ColeSLaw
-
Content Count
393 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by ColeSLaw
-
-
http://luckiestone.blogspot.com/"In 2002, I matriculated at an Ivy League law school. Four short years later, I've found myself in a large Midwestern city, without a law degree. Without a job. Missing three teeth. And approximately $91,000 in debt. I have alienated my friends and family. I have committed many crimes and idly contemplated committing many more. Told countless lies. How to explain this troubling reversal of fortune? Welcome to the entertaining world of online (and offline) gambling."
-
No just Bees
-
too small a picture?Maybe someone can improve the scaling:http://i6.tinypic.com/16m12d4.jpg
-
I just found a great document that addressed every crackpot tax argument possible. I'm glad to see the IRS has addressed these conspiracy theories:http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf
-
You get Neteller robbed or what?
-
Just like banks, the lower the reserve ratio, the higher the profit. The only limitation would be prudence and the relevant laws of the jurisdiction, which in this case is some shady place like Gibraltar so it wouldn't surprise me if they kept a low reserve and pushed the rest in high-interest account and instruments.That is why I think a no-rake poker site could make sick money if they were able to avoid a run on their funds.But, that is a long-winded way of saying I'm too lazy to look as well.Here's an example of no escrow:June 20, 2006.According to various press releases surfacing on online gaming news sites, ten ChecknRaisePoker.com members that had won World Series of Poker seats have been informed that their prize packages are not to be honored. Via an email from ChecknRaise management they have instead been offered a series of small payments over the coming months.Poker.com has attempted to contact ChecknRaisePoker.com management by email and telephone to confirm this situation and offer to cover the prize costs, but as yet have been unable to get a response.Both the tournament entry fee and spending money according to the terms of each promotion will be provided by Poker.com if any of the affected players come forward.Poker.com Director of Gaming, Paul Cherry said, "I don't want to comment too much at this time, as we are yet to obtain confirmation that the reported situation is accurate. But if the story is true, we are happy to help these players however possible.""From most players’ perspective, this is a chance of a lifetime, and I can’t think of anything more upsetting than to be told you are not going to Vegas, after having already won the prize. It’s only a few weeks away and the players may have already planned and paid for their travel arrangements.""Our own players are like family to us and we'd hate to see these ChecknRaise players miss out due to no fault of their own. That’s why we are offering to help them get to Vegas as a part of the Poker.com family and enjoy the trip they have won and earned. A trip that includes the chance to win a World Series of Poker bracelet!""I know that at Poker.com we keep all guaranteed tournament prizes and player funds in escrow, separate from operational funds to avoid such a situation ever occurring." Mr Cherry said.
-
I doubt you would say this to someone in the OP's position in person, so why be an e-*******?Losing your roll is punishment enough for poor management, no need to kick someone when he's down.so he's even a bigger idiot than I would ever be.no offense to idiots. -
Oh gosh, I just peed my pants laughing when that starting playing!175k prize pool sounds like the approximate GDP of Australia, not the prize pool in the game that the friend of your barber's sister's cousin's brother organized.Besides, I thought "cu in 4years Dan" referred to when you were getting out of prison.
-
If I wrote low pairs, then it is not clear whether the pair is at least in board on the board. I could have said pocket, but that's 6 letters and wired is only 5.Not that anyone on General will actually discuss strategy.But thanks for making my make-up run this morning with your hurtful comments.Why did you use the word "wired" here? Do you think it sounds cool? Or are you just brainwashed from watching too much WPT? -
Funny stuff, but I'd like to hear some critique of the play, maybe get something out of it.Concerning the angry Kenny Rogers guy: too aggressive with low wired pairs?
-
I want some final remarks from Brad, I'm curious to see if his perspective is different when he is a little less anonymous.
