I had to get in some wise guy UFC plays. Once Sirbet was back up I w/d from EWinner. This, by mere coincidence, was the day of the alleged scamming/stiffing scandal.
However, to prove to you my stance - I repeated URGED Rio to take Clauds fraudulent accounts and confiscate them or give them to charity. Rio WILL CONFIRM THIS.
If you really believe all is fine give Shrink a call, seriously. You're not a dumb guy.
Thanks for the offer, Pat, but the truth is that Shrink has offered to talk with any posters, any time. An invite has never been needed for anyone before.
It's a bad feeling when you lead lambs to the slaughter. You don't want to do it twice.
I'm not sure what you are implying - but I perceive myself to be as pro-player as you were. I have NEVER led anyone astray. I just told you of the Rio situation. Further evidence can be found with my Royal stance - hell, I work with Royal on the lines - but I sure as heck am not putting other posters at risk when I have doubts myself. This goes for any book that I work with, or any book that advertises here.
This has ALWAYS been my position.
I DO NOT have money there. I did for 2 days when Sirbet was down & EWinner wasn't ONLY because I had to get in some wise guy UFC plays. Once Sirbet was back up I w/d from EWinner. This, by mere coincidence, was the day of the alleged scamming/stiffing scandal.
However, to prove to you my stance - I repeated URGED Rio to take Clauds fraudulent accounts and confiscate them or give them to charity. Rio WILL CONFIRM THIS.
If you really believe all is fine give Shrink a call, seriously. You're not a dumb guy.
Thanks for the offer, Pat, but the truth is that Shrink has offered to talk with any posters, any time. An invite has never been needed for anyone before.
It's a bad feeling when you lead lambs to the slaughter. You don't want to do it twice.
I'm not sure what you are implying - but I perceive myself to be as pro-player as you were. I have NEVER led anyone astray. I just told you of the Rio situation. Further evidence can be found with my Royal stance - hell, I work with Royal on the lines - but I sure as heck am not putting other posters at risk when I have doubts myself. This goes for any book that I work with, or any book that advertises here.
This has ALWAYS been my position.
Patrick and others, I want to clear something up.
I stand behind the Rx 100% for taking E-Winner off the site, its better to error on the side of the players than the other way around, but you are way off base with the Stiff Book comment, its out of line till all the facts are know, people wont get paid if they cheat, do u think cheaters such as hackers and past posters a should be paid as well??
I stand behind the Rx 100% for taking E-Winner off the site, its better to error on the side of the players than the other way around, but you are way off base with the Stiff Book comment, its out of line till all the facts are know, people wont get paid if they cheat, do u think cheaters such as hackers and past posters a should be paid as well??
>>>Patrick:
Firstly, I have no idea what the real situation is with e-winner, and I won't pretend that I do.<<<
Thanks for your honesty, shame more can't admit that.
First off I wasn't livid with anyone. Upset? Sure. Damned right I asked questions too. But instead of coming out here for weeks and hundreds of posts I ended up calling Buckeye and discussed it man to man. I told him what Wagers Paradise had posted (that they were affiliated) and we discussed the issue. I was satisfied with what he said and moved on. Amazing what that phone will do when you call someone. And by the way I was just a regular poster when I did all this, I didn't work for anyone. This was the days when they tried to bring books like Pro 5 up top, so yes I was always very suspicious of anything. I'd be lying if I said otherwise.
For SirBet, Shrink makes every call on who advertises. If I had a call I wouldn't pull them though, why would I? Corby and SirBet claim they are nothing more than a service provider for EWinner, I believe them. Just like in the Buckeye situation with Wagers Paradise. If you have information pointing otherwise I am sure Shrink would love to hear about it but I can't kick Corby under the bus for what EWinner is doing.
Firstly, I have no idea what the real situation is with e-winner, and I won't pretend that I do.<<<
Thanks for your honesty, shame more can't admit that.
First off I wasn't livid with anyone. Upset? Sure. Damned right I asked questions too. But instead of coming out here for weeks and hundreds of posts I ended up calling Buckeye and discussed it man to man. I told him what Wagers Paradise had posted (that they were affiliated) and we discussed the issue. I was satisfied with what he said and moved on. Amazing what that phone will do when you call someone. And by the way I was just a regular poster when I did all this, I didn't work for anyone. This was the days when they tried to bring books like Pro 5 up top, so yes I was always very suspicious of anything. I'd be lying if I said otherwise.
For SirBet, Shrink makes every call on who advertises. If I had a call I wouldn't pull them though, why would I? Corby and SirBet claim they are nothing more than a service provider for EWinner, I believe them. Just like in the Buckeye situation with Wagers Paradise. If you have information pointing otherwise I am sure Shrink would love to hear about it but I can't kick Corby under the bus for what EWinner is doing.
"Since Ewinner is done lets try a new approach"
Once again, excuse me, but WHAT THE FUKK?
Now Ewinner is "done"? Why, because all the mods & their ghost accounts pulled out?
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. If we can all make unproven claims, no point in holding back. My claim is just as proven as the one that they were broke.
Once again, excuse me, but WHAT THE FUKK?
Now Ewinner is "done"? Why, because all the mods & their ghost accounts pulled out?
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. If we can all make unproven claims, no point in holding back. My claim is just as proven as the one that they were broke.
Right Tin, just like your Securebuxx claim huh? "Everything's fine, nobody has anything to worry about". If the Rx was involved you'd have died of hunger before you left your computer banging out conspiracy theories against us. Instead when we lay the cards out on the table it's a big deal with you. Or at least the effort is there to make it one.
Securebuxx scam - no big deal.
Us pulling an advertiser over concerns expressed to us - major scam.
We know your game Tin, what a joke!
Securebuxx scam - no big deal.
Us pulling an advertiser over concerns expressed to us - major scam.
We know your game Tin, what a joke!
