OK, Here's The Truth

[Tamtaram]

Admo,
A+

[Admo]

[EvanJC]

[ QUOTE ]
Based on the reactions of some here, I feel that my latest post was misunderstood. I'd like it to be known that I have every intention of compensating Mark.
Since he has told others that he will not accept my money, I have decided to delegate David to give it to him. This way not only will Mark not have an option about taking the money, but I too will have a witness to this transaction and finally be able to have a sense of closure.
What he does with the money or what he says about me after that is up to him. At least I will have piece of mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

already delegating duties to david? jesus you work fast!

[WiltOnTilt]

Admo, it can't be said enough. You really have an amazing talent for humor and photoshopping. Well done sir, well done.

[jmill2511]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At least I will have piece of mind.

[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

Just wow. So good. [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Based on the reactions of some here, I feel that my latest post was misunderstood. I'd like it to be known that I have every intention of compensating Mark.
Since he has told others that he will not accept my money, I have decided to delegate David to give it to him. This way not only will Mark not have an option about taking the money, but I too will have a witness to this transaction and finally be able to have a sense of closure.
What he does with the money or what he says about me after that is up to him. At least I will have piece of mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

already delegating duties to david? jesus you work fast!

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, I saw that too. No need to use a big word when a small one will do. "ask" means what you want "delegate" to mean. Also, "reimburse" is probably better than "compensate." "compensate" "I'll compensate losing your 30k by offering teh butseks" "reimburse" is unambiguous. Of course partial reimbursement is all you're offering.

The 30k situation is so odd. Look at it in Vegas terms: Newhouse gave his hussy free access to his monies and allowed her to play as she would. No one expects the hussy to feel accountable for the loss. As much as she wants to be seen differently, Brandi still probably thinks in these terms. On the flip side, I have my stars account with password saved. My roommate could log on at any time. Of course, if he ever did, and I ever found out, he'd be responsible for any losses. If I were to say for some reason, "I don't mind if you play X games provided that you lose no more than $X", then he'd only be liable for losses greater than X.

The questions none of us really know the answer to are:

1) Was Brandi Newhizzle's hussy at the time?
2) Did Newhizzle set monetary or game limitations?
and why not...
3) Is it really as Brandi says: Newhizzle lost the money himself.
or if you prefer her other story...
4) Was Newhizzle "coaching" her at the time - all decisions his?
but most importantly...
5) Will Brandi fly someday?

[isapistola]

CardSharpCook, how about reading this thread to find out?

[OPportunist]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Anyone involved in the lending business should take note here. This is a classic example of somehow who has no intention of paying their debts.

They will block, distort, and delete all reasonable arguments, and continue to rationalize their poor behavior to themselves and anyone stupid enough to listen.

When I see this type, and hear the first ridiculous argument, I immediately know they have no intention to pay despite what they say. If the money is to be returned, it won't be voluntarily.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont understand the pt. Newhouse has zero recourse. SHe says he let her use the acct. He admits he did, but not at the stakes she allegedly played. He stayed friendly with her for weeks after. Then he gets all pissy cause she doesnt put out. She now offered to pay him 8k to drop the whole thing. This is 8k more than any court would award him. And he says he will take the money but not absolve the debt. So if you were her, you would pay here? for realz?

[/ QUOTE ]

You misunderstand my point. I did not mean to comment on whether or not Brandi should pay him back, as I do not know all the details. Nor did I bring up legal recourse, as again I don't have the details (i.e. offer? acceptance? consideration?)

I simply meant, people who are owed money can learn from this typical reaction.

As soon as I hear excuses about personal responsibility, I know the money will not be freely offered. Maybe that isnt the case here, but I'd wager that Newhouse won't be satisfied with the result in terms of dollar amount.

That's all I was saying, maybe it is common sense but I've repeatedly seen people wasting a lot of time and energy trying to collect and end up just getting in stupid arguments that go nowhere.

[Signal777]

I hope you are strongly encouraging Brandi to seek professional help to resolve her problematic childhood. It seems that poker lessons, while important, may not be all of the help she needs right now.

[uclabruinz]

I appreciate Sklansky's books and this website, but could he possibly make a bigger douchebag out of himself? David, you are now one of the running jokes of the poker world. I hope it was worth the extra advertising revenue.