-
I was just reading about Andew Black on a wiki link and thought this was relevant:"Losing is one of poker's hard lessons. As well as being highly intelligent, Black is a clearly a very emotional man. "Because of the element of chance, you can do everything right and still lose. You get hit by unbelievable body blows, which are dictated by statistical probabilities. I work with this by saying, 'This will happen.'"I ask what it was like to lose that hand at the World Championship. Black's face creases: "It was so painful, you have no idea. Afterwards, while I was playing, I was trying to hold the pain without being overwhelmed; to remind myself that what had happened is now the past and I am in the present. Even now, I'll be sitting in meditation turning over the same six or seven hands. That's my practice.""
-
Wiki says Andew Black discarded all his possessions and lived in a semi-monastic Buddhist environment for 5 years after exiting the 1998 WSOP.This guy sounds like quite a character. Any good stories of him that people have heard? Does he have monk-like calm at the table?Just curious.I found this interesting (article linked to the wiki entry):"My experience of Buddhist practice means that I also include how I am, how I am treating the other players, and how I respond to both winning and losing. You can disregard that feeling, just like in life, but in poker you get immediate payback. It's always the same lesson: when your actions are not in accordance with how things are, you suffer.” Losing is one of poker's hard lessons. As well as being highly intelligent, Black is a clearly a very emotional man. “Because of the element of chance, you can do everything right and still lose. You get hit by unbelievable body blows, which are dictated by statistical probabilities. I work with this by saying, 'This will happen.'” I ask what it was like to lose that hand at the World Championship. Black's face creases: “It was so painful, you have no idea. Afterwards, while I was playing, I was trying to hold the pain without being overwhelmed; to remind myself that what had happened is now the past and I am in the present. Even now, I'll be sitting in meditation turning over the same six or seven hands. That's my practice.”
-
Derek, I don't think you will find common ground, despite the objective truth of the matter.His response will likely be a sentence that spits on the noble apostrophe combined with either the word slave or b*tch.http://profiles.yahoo.com/bhaas I'm sure you are extremely creative and innovative, but you understanding of the law as demonstrated on this board is largely incorrect.Seriously though, Bhaas, I wish you the best in finding an inventing job.I'm also envious about your suped up Camaro. I bet it hauls.http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/cascade-...-hey-bhaas.html
-
Ha, poetry.This should be your signature.Skill wins out over luck in the end my ***. ****ing lifetime luckbox's,that's all the poker pros are. -
Wow, you win with your poorly written insults.In the end, you can choose to drive drunk, to speed, or to not pay your taxes. But, don't suggest you are not breaking the law or that the law doesn't apply to you. Be a man, and take some responsibility instead of looking for an imaginary loophole that justifies your conduct.Nope. Your an idiot. Go back to your mommas teet. -
You repeatedly ask for proof on this or that, but what proof have you offered on anything?You make ridiculuos claims, then hide your ignorance by dropping "hints" of how you are correct, without every explaining anything. You merely link conspiracy websites. When you are proven wrong, you just ignore it and move on.Tell you what, I will continue to look up and debunk the myths you present, if you admit the number of things you have been wrong about including:The fact the Kuglin case is about criminal liability, not the right of the IRS to tax. And that criminal liability was not found but of the issue of intent, not because of the IRS's right to tax. Admit that it was not an issue in the case, and you will restore my faith that my efforts are not wasted on you.And please learn the difference between "your" and "you're".
-
Listen. Everytime you have offered proof, I have shown you to be the idiot you are. However, I don't have the time to look up every piece of leglislation, every case, or every principle you misinterpret or claim to understand. Can someone else please jump in here?And Fox News is your proof. Please.Why won't you answer any of the questions I put to you in a previous post? Your just as bad as the IRS. Lets see your answers. Your hopeless.I'm waiting...............http://www.taxableincome.net/articles/othe.../16thamend.htmlRead all of it.I can see that this will never ever end. You will never see the light.
