Remind me to never start a poll again, LOL.
Lander - I didn't brush you off, I just don't have time to type out all that in AOL right now. You know how many boxes I have open right now? 11 on AOL and if my MSN wasn't down I'd have 11 more over there probably. LOL. Also another 15 browsers or so open and was on the phone when you sent me the first message. LOL. I wasn't mad I said post what you know, I won't be angry. If you think we are wrong you think we are wrong. Won't be the first or the last. Contrary to popular belief we like folks who think for themselves, its just nice when they are wrong they are man enough to admit it.
Lander - I didn't brush you off, I just don't have time to type out all that in AOL right now. You know how many boxes I have open right now? 11 on AOL and if my MSN wasn't down I'd have 11 more over there probably. LOL. Also another 15 browsers or so open and was on the phone when you sent me the first message. LOL. I wasn't mad I said post what you know, I won't be angry. If you think we are wrong you think we are wrong. Won't be the first or the last. Contrary to popular belief we like folks who think for themselves, its just nice when they are wrong they are man enough to admit it.
By the way like most issues I'm not providing a social commentary on beards or bonus chasers. Just because I don't feel a book can rightfully confiscate money from these guys does not mean I condone it all. Sort of like if someone committed a robbery. I do not support what he did but don't think he should get the electric chair either. To go back and steal all the players money is way too harsh a punishment for the crime, that's all. Keep their bonuses and make them pay all fees but you can't keep their money? Why in hell would any book even want to? Of course for the book it is the most profitbale punishment but it does not make it the fairest.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patrick McIrish:
By the way like most issues I'm not providing a social commentary on beards or bonus chasers. Just because I don't feel a book can rightfully confiscate money from these guys does not mean I condone it all. Sort of like if someone committed a robbery. I do not support what he did but don't think he should get the electric chair either. To go back and steal all the players money is way too harsh a punishment for the crime, that's all. Keep their bonuses and make them pay all fees but you can't keep their money? Why in hell would any book even want to? Of course for the book it is the most profitbale punishment but it does not make it the fairest.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
patrick taking there money is to harsh and giving them there money less bonus' doesn't seem harsh enough. is there an inbetween that you would settle for. where both side were content but not comming out smelling like roses
By the way like most issues I'm not providing a social commentary on beards or bonus chasers. Just because I don't feel a book can rightfully confiscate money from these guys does not mean I condone it all. Sort of like if someone committed a robbery. I do not support what he did but don't think he should get the electric chair either. To go back and steal all the players money is way too harsh a punishment for the crime, that's all. Keep their bonuses and make them pay all fees but you can't keep their money? Why in hell would any book even want to? Of course for the book it is the most profitbale punishment but it does not make it the fairest.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
patrick taking there money is to harsh and giving them there money less bonus' doesn't seem harsh enough. is there an inbetween that you would settle for. where both side were content but not comming out smelling like roses
if ewinner was willing to deal that is. i don't see them being as horrible as others do in this deal. but one thing for certain is they should be willing to discuss the issue. their i said so thats why is not good enough. if they have righteous indignation, good then sell everyone on it. shutting up is not the right call in my opinion
i also think cooler heads could prevail in this situation
i also think cooler heads could prevail in this situation
Ewinner, up until this point, I have given you the benefit of the doubt in the absence of any proof against you.
At this point, it is time for you to defend yourself and present your side of the case.
If you think that Shrink and\or the Rx is biased against you, you also advertise at MW & Bworld. There are a lot of impartial people out there who can mediate this issue. If you have a case, you owe it to yourself to defend your name.
At this point, it is time for you to defend yourself and present your side of the case.
If you think that Shrink and\or the Rx is biased against you, you also advertise at MW & Bworld. There are a lot of impartial people out there who can mediate this issue. If you have a case, you owe it to yourself to defend your name.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ballsofblue:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patrick McIrish:
By the way like most issues I'm not providing a social commentary on beards or bonus chasers. Just because I don't feel a book can rightfully confiscate money from these guys does not mean I condone it all. Sort of like if someone committed a robbery. I do not support what he did but don't think he should get the electric chair either. To go back and steal all the players money is way too harsh a punishment for the crime, that's all. Keep their bonuses and make them pay all fees but you can't keep their money? Why in hell would any book even want to? Of course for the book it is the most profitbale punishment but it does not make it the fairest.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
patrick taking there money is to harsh and giving them there money less bonus' doesn't seem harsh enough. is there an inbetween that you would settle for. where both side were content but not comming out smelling like roses<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Blue - we don't appreciate a voice of reason posting in this thread!! LOL.
Actually you make legit points. I think that would have been a good place to start. People get tired of hearing it but we make compromises all the time between book and player. More times than not neither side is virgin pure so you do just what you are suggesting. That's why it's tough if you can not communicate with one of the parties. I'm all for it but I'm not sure see what purpose it would serve? Royal has already came through so the players didn't end up getting stiffed and Ewinner seems comfortable in their actions.
I would be more than willing to listen to anything but doubt there is going to be much movement here. I said it before I thought he was a decent guy all along and spent quite a while chatting with him at the party. You just can't take everything from the players in my honest opinion and call yourself a bookie. Jared can call me anytime though, I promise I won't yell at anyone. LOL. Or if we can do anything else, let us now. Life's to short to not try and work things out if you can.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patrick McIrish:
By the way like most issues I'm not providing a social commentary on beards or bonus chasers. Just because I don't feel a book can rightfully confiscate money from these guys does not mean I condone it all. Sort of like if someone committed a robbery. I do not support what he did but don't think he should get the electric chair either. To go back and steal all the players money is way too harsh a punishment for the crime, that's all. Keep their bonuses and make them pay all fees but you can't keep their money? Why in hell would any book even want to? Of course for the book it is the most profitbale punishment but it does not make it the fairest.
I say this because we often get "so the Rx supports cheating now!!" Or some other extreme reaction to it. We won't all see things the same but just because I don't want all the players money taken over a rules violation does not mean I support what they did. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
patrick taking there money is to harsh and giving them there money less bonus' doesn't seem harsh enough. is there an inbetween that you would settle for. where both side were content but not comming out smelling like roses<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Blue - we don't appreciate a voice of reason posting in this thread!! LOL.
Actually you make legit points. I think that would have been a good place to start. People get tired of hearing it but we make compromises all the time between book and player. More times than not neither side is virgin pure so you do just what you are suggesting. That's why it's tough if you can not communicate with one of the parties. I'm all for it but I'm not sure see what purpose it would serve? Royal has already came through so the players didn't end up getting stiffed and Ewinner seems comfortable in their actions.
I would be more than willing to listen to anything but doubt there is going to be much movement here. I said it before I thought he was a decent guy all along and spent quite a while chatting with him at the party. You just can't take everything from the players in my honest opinion and call yourself a bookie. Jared can call me anytime though, I promise I won't yell at anyone. LOL. Or if we can do anything else, let us now. Life's to short to not try and work things out if you can.
Patrick,
Give me a call anytime- email me at ewinnercom@hotmail.com i would be more than happy to discuss things with you. I will call you tomorrow just shoot me a number and a time and we can go over things.
Best!
Give me a call anytime- email me at ewinnercom@hotmail.com i would be more than happy to discuss things with you. I will call you tomorrow just shoot me a number and a time and we can go over things.
Best!
I had a good conversation with EWinner. Still trying to get to the bottom of it all and come to some sort of resolution on it. Other than the fact I felt it was a positive conversation there is nothing further to report as of now. I will keep everyone updated when there is.
Reminds me of a story. They spoke with a man who literally walked around the world. They asked him which was the toughest single step you took? The step over in the Far East where they threatened to shoot you? The step where you developed blisters and could hardly move? The last step where you legs had cramped up so bad you could hardly stand? The man said no, no and no. The hardest was the first step in the journey. Once you get that out of the way the rest is easy......
Reminds me of a story. They spoke with a man who literally walked around the world. They asked him which was the toughest single step you took? The step over in the Far East where they threatened to shoot you? The step where you developed blisters and could hardly move? The last step where you legs had cramped up so bad you could hardly stand? The man said no, no and no. The hardest was the first step in the journey. Once you get that out of the way the rest is easy......
Patrick,
Good to know that you guys at least communicate.
But why waste your valuable time over the phone.
EWINNER has so far refused to answer my questions regarding me and a friend joining them and allowing us to have identical plays left alone me putting bets on for him and visa versa.
And why did they not take any action when they got suspicious about the accounts, but simply waited till those guys won?
Good to know that you guys at least communicate.
But why waste your valuable time over the phone.
EWINNER has so far refused to answer my questions regarding me and a friend joining them and allowing us to have identical plays left alone me putting bets on for him and visa versa.
And why did they not take any action when they got suspicious about the accounts, but simply waited till those guys won?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by acw:
EWINNER has so far refused to answer my questions regarding me and a friend joining them and allowing us to have identical plays left alone me putting bets on for him and visa versa.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Looks like Pancho was right.
EWINNER has so far refused to answer my questions regarding me and a friend joining them and allowing us to have identical plays left alone me putting bets on for him and visa versa.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Looks like Pancho was right.
