ohbummer 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I forgive Raymer. He's an okay kinda guy. Link to post Share on other sites
Exeunt 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I was wrong to insult Daniel. Whatever my feelings, I should have kept the negative comments to myself. They don't help me or the cause we are fighting in this lawsuit, and they might have been hurtful to Daniel. For that I am sorry, and I do apologize.While I am sure Daniel and I will continue to disagree on the issues surrounding the lawsuit, I hope we will both keep our comments positive. Both of us are capable of intelligent debate without insults. I know I intend to do my best to live up to this goal going forward.Thanks for your time and attention.Greg Raymer (FossilMan)I'm glad to see some kind of step in the right direction has been made here, though I think the original outburst toward Daniel did a lot more damage than expected, while at the same time being very unprofessional, which was surprising given the points being made outlined your position as a professional of the law, and Daniel to be "stupid".I'm not too familiar with the case, neither am I an expert of law, so I'm not assuming anyone is right or wrong here. However, when Daniel offers his own personal opinions regarding the issue as a professional Poker player, he's entirely entitled to do so. If he's expressing how he feels it would affect the Poker community to other players and fans, that's no big deal.At the end of the day, the case will be decided by lawyers, not public opinion, so what good does demeaning Daniel for a 'worthless opinion' via the following achieve?:"And he knows or should know that his legal opinion is worthless, since he has zero training or experience in the area of antitrust law"He is 'trying to persuade public opinion against the plaintiffs', so you try and persuade public opinion against him for a lack of information as to your cause? What's the point? As Daniel said, there only seems to be negatives coming out of this issue, and I think one of the worst being the seperation and fallout of the Poker community and it's players needlessly. It takes a lot to apologise for such comments, and that is decent of you, but I think it would be necessary on your part to try and get people on your side by explaining your cause in an informative way, rather than pulling people down for not having the information or viewpoint you have.On that point I hope that's what you intend by "I hope we will both keep our comments positive. Both of us are capable of intelligent debate without insults"At the end of the day, everybody's interests are for the good of the game, so I hope whatever the outcome, there are positives for the Poker Community. Link to post Share on other sites
pokergeekinaz 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I did a quick browse of the 2+2 forums and found him making multiple posts apoligizing for his insults. At least one had the same opening remarks as the OP for this thread. Seems like it's a legitimate account and legit apology. Many kudos to Raymer for owning up to his mistake and working to mend any fences before it gets too bad. Link to post Share on other sites
DanielNegreanu 141 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I was wrong to insult Daniel. Whatever my feelings, I should have kept the negative comments to myself. They don't help me or the cause we are fighting in this lawsuit, and they might have been hurtful to Daniel. For that I am sorry, and I do apologize.While I am sure Daniel and I will continue to disagree on the issues surrounding the lawsuit, I hope we will both keep our comments positive. Both of us are capable of intelligent debate without insults. I know I intend to do my best to live up to this goal going forward.Thanks for your time and attention.Greg Raymer (FossilMan) I appreciate the apology, and would like to offer one to you as well if you were offended by my comments in the blog. My intentions weren't to offend you or the others in the blog, and I'm sorry that my comments may have offended you. Obviously we aren't going to agree on this issue. Actually, the issue I have is one that has virtually nothing to do with the merits of your lawsuit. As I've said before, I don't care all that much who is "right" in this case. What frightens me the most is that I truly believe that this lawsuit, win or lose, can only be harmful to the poker world in a myriad of ways. What also bothers me is reading quotes from the seven of you along the lines of, "We are doing this for ALL players." I was never asked if I wanted this group speaking on my behalf. I never voted to elect the seven of you to speak for all poker players best interests. The seven of you took it upon yourselves to speak for the poker community without even going to the poker community to get a sense of how the players felt about the lawsuit. Aside from all of that, I don't know if the seven of you have really thought through the ramifications of this lawsuit. While we'd all love to believe that online poker in the U.S. is in the clear, that's just not realistic. This lawsuit, will further damage the cause of the PPA. There are other things I'd like to add, but simply couldn't do that in a public forum. Some of the seven are taking a much bigger risk than others, and I'm not sure they realize how serious it is. Link to post Share on other sites
FourFlusher 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I doubt very much that there will be any real discussion of the merits of the case by the plaintiffs...They have hired people to decide and discus the legal issues of the case, and, the individual plaintiffs can only hinder the case by making public statements concerning the legal arguments.If I was the lawyer, and my client was on forums arguing the case I would kick him in the nuts. Link to post Share on other sites
byaaatch 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 does this mean everything is finally done and we can talk about other crazy *** things in the forum now? Link to post Share on other sites
Nealyh_02 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I appreciate the apology, and would like to offer one to you as well if you were offended by my comments in the blog. My intentions weren't to offend you or the others in the blog, and I'm sorry that my comments may have offended you. Obviously we aren't going to agree on this issue. Actually, the issue I have is one that has virtually nothing to do with the merits of your lawsuit. As I've said before, I don't care all that much who is "right" in this case. What frightens me the most is that I truly believe that this lawsuit, win or lose, can only be harmful to the poker world in a myriad of ways. What also bothers me is reading quotes from the seven of you along the lines of, "We are doing this for ALL players." I was never asked if I wanted this group speaking on my behalf. I never voted to elect the seven of you to speak for all poker players best interests. The seven of you took it upon yourselves to speak for the poker community without even going to the poker community to get a sense of how the players felt about the lawsuit. Aside from all of that, I don't know if the seven of you have really thought through the ramifications of this lawsuit. While we'd all love to believe that online poker in the U.S. is in the clear, that's just not realistic. This lawsuit, will further damage the cause of the PPA. There are other things I'd like to add, but simply couldn't do that in a public forum. Some of the seven are taking a much bigger risk than others, and I'm not sure they realize how serious it is.Daniel never dissapoints me...you keep proving to me over and over you are a class guy Link to post Share on other sites
Squamch 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 Good to see we might finally be past the nasty parts of this. And hopefully DN and Greg don't hold what was said against each other, regardless of how strongly they feel about the lawsuit. Link to post Share on other sites
MaltiMignun 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 Daniel never dissapoints me...you keep proving to me over and over you are a class guyWhat did you expect? DN to come out with pictures of tubgirl and start making more fat jokes while morphing raymers head onto a manatees body? Link to post Share on other sites
spydergizard 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 he DN u said u never said anything about him in ur blog, what about the breats joke? Link to post Share on other sites
dino 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I appreciate the apology, and would like to offer one to you as well if you were offended by my comments in the blog. My intentions weren't to offend you or the others in the blog, and I'm sorry that my comments may have offended you. Obviously we aren't going to agree on this issue. Actually, the issue I have is one that has virtually nothing to do with the merits of your lawsuit. As I've said before, I don't care all that much who is "right" in this case. What frightens me the most is that I truly believe that this lawsuit, win or lose, can only be harmful to the poker world in a myriad of ways. What also bothers me is reading quotes from the seven of you along the lines of, "We are doing this for ALL players." I was never asked if I wanted this group speaking on my behalf. I never voted to elect the seven of you to speak for all poker players best interests. The seven of you took it upon yourselves to speak for the poker community without even going to the poker community to get a sense of how the players felt about the lawsuit. Aside from all of that, I don't know if the seven of you have really thought through the ramifications of this lawsuit. While we'd all love to believe that online poker in the U.S. is in the clear, that's just not realistic. This lawsuit, will further damage the cause of the PPA. There are other things I'd like to add, but simply couldn't do that in a public forum. Some of the seven are taking a much bigger risk than others, and I'm not sure they realize how serious it is.I'm not sure which side is right either, as far as the lawsuit goes. Greg's posts on another forum seem like the WPT is at least partly at fault and the 7 have a legitimate beef. However, to me it sounds like what happened all those years ago with the USFL vs the NFL. The USFL won the battle, but they lost the war. I think they got $3.65 in damages or something. Link to post Share on other sites
TimADugan 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I'm not sure which side is right either, as far as the lawsuit goes. Greg's posts on another forum seem like the WPT is at least partly at fault and the 7 have a legitimate beef. However, to me it sounds like what happened all those years ago with the USFL vs the NFL. The USFL won the battle, but they lost the war. I think they got $3.65 in damages or something.Actually, part of the problem with the USFL was that the league went under before the suit was concluded. The USFL was awarded $1.00 in damages, but I believe that under the Sherman Anti-Trust act, an act to willfully maintain a monopoly can statutorly award triple damages. I can't actually find that in the decision affirming the judgement for $1, but I think that is the case.But, don't forget the lawyers: the USFL also won their attorney's fees So, the lawyers got paid and the USFL's defunked business saw at most $3.00. Link to post Share on other sites
GoodimGod 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 " There are other things I'd like to add, but simply couldn't do that in a public forum. Some of the seven are taking a much bigger risk than others, and I'm not sure they realize how serious it is. " He must be talking about evading taxes when cashing out large sums of money through offshore ltd's etc.Although i dont know exactly what the Law in America is on gambling taxes etc, but im quite sure that some of the 7 have manipulated certain balance sheets into there favor, and thats what gonna come up in court for sure. That mustbe so gay to happen to ya just because u want to protect ur image ( correct me if im wrong ) Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 If bringing out tax irrelgularities is the issue, then this isn't going to do anything. The IRS has been after money for a long time, they are very good at it and they are not sitting in some room with CSPAN on, ignoring gamblers.Unless you can get a presidential pardon like Marc Rich did, you will pay your taxes.Ask Capone Link to post Share on other sites
nmdavidb 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I was never asked if I wanted this group speaking on my behalf. I never voted to elect the seven of you to speak for all poker players best interests. The seven of you took it upon yourselves to speak for the poker community without even going to the poker community to get a sense of how the players felt about the lawsuit.This is the kicker of the whole deal people. Remember "taxation without representation"?? It actually started out as "virtual representation" over in England...no slam on our fellow Brits here.These seven took it upon themselves to wage a war for all of the poker players without even asking them or putting it to a vote or anything.So for them to say they speak for ALL poker players is beyond ludicrous.I know I am new here but have been watching poker and playing for years but after reading this point I felt the need to really show off the beauty of what Danny said.Oh btw sorry you didn't make final table...was pulling hard for yaDave Link to post Share on other sites
FourFlusher 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I'm interested in the part about the online owner that was arrested and what that might mean to players that own part of an online poker room.Can any of you legal types speak to that? Link to post Share on other sites
kingpin_99 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 " Although i dont know exactly what the Law in America is on gambling taxes etc, but im quite sure that some of the 7 have manipulated certain balance sheets into there favor, and thats what gonna come up in court for sure. That mustbe so gay to happen to ya just because u want to protect ur image ( correct me if im wrong )The whole 'tax record' stuff is silly. Why would that come up in court? If the WPT's only defense is to desecrate the names behind the lawsuit then they will lose. Obviously, they have no valid defense and will have to resort to name calling which will make the WPT look even worse. Why can't the WPT win by proving that they are not in violation of anti-trust? Probably because they know that they will lose unless they dig up dirt. The WPT sounds very guilty (assuming that Daniel speaks for what the WPT will do). Link to post Share on other sites
mcpickl 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 to Greg for stepping up and apologizing to Daniel for accepting and offering one backboth of you are class acts in my book.........well, if i had a book Link to post Share on other sites
cfinnn 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I'm interested in the part about the online owner that was arrested and what that might mean to players that own part of an online poker room.Can any of you legal types speak to that?I am no legal type, but you can read more about it here. Link to post Share on other sites
FourFlusher 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 Thanks, I knew about the first arrest, I'm interested in the ramifications to players that may own all or part of sites...Are they going to be subject to arrest in the near future? Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 My rant may come off as overly simplistic but here goes anyway.This entire situation is very sad and quite frankly hurting poker. Right or wrong, the law suit, if pushed forward, WILL NOT bring good feelings and positive attention to this great game. And the press will eat this up. They love a good disaster story and love to play it up even more.This will be very bad for the game. What good will winning the lawsuit be if there is a huge black eye attatched to it? It'd be like winning a lottery where the prize is a new home that's just been gutted by a fire. What good is that???I know the "7" have their right to voice discontentment, as does everyone have the right to voice opinions of opposition to the lawsuit. I just wish it would all go away, and fast.The "7" should have a big sit down behind closed doors, throw away the key and fight in out hidden from the media and keep hammering away until an acceptable agreement is reached. A bad, nasty war will not only smear and taint poker for the pros but could very easily affect the rest of us as well!Never forget that without all of US, the Amateurs, wanna be's, hobby players, etc, none of THIS would exist! And yes, we may be the bottom of the food chain, but we ARE LINKS IN THAT CHAIN. You weaken us and you may not eat in a few years. We are a large part of why today YOU all get fed! We are indeed what you will feed on in years to come. Do you want to spoil your future food source? I know that sounds a little wacky but it is true!I know that I LOVE this game. My passion for it is full blown as are millions of others. We just love the game so much...it sucks that this nasty court fight may be coming, especially right now. The timing could not be worse.I was shocked that Raymer would insult Daniel but am very happy to see that Greg has since extended an appology to him (who being the class act fully accepted). THAT is a huge step in the right direction.Is there anyway that somehow an official mediation committee could be formed out side of the glare of the cameras and microphones and get everyone sensibly talking and settle this thing in private? Does it HAVE to go to court?PLEASE...for the love of the game, Can you folks do the right thing here and put poker first?Just one amateur wanna be's Christmas wish.(Dear santa....please let everyone stop fighting and share their toys. Thanks!) (originally added to a blog post, but actually appropriate here) Link to post Share on other sites
WVUCarter 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I would be really curious to hear Harry's point of view on the law suite. His comments are always professional and well thought out. If he has already commented on it in a previous topic I must have missed it, sorry. Link to post Share on other sites
llou 0 Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 I am happy to see that GR and DN are trying to get back on better terms.Daniel said that there would be mud-slinging as a result of the lawsuit and he was right. I'm a little surprised that the mud-slinging started with GR and DN, but not surprised that it started. Let's hope they can set a good example and not let the situation escalate. Link to post Share on other sites
Keenen 0 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 yeah if we're not forgiving mel gibson we're not forgiving Raymer eitheramen loldaniel likes using the word ramifications, lol Link to post Share on other sites
sdnuol 0 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Speak for yourself, forum donk.Nice post, Greg. You handle yourself very well, and we all get outta line sometimes. you would knowedit: damn, your avatar tricked me Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now