Scammed by TheTemplar thread

[DRK Star]

Suggestion

Have both parties on the air next radio show. Vegas goes first. He gets two minutes to state his case. J Searles then gets two minutes to state his. Vegas gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Searles gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Druff, as moderator, gets to ask any questions to either party. This time period has a maximum of 5 minutes. Druff gives his ruling on air. His reputation is at stake should his decision be clearly askew to what a reasonable person would conclude.

Money is escrowed with Druff prior to the calls.

[jsearles22]

Suggestion

Have both parties on the air next radio show. Vegas goes first. He gets two minutes to state his case. J Searles then gets two minutes to state his. Vegas gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Searles gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Druff, as moderator, gets to ask any questions to either party. This time period has a maximum of 5 minutes. Druff gives his ruling on air. His reputation is at stake should his decision be clearly askew to what a reasonable person would conclude.

Money is escrowed with Druff prior to the calls.

I like all that except the part where Druff is the sole arbitrator & escrow holder. He has already repeatedly said I lost. No one in their right mind would risk $500 that they could change someones mind in 3 minutes! Nothing is going to be said that hasnt been said on these boards 1000x

[Faduniak]

Suggestion

Have both parties on the air next radio show. Vegas goes first. He gets two minutes to state his case. J Searles then gets two minutes to state his. Vegas gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Searles gets 1 more minute in case there is anything in dispute. Druff, as moderator, gets to ask any questions to either party. This time period has a maximum of 5 minutes. Druff gives his ruling on air. His reputation is at stake should his decision be clearly askew to what a reasonable person would conclude.

Money is escrowed with Druff prior to the calls.

I like all that except the part where Druff is the sole arbitrator & escrow holder. He has already repeatedly said I lost. No one in their right mind would risk $500 that they could change someones mind in 3 minutes! Nothing is going to be said that hasnt been said on these boards 1000x

You are looking at the situation in the completely wrong manner. You interpretation of "fair judge" in your mind is someone who sides in your favor or someone who doesn't side against you. A fair judge should be someone who is proven to be open minded and is able to set aside prior feelings toward any party and make a fair and valid judgment on the facts provided. This sounds like a good idea, and you guys should both be prepared with post numbers/topic titles for factual references. As per prior experiences, Druff should ALWAYS be sole escrower. But I could see a panel of 3 to make the decision, however Druff needs to be 1 of the 3.

[DRK Star]

Druff is pretty thorough (re:anal) about details, so I highly doubt he is going to be biased in anyone's particular favor. If anyone on this site is going to dissect every detail, its him.


He is the best solution for an arbitrary judge.

[vegas1369]

Quote made by LLL when all of this originally went down back in May....

He'll never pay regardless of who rules. Brand him a POS and ban his dumb ass.

Spot on from the very beginning.


As far as Druff ruling on this, that's already been done...

jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.

I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.

That's not the same as a smart prop bet. A smart prop bet is getting someone to bet you where you already know you have an edge (or a certainty) to win. For example, if I trained for running a 6-minute mile, told no one about it, and then offered a prop bet to someone at my poker table that I could run a mile in six minutes, that wouldn't be angle shooting. It would be a smart bet because people would assume that from my age and weight, I wouldn't be able to do it, when in reality I actually could. But the bet would still be clear. I would be betting that I could run a mile in six minutes, and my opponent would be betting that I couldn't. The bet would be straightforward and legitimate, even if I knew that my opponent was doing it based upon a false assumption about me.

But this is different.

If you trick someone into betting something different than they think they are (or if you change it midway because of a fear of losing), you are being dishonest.

Therefore, my opinion is that jsearles definitely owes vegas1369 $500, since jsearles lost the bet.

Regarding bias, I don't have any here.

Did I have a few minor arguments with jsearles here? Yes. But vegas1369 and I aren't exactly best friends. He did some things I didn't like or appreciate around the time I left DD, and while I have gotten over them, we definitely had some unpleasant moments over the past 8 months. If anything, it would be vegas1369 who would have more of a claim that I could be biased against him.

vegas1369 is definitely in the right here, and jsearles should pay up.

[Charham]

Quote made by LLL when all of this originally went down back in May....



Spot on from the very beginning.


As far as Druff ruling on this, that's already been done...

jsearles clearly made a bet with vegas1369 about his misuse of then/than. Since it became clear that he was going to lose, he changed his stance and found a reason in the semantics of his challenge to where it actually meant something different.

I read this with an open and neutral mind, and I got the same impression that vegas1369 (and nearly everyone else did): The bet was whether or not vegas1369 could come up with 25 examples of jsearles' misuse of then/than. This was what any reasonable person would take away from that challenge. To make such a challenge and then change its meaning based upon a semantic technicality is really scummy.

That's not the same as a smart prop bet. A smart prop bet is getting someone to bet you where you already know you have an edge (or a certainty) to win. For example, if I trained for running a 6-minute mile, told no one about it, and then offered a prop bet to someone at my poker table that I could run a mile in six minutes, that wouldn't be angle shooting. It would be a smart bet because people would assume that from my age and weight, I wouldn't be able to do it, when in reality I actually could. But the bet would still be clear. I would be betting that I could run a mile in six minutes, and my opponent would be betting that I couldn't. The bet would be straightforward and legitimate, even if I knew that my opponent was doing it based upon a false assumption about me.

But this is different.

If you trick someone into betting something different than they think they are (or if you change it midway because of a fear of losing), you are being dishonest.

Therefore, my opinion is that jsearles definitely owes vegas1369 $500, since jsearles lost the bet.

Regarding bias, I don't have any here.

Did I have a few minor arguments with jsearles here? Yes. But vegas1369 and I aren't exactly best friends. He did some things I didn't like or appreciate around the time I left DD, and while I have gotten over them, we definitely had some unpleasant moments over the past 8 months. If anything, it would be vegas1369 who would have more of a claim that I could be biased against him.

vegas1369 is definitely in the right here, and jsearles should pay up.

So jsearles is in effect asking for an appellate court to review Dan's decision.... not sure where that would come from .... or he is creating never ending process to get out of the bet. I like the earlier idea of a radio version of a trial. Perhaps Dan invites 2-3 people to be on a panel to hear oral arguments and decide.

[Steve-O]

Druff or Jasep are perfectly accptable Escrowers. But I'd be happy to hold $500 from each of you. I've had an online presence dating back to before moneymaker and have never stolen a red nickel from anyone (blue nickels are a diffferent story) or been accused of any form of shadiness. I'm not pro- or anti-JSearles and don't know Vegas1369 from a hole in the wall. I will abide by the rules you two agree to in terms of arbitrators.

If you can't agree to this then I feel you should turn to a reincarnated Gandhi or perhaps Santa Claus as the Escrow holder.

[jsearles22]

Druff or Jasep are perfectly accptable Escrowers. But I'd be happy to hold $500 from each of you. I've had an online presence dating back to before moneymaker and have never stolen a red nickel from anyone (blue nickels are a diffferent story) or been accused of any form of shadiness. I'm not pro- or anti-JSearles and don't know Vegas1369 from a hole in the wall. I will abide by the rules you two agree to in terms of arbitrators.

If you can't agree to this then I feel you should turn to a reincarnated Gandhi or perhaps Santa Claus as the Escrow holder.

Im open to discussing other escrow holders. I mentioned Tony Bags, I mentioned escrow.com. Steve-O is another example of someone I would throw into the discussion. However, i feel that this is where we are at currently:

For me its either druff or nobody

Since May 31st Ive been on board and Vegas