Another stupid ethics question - Page 21

yvesaint · #**201** 01-18-2007, 04:58 AM

make more assumptions, daliman, make more assumptions. cole never let me listen to the voice mail. im across the country from him.

i just correctly deduced what your message would most likely sound like, because its quite obvious how you respond to every single situation like this

BobboFitos · #**202** 01-18-2007, 04:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
apparently I just found out my friendship is worth far less than $60 to cts

[/ QUOTE ]
are you seriously this retarded?

[/ QUOTE ]
Mike, give me $60. If you don't do it, I'll know our friendship means less to you than $60. You bastard.

[/ QUOTE ]

man, imagine if you could do that? that would be awesome.. 'you're not my friend unless you PAY ME THE MONEY'

yvesaint · #**203** 01-18-2007, 05:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
For the next 2 months now, when I post strategy, I am going to get 2 or 3 posts saying I should ask for my blinds back. maybe (probably) more.

[/ QUOTE ]

mmmm, i see. so i guess this stuff really does hurt your feelings, doesnt it.

Daliman · #**204** 01-18-2007, 05:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Dali,

"a blind give-back situation"

If you say "the next hand I'll fold my blind to you" which one might do for various reasons, then I'm sure you would fold any two cards.

However, that hand was the first hand after you sat down and posted your blind. So, should players now assume that if anyone they know sits down at the table, the first hand is by default a "blind give-back situation" until they have chatted with each other and verified that they are actually playing poker rather than accidentally sitting down or soliciting flipping contests?

[/ QUOTE ]

At some point, it's comes down to a matter of trust. My take on this is he didn't trust my intentions. He either believed my intentions, or he didn't. Maybe he doesn't trust ANYONE'S intentions in situations like this, which given the current state of affairs in online poker is COMPLETELY reasonable. But from a friend, I expect better. This is not the first time I have been disappointed more due to what are apparently outsized expectations of my friends than their own ethical compass. It has cost me a lot of time, SEVERAL thousand $$$( when I was making 30k a year), and a few friends.

yvesaint · #**205** 01-18-2007, 05:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dali,

"a blind give-back situation"

If you say "the next hand I'll fold my blind to you" which one might do for various reasons, then I'm sure you would fold any two cards.

However, that hand was the first hand after you sat down and posted your blind. So, should players now assume that if anyone they know sits down at the table, the first hand is by default a "blind give-back situation" until they have chatted with each other and verified that they are actually playing poker rather than accidentally sitting down or soliciting flipping contests?

[/ QUOTE ]

At some point, it's comes down to a matter of trust. My take on this is he didn't trust my intentions. He either believed my intentions, or he didn't. Maybe he doesn't trust ANYONE'S intentions in situations like this, which given the current state of affairs in online poker is COMPLETELY reasonable. But from a friend, I expect better. This is not the first time I have been disappointed more due to what are apparently outsized expectations of my friends than their own ethical compass. It has cost me a lot of time, SEVERAL thousand $$$( when I was making 30k a year), and a few friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

its not that he didnt "trust" your intentions. you said "give me back my blind next hand" and he said "NO" very clearly, and you STILL posted the blind.

Daliman · #**206** 01-18-2007, 05:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For the next 2 months now, when I post strategy, I am going to get 2 or 3 posts saying I should ask for my blinds back. maybe (probably) more.

[/ QUOTE ]

mmmm, i see. so i guess this stuff really does hurt your feelings, doesnt it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It just gets annoying, and you've seen how well I handle being annoyed.

FWIW, Yves, I didn't say anything more than "such good material" in your recent trainwreck of a thread. I easily could have, but again, I had been trying to be better about these sort of things.

yvesaint · #**207** 01-18-2007, 05:05 AM

and to say "i thought he was kidding" is a reasonable explanation, but obviously not a reasonable argument. it illustrates how blindly dumb you are to this sort of situation. if a simple "no" wouldnt suffice for cole to refuse a flip and refuse to "give you back your blind" the next hand, what would it take to tell you he wouldnt do such things? proof of identity, signed documents, maybe a voice mail?

BobboFitos · #**208** 01-18-2007, 05:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Fellow TBG victims,

How many of you have fallen for "Hey, wanna play some NL25 for fun drunken poker? Yeah? OK, cool transfer me a buying so I can play too. Damn, lost it. Hey, transfer me two or three more buyins so I can play for real, OK?"

[/ QUOTE ]

we should have group therapy sessions

lapoker17 · #**209** 01-18-2007, 05:09 AM

daliman - intimating that you are on some different (and higher) ethical plane than nearly all of the respondents here is a joke. it's a joke because

a) this thread as it has been presented ("did cts do something wrong?") has little to do with ethics - in fact if there is any ethical debate to be had at all it is whether your asking for the money back is unethical...

and

b) because numerous posters who have demonstrated ethical soundness over many years and many posts are also telling you you're wrong.

stop acting like a martyr.

Daliman · #**210** 01-18-2007, 05:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dali, it's fairly simple. People are making fun of you for what you did. You made fun of her for being a lesbian and it was not in a friendly joking way. That's no different than making fun of someone for being Jewish and that seems to have been an instaban in some cases.

I think it is immature to make fun of Dids' weight. If it's been done outside of a kidding way among friends, then it's worse than immature.

I've read enough of your posts and know enough people that know and like you that I'm sure you aren't a rotten person, but the comment you made sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

So saying that what I did in this case equates me specifically with people who are mentally challenged, a term whose use is offensive in the first place, is ok to you? How would you feel if one of your kids had down's, would thatr be worse then.

As said in this thread before, fslexduck made a completely unwarranted personal attack against me to start the ball rolling. Not, "I couldn't disagree with you more, and think it was a bad idea of you to Not, "Jeez, Dali, I think your posts and posting sucks.", but "Let me just say, Dali, that you appear to be an enormous douche." So patronizing her sexuality, ( and possibly gender) by saying my VERY tame remark is out of line, is, at the least, uninformed.

I have posted a few times in her threads being nice, but she continues to grind her axe, so F her. She's a big girl, and I;m sure she'd be the last person to ever ask for protection in situations like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you not see the difference between calling one of your friends a retard and calling somebody who is literally mentally retarded a retard? Nobody made any negative personal comments to you. You on the other hand did.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may want to work on that reading comprehension. Try starting with the first 3 responses in this thread.