PURPLE BANS FRED NORRIS II FOR BULLSH*T

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

panther, he only had 11 posts

a few of them are in this thread Fred Norris II

you might not agree with him, but it is not as though he has "nothing" to offer

bullsh*t banning

Dante · May 28, 2003

hammy...if you can get fred to just post even as ruff as you or some other posters that post ruff thats FINE..the instant flame everytime is horrid...he could stay if he would only do that ....but he likes what hes doing...its comic

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>HAmmy...did you see this post that UB caught before your thread was started ..was this after the supposed clean slate?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

that was after the bs banning

bartybet · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>you might not agree with him, but it is not as though he has "nothing" to offer <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

where were you when he was all his other ghosts....other then kniwing ray meyers is a sack of shit...what else does he know?

Dante · May 28, 2003

well i had no problem with the fred norris II name..that name was posting at least not 24/7 flames to everyone

TheGeneral+ · May 28, 2003

I cannot believe there is a need to argue the biggest ****ing joke of a poster that internet forums has ever seen.

He is a piece of shit.

The guy has repeatedly told Ken he is awaiting his mother in law to die.

She happens to be very sick.

Hammy, your attempt here at criticism to a moderator who handled this waste of sperm is unbelievable.

WTF next? Bin Laden to be forgiven.

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

General, no question he deserved to be banned in the past

This was a clean slate

enjoy your day

bartybet · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> General, no question he deserved to be banned in the past

This was a clean slate

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

who said it was a clean slate? a moderator or the owner of the site?

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`•¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.•´
............\..............(
..............\.............

Journeyman · May 28, 2003

give me back my finger hammy!

RPM · May 28, 2003

ham, not that this is open for discussion, but tell me something positive fred has EVER offered to the site? ANYTHING.

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

j man, "your" finger?

i know where u stole it from, fraudboy

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

RPM, see above link

Actually, look at his posts about poker..all 11 of his posts have quality stuff in it.

The guy gambles, RPM, and has a brain

As I said, he gambles more than 99.9% of people on this site

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

RPM, show me your last post about gambling

thanks

panther · May 28, 2003

hammy, guys

I thought this was a players issue.

this is on the book end.

theirfore I will SHUT THE HELL UP

panther

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> General-

Fair enough if "just pertaining" to offshore is the prerequisite for a post to be considered legit.

As I said it was my observation and mine only. Just trying once again to have people use their OWN VOICE to fix a problem rather than come in here with a "unique slant" on a situation. And with that I will give you a 100% true statement to back up my observation.
How many times do you see a player state a problem with a book and not give up the name of the book in question? Answer: 100%! In those situations the player always tries to fix the problem first without "snitching" on the book. If the players are so inclined to talk with the book about a LEGIT problem, then color me blue if you're going to tell me that this situation does not warrant the same reaction.

And no I do not work for OLYMPIC. I do not work for any of the books and I think you know that. OLY's software sucks and has been admitted to by Wally. An upgrade would cost a pretty penny( not that cheapo Spiro can't afford it) but until that update comes the glitches will have to come with territory. A pretty fair trade off for the knowledge that you can sleep at night knowing your money will be there waiting for you in the morning. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Pat-

Are the players going to be as solid as the 80 game I frequent? Game has been easier this past month. I was actually thinking that I have been getting better, then an old timer pointed out to me that all the players have been in Vegas this past month. Kinda brought me back to Earth.

I did look at Big Bet and am "not too thrilled" with the match play bonus.

1. The wording is very vague with regard to the manner in which the bonus will be added.

2. The amount in question (max $75) is not worth all the stipulations that they seem to be imposing.

3. The "mumbo-jumbo" way in which they explain the loyal dollars or whatever they are called smells a "little fishy" if you ask me. Not saying that they are wrong, but stating that all is not what it may seem to be.

Whatever happened to, "Deposit $75, play 5 or 10 times rollover and the bonus money is yours to keep." I guess that would be too easy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

show me the best of your last 10 posts, RPM

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Fred Norris II

Mildly Insane
posted May 27, 2003 02:50 AM
Players-

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only idiot in the lot. Confusing -definitely, Concise-definitely not, Misleading-Probably, Trying to pull the wool over our eyes-FOR SURE!

I agree with your evaluation on the buy-in amount. I have never started out in a game with only 3/4 of a rack. In a 3/6 game $100 has got to be the min. Would probably recommend at least another $100 or more in reserve. One must be able to survive an early run of gut shots, river cards and bad beats. The rack that is recommended will not be able to withstand the usual "horseshit" that I see weekly. Anyway, I am getting a little too serious with the money portion of the game. Afterall the game is solely for fun (I assume). Nobody is going to get rich (I assume). Nobody is going to miss their buy-in (I REALLY ASSUME). So for fun the game sounds like it should be a hoot.

Getting back to the subject-The bonus program with which Big Bet is promoating has too many hoops to jump through. I believe they need to be a little more precise with their explanation.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hamneggs · May 28, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by RPM:
ham, not that this is open for discussion, but tell me something positive fred has EVER offered to the site? ANYTHING.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK RPM he only had 11 posts and I showed you a few of them above. You can't say that the guy offered "nothing," that is bullsh*t and you know it.

Ok, show me your "best of RPM" posts.