Yes, of course, when the police or a government agency decide it is not worth their time to respond to the stupid questions posed to them, it is because they know you are on to them.Either that or they know it is a waste of their time, and the dumbest fool can ask a question that the smartest person can not answer.If you ask the IRS a question shouldn't they answer it? But they don't cause they know they have no authrity over you. -
No, that is not fair enough because you are wrong and your ignorance has harmful consequences.You can believe what you want, but I will make a point of showing some of your errors to prevent people from assuming it is correct. Fair enough?You know what? I'm getting real tired of talking about this because it always turns into a fu*kfest. I gave you some info to look up so you need to find out for yourself. You have the right to beleive what you want and so do I. So lets just go out on a good note and just agree to disagree. Fair enough? -
Look, I've come to the conclusion that you are beyond all hope.However, my remaining concern is that by throwing out these ridiculous statements, people may actually rely on your nonsense and get hurt.Ultimately, I just hope people have the sense to see your comments for what they are.Here's what a judge has to say about the 16th amendment:JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FOX NEWS SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYSTGIBSON: Is there a constitutional objection to allowing the federal government to take money out of your paycheck every week?NAPOLITANO: Well, there was until the 16th Amendment was enacted in the early part of the last century. The Constitution specifically prohibited the federal government from taxing individuals directly. The 16th Amendment amended that. And it was challenged several times in two cases right after it was enacted. And those cases have been called intellectually dishonest. But no one seriously, successfully, has challenged the power of the federal government since then to tax individual income.Now, nobody likes to pay tax. I don't know anybody who comes home at the end of the week and says, “You know what? They didn't take enough this week.” And she will probably still have to pay her taxes…But, seriously speaking, this is a criminal case. And the only thing the jury decided was that the government couldn't prove its case against her. And the reason the government couldn't was that she begged them, she pleaded with them to explain the tax laws to her. They wouldn't answer her letters. They wouldn't return her phone calls. They wouldn't give her any explanation. I think the jury said, “Enough is enough.” She owes a lot of money. You're talking about $1 million worth of income and easily $250,00 in taxes for which they will sue her and for which they will probably get a judgment. And if she doesn't pay, they will levy on her assets. But she is not going to jail. The government has lost its shot to convict her of a crime.
-
Listen moron, quit jumping from one stupid statement and issue to another.This is what you said, "They couldn't prove she was liable for income tax."WRONGThey couldn't prove she intended to disobey tax law. Can you see the difference?THE CASE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HAVING TO PAY TAXES.She, like you, truly believe in the nonsense you are muttering. You believe you do not have to pay taxes, therefore it is difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were breaking the law on purpose. You are still done for on crimes that require less intent and in civil cases with a lower burden of proof.And please, can you make a single post without saying: b*tch, slave, or freedom?
-
Oh my *#*$#*$#*$*$*!!!!!Once again, you have jumped from one ignorant legal claim to another.From the 2 seconds of research I have done, the Kuglin jury merely does not find the criminal liability attached to her failure to pay (and probably was appealed or the IRS merely sued her civilly to collect). The mental state is likely intentional breaking of the act, and she honestly believed it did not apply to her so they were unable to get a conviction on the criminal element.THIS DOES NOT MEAN SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO PAY TAXES.Here you go: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94630,00.html Please, take your garbarge elsewhere. You are polluting the internet.Why is there not a site picking apart these inane arguments? Probably because it is not worth the time of anyone with half a brain to speak to people that will not listen.
-
Is that when he gets out of prison?cu_in_4years -
It is actually quite amusing reading how people think they have some secret handshake that will get them out of legal trouble.Here's a funny one:http://www.suijuris.net/forum/court/7238-p...g-strawman.htmlBasically, the guy tries to apply some of this legal mythology and gets worked over and sent to the loony bin. Yet, he still tries to represent himself and apply this bs. A overworked court gives him a conditional discharge and he thinks his nonsense has saved him. He would have got the same deal if he just plead guilty.These stories are sad, and guys like Clyde Hyde do a lot of harm by convincing people they can ignore the rules.Bhaas, you are no better by bringing this garbage to the forum.
A Thoughtful And Intelligent Convesation
in General Poker Forum
Posted
I liked his legal/illegal gibberish.