Dancer is part of an (ig)noble tradition.
Speck Parsons (aka Lawrence Revere) would finger his best students for the
casinos.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bob Dancer
Dancer is part of an (ig)noble tradition.
Speck Parsons (aka Lawrence Revere) would finger his best students for
the casinos.
···
**********************
These undocumented, unqualified comments may have a friendly and
humorous intention, but they can easily be interpreted as being
demeaning.
Demeaning comments aren't welcome on vpFREE, and often lead to a
disruptive thread. Please help make life easier for the vpFREE
Administrator - Don't post anything that is, or can easily be
interpreted as being, demeaning - or reply to, or comment on the
demeaning aspects of any such post.
This is a boiler plate administrative message that will be used by the
vpFREE Administrator whenever he deems appropriate. If any member's
comments trigger this message a second time, that member will be
moderated on vpFREE indefinitely.
**********************
vpFREE Administrator
> Dancer is part of an (ig)noble tradition.
> Speck Parsons (aka Lawrence Revere) would finger his best
students for
> the casinos.
These undocumented, unqualified comments may have a friendly and
humorous intention, but they can easily be interpreted as being
demeaning.
It seems to me a bit inconsistent to exalt certain members of the VP
guru community, as in the "Hall of Fame", while censoring negative
comments about those selfsame gurus.
Bob Dancer has shown, both by his own words and his admitted deeds
(as well as recent actions), that his ethics frequently take a back
seat to profit potential, and that he is not beyond jumping into bed
and snuggling cozily with the casino industry if the monetary
incentives exist to do so. He is, of course, welcome to do whatever
he wants to make a buck, but stating that he has cooperated with and
consulted for the casinos, INCLUDING identifying other pros, is
merely a statement of fact. It is the poster's implied opinion that
he disapproves of this.
THE POSTER IS ENTITLED TO HIS OPINION, AND SUCH OPINION IS WELL
WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THIS BOARD WHEN THE MERITS OR LACK THEREOF OF
CERTAIN VP "PERSONALITIES" ARE ALREADY UNDER INTENSE DISCUSSION.
So could we lighten up on this censorship crap? It's not like we're
the "Gaming Today" of the VP world and are just some stupid house
organ that can only print (or post) unqualified praise. THIS
particular emperor has no clothes; I can't see the harm in saying so.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_FREE" <vpFREE@C...> wrote:
> > Dancer is part of an (ig)noble tradition.
> > Speck Parsons (aka Lawrence Revere) would finger his best
> > students for the casinos.
To which, vp_FREE chastised
> These undocumented, unqualified comments may have a friendly and
> humorous intention, but they can easily be interpreted as being
> demeaning.
It seems to me a bit inconsistent to exalt certain members of the VP
guru community, as in the "Hall of Fame", while censoring negative
comments about those selfsame gurus.
There have been several negative comments about this VP guru on vpFREE
recently that haven't received my Solomon like <G> disapproval. The
incident in question might have escaped my wrath if it had been qualified
and documented as to Revere's actions and as to Dancer having done the same.
Bob Dancer has shown, both by his own words and his admitted deeds (as
well as recent actions), that his ethics frequently take a back seat
to profit potential, and that he is not beyond jumping into bed and
snuggling cozily with the casino industry if the monetary incentives
exist to do so. He is, of course, welcome to do whatever he wants to
make a buck, but stating that he has cooperated with and consulted for
the casinos,
I don't have a problem with any of the above.
INCLUDING identifying other pros, is merely a statement
of fact.
Please document.
I own, but haven't read Bob's book, and have read and heard a lot of things
about him, but I'm not aware that he has identified other pros to casinos.
I wouldn't have chastised the poster of the Dancer/Revere analogy if this
were, to my knowledge, an established fact.
It is the poster's implied opinion that he disapproves of this.
I'm confused as to what this means, so I won't address this sentence.
THE POSTER IS ENTITLED TO HIS OPINION, AND SUCH OPINION IS WELL
WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THIS BOARD WHEN THE MERITS OR LACK THEREOF OF
CERTAIN VP "PERSONALITIES" ARE ALREADY UNDER INTENSE DISCUSSION.
All posters are entitled to their opinions, but UNDOCUMENTED, negative
comments about anyone aren't welcome on vpFREE.
So could we lighten up on this censorship crap? It's not like we're
the "Gaming Today" of the VP world and are just some stupid house
organ that can only print (or post) unqualified praise. THIS particular
emperor has no clothes; I can't see the harm in saying so.
vpFREE isn't a GAMING TODAY or a NATIONAL ENQUIRER. vpFREE is is a free forum
for discussing and exchanging information about video poker and video poker
related topics. Although I personally prefer a free speech forum, and read
every word on vp_heaven for a couple of years, it's my judgment that the
posting rules that we have on vpFREE are necessary and appropriate.
I really hate my moderating responsibilities, and spend a lot of time
agonizing over censorship decisions.
Suggestions for improvement are always welcome, but in the final analysis,
vpFREE isn't a democracy. It's a benovelent (hopefully) dictatorship.
vpFREE Administrator
···
On 27 Jul 2003 at 1:57, mkl54321 wrote:
Tom et all,
Isn't this why you set up freevpfree as an unmoderated almost-
anything-goes board, subject only to peer scrutiny? I was amazed
when I posted on freevpfree two days ago to see that no post had been
made since April! It is the perfect place to continue threads that
threaten to get out of hand, and I recommend it for those who feel
the need (as I did) to rant against perceived injustices, moronic
viewpoints (which may describe mine at times), or to deliver
unsubstantiated rumor-mongering diatribes (hear the latest about so-
and-so secretly funding X's new book? Whoa!).
lb
vpFREE isn't a GAMING TODAY or a NATIONAL ENQUIRER. vpFREE is is a
free forum
for discussing and exchanging information about video poker and
video poker
related topics. Although I personally prefer a free speech forum,
and read
every word on vp_heaven for a couple of years, it's my judgment
that the
posting rules that we have on vpFREE are necessary and appropriate.
I really hate my moderating responsibilities, and spend a lot of
time
agonizing over censorship decisions.
Suggestions for improvement are always welcome, but in the final
analysis,
vpFREE isn't a democracy. It's a benovelent (hopefully)
dictatorship.
···
vpFREE Administrator
vpFREE isn't a GAMING TODAY or a NATIONAL ENQUIRER. vpFREE is is a
free forum > for discussing and exchanging information about video
poker and video poker related topics. Although I personally
prefer a free speech forum, and read every word on vp_heaven for
a couple of years, it's my judgment that the posting rules that we have on
vpFREE are necessary and appropriate.
Isn't this why you set up freevpfree as an unmoderated almost-
anything-goes board, subject only to peer scrutiny?
Yes.
I was amazed when I posted on freevpfree two days ago to see that
no post had been made since April! It is the perfect place to
continue threads that threaten to get out of hand, and I recommend
it for those who feel the need (as I did) to rant against perceived
injustices, moronic viewpoints (which may describe mine at times),
or to deliver unsubstantiated rumor-mongering diatribes (hear the
latest about so- and-so secretly funding X's new book? Whoa!).
At present, I'm content that FREEvpFREE exists and is available as a free
speech adjunct to vpFREE. I would like to see FREEvpFREE become an active,
viable forum, but accomplishing this isn't at the top of my list, yet.
vpFREE Administrator
···
On 27 Jul 2003 at 4:30, lawrenceboxer wrote: