Jump to content

Don Giovanni

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Don Giovanni

  1. Whether the 'old Vegas poker crew' were cheats or not isn't even a matter of debate. They were. Most have admitted to as much, if you know any of them personally (or know anyone who knows them), that era is openly discussed/mocked when there aren't any cameras around. Of course, when the cul-de-sac kids needed gods to lord over this new poker world they stumbled into, that part didn't quite fit in with the squeakier ethics of the new guys, so they pretended it didn't exist.The corrupt nature of online poker has to be the most amusing, though. Corkies like you howled and shouted for YEARS that online poker was pure as the driven snow, created all sorts of contorted narratives as to why it 'wasn't in the best interests' of poker sites to be dishonest... Then, UB/AP.Oh, but that was an outlier! Surely, HOWARD LEDERER, CHRIS FERGUSON and ISAI SCHEINBERG can be trusted!When the economic pyramid collapsed, the narrative changed, but still, the same old retarded Pollyannas, skipping through the snakes, anyone who points it out IS JUST A LOSING PLAYER HAHAHAHA.
    who are you replying to here? it couldn't be me. i don't even understand what you're going on about. i never thought online poker was pure. no serious people did, unfortunately for your wild story. anyone who plays poker online, which has been technically illegal for a while now, knows they are putting their money at risk. just losing players and weaklings in general who complain about this stuff.and it IS in the best (long term) interest of poker sites to be legit. but people don't always see or follow their best long term interest. the fact that there have been scams doesn't change anything. it was predictable and it proves the rule. full tilt makes more money in the long run if they were still legit, even if they get away with everything. they blew it. i dont see how this whole story of old world gambling shootouts and train robberies relates. a few of these corrupt poker pros ran tilt. but things like enron, worldcom, and bernie madoff happen in entirely regulated, domestic, "respectable" fields as well. so...the poker world today is mostly just honest people playing a card game. yours and bigDs conspiracy theories not withstanding.
  2. At least, with corporate fraud, embezzlement and the like, there are laws against it. Fines that can be levied. Theoretical punishments. THey may not be enforced, but the laws are there. There's NOTHING illegal about marking a deck of cards at a casino. Nothing illegal about getting on skype with 3 friends and colluding in an online room. No punishments. No consequences.
    wow this gets worse and worse. i mean, what the hell are you talking about? and what is motivating this weird tirade about the poker world. people get away with all sorts of shit in every field. and many don't. and it has little to do with legality. but this is lost on you.and i don't get it, it's ok for people to get away with things as long as there are laws against it that aren't enforced? what a strange idea. as long as the laws are there? laws aren't there if they aren't enforced...a casino will kick out someone marking cards. poker sites have for the most part always done what they can to get rid of colluders when they have some evidence of the act. should it be illegal to collude on some third party poker site? its already against the rules of the poker site... wtf... you really think there should be federal laws or something against collusion on poker sites?you have played online poker before right?
  3. I used to beat the drum for years that Doyle Brunson was a cheat, and through simple logic most of the old school vegas pros were likely cheats and I got shouted down by Rounders fanboys who had signed copies of super system and said everything I was saying was just slander. And I just laughed and shook my head. These days, I've seen you make several long posts on the issue and no one even bothers to speak out against them. Maybe it's just because FCP is so dead that there's no one left even to take issue. But I think part of it is that people aren't quite as naive as you think they are anymore. In 2007? No doubt . But after online company after online company rips people off, Poker Legend after Poker legend are revealed to be irrefutable thieves that the cognitive dissonance required to defend these degenerates simply becomes too difficult to maintain.
    LOL lets see some old posts over the course of "years" with you "beating the drum" about brunson being a cheat. these rants about the corrupt nature of poker in general from you, scram, and sklansky are really hilarious. sounds like three losing players to me.
  4. For the first part, govt continues to spend extremely large amounts as a percentage of GDP, and that's a more important measure than actual dollars.For the second part, the depression was caused by a massive contraction of the money supply by the Fed. I'm not sure Austrian economics makes any definitive statements on how to handle the cleanup from a catastrophically bad previous policy. Certainly repeating the previous mistakes would not be good; you could try to undo it as much as possible, I guess. But acting like the Great Depression had anything to do with a laissez faire govt is laughable.
    pam pam pam pam pam...you are never going to get anywhere trying to argue economic or historical bullshit that no one can ever really prove cause there are too many details and vagaries to satisfy anyone. this is why libertarians are such failures despite being mostly right.if you want any chance of getting through to liberal tools like strategy and his professors who told him so, you need to focus on the immorality of an organization forcing a certain currency on 300 million people born into some area and then paying themselves to manipulate it. there are no historical interpretations or statistics to cloud moral questions.
  5. The sudden worldwide realization that gold is nothing more than a metal that is shiny and has very little actual value aside from some niche uses in circuitry...?
    this is a common understatement. gold has immense value because of its unique properties, mentioned by Aristotle over 2000 years ago by the way, that make it perfect as a medium of exchange. you need to realize that something being perfect for a medium of exchange (doesn't corrode, scarce, homogeneous, malleable, ect) makes it hugely valuable to humans. its aesthetic and electrical purposes are added bonuses.we know that gold is in fact universally valuable to humans because its been in use as a medium of exchange and other things by every culture who could get it as far back as we can see. this is not some coincidence for people to awake from. gold is indeed much more than a "metal that is shiny"
  6. we should not be using this event as a call for taxing, legislation, and control of online poker. if anything, it shows the ridiculousness of a bunch of rich old white men being able to run our private lives from afar. something should not be legal on the grounds that it makes these ruling elites more money to fuel their power addictions.i encourage all of you to NOT report any of your poker income. it legitimizes their tactics. have some self respect.

  7. by the way, enough people aren't complaining about this idiot sheriff who immediately started blaming right wing hate for this incident when really it seems like it was his incompetence. his police force did nothing about the future shooter despite several opportunities and they weren't the least bit worried about an insane guy despite the fact that everyone else was. and all this in an environment that should be ultra sensitive towards school shooting threats. this sheriff is a failure and the fact that he started making it into a political issue before even knowing what the **** happened is pathetic. what a loser. should have just shut his ****ing mouth or apologized for being shit at his job. why isn't he being fired right now?

  8. Actually, Exactly my point.I happen to feel that it is bad lazy journalism. What you describe is pretty much the definition of Demagoguery - as opposed to fact-based objective journalism/dialogue/debate - and that is one of my personal Windmills. I hate when anyone, but particularly the Media, uses inflammatory, emotion inducing language to purely as a short cut to invoke an emotional rather than rational response. The 9/11 reference is at best a short-cut to real journalism and communication, and at worst a possible attempt to link the emotions of 9/11 to this story. It is already a real and tragic story without the ubiquitous 9/11 references.
    what? exactly your point? you don't have a point. what the hell are you talking about? suppose people just think its a bit interesting that this girl was born on 9/11/01. what does this have to do with objective journalism, dialog, or debate? how does mentioning that little fact prevent a rational response? why are you reading into this so much?
  9. season 5 was for the most part a disappointment. season 1 was the best thing ever and 2-4 are worth watching.more importantly, i just want to reiterate my awesomeness due to the fact that the actress who plays kima lives just down the street from me, and seeing her, and sometimes even other main actors from the show visiting her, is a relatively common and unremarkable occurrence among people in this immediate area.

  10. But I meant absolute value vs food & water & energy, not value vs other money(obviously I know gold rises massively against fiat currency - that's what I've been saying).But the bolded in your post is what I mean by gold losing value in Armageddon, because as a placeholder for decreased total wealth(as happens in Armageddon), the gold is devalued.
    no i mean absolute value vs food and water too. watch some videos on youtube about people in zimbabwe right now mining for gold with their hands because their currency is worthless. thats no rich and developed society. they barely have food and water yet they still mine for gold and use it in trade. so just because there is not much material wealth in an area does not mean that gold is in any way devalued in real or absolute terms.
  11. Lol, you're the one walking around with 3 ping-pong balls in your mouth...But seriously, I was trying to say that gold only loses value in an Armageddon scenario.
    how does it lose money in an armageddon scenario? thats when it gains value the most. i think youre saying that only food and water will matter then, but there will always be a use for a placeholder of wealth, and in that case gold and other precious metals will be the only things accepted. people cant just carry huge stores of food and water around with them, so they need something like gold to transport and use to purchase real goods, even in an end of the world scenario. gold GAINS value the worse everything with fiat currencies becomes. just look at Zimbabwe right now. their currency is useless and valueless, and they might as well be in armageddon, and the people there are going into the hills to mine for gold because its the only currency accepted. THAT is the definition of a safe and stable currency people.the only thing that devalues gold is an increase in supply, but that happens slowly and is limited.
  12. look back at the history of the conversation. I'm not disputing that we have culturally assigned a value to gold that won't ever go away. I'm questioning the idea that "gold is stable."
    we haven't 'culturally assigned' a value to gold. as if its just some random decision and we could have picked anything else. go read about the history of gold and other precious metals and drop the fashionable post-modernist interpretations. gold is a physical object that was specially suited for coining in the beginning and its value continues to be based on its objective physical properties and scarcity. other similar substances like silver are also similarly valuable. this is not a coincidence.this is also the reason that gold is stable and safe, and measuring it in terms of dollars at any given moment is missing the point.
  13. You didn't quite get it straight. See, Republicans threatened to filibuster any tax extension bill that didn't extend taxes to super-minority of rich americans (my graph allows me to call them that).
    provided that our justice system works and those people earned their money legally, why do you think its morally right to have harsher economic policies for a super-minority of people in this country? and if they didn't earn their money legally thats obviously a separate problem that should be dealt with on its own terms.
  • Create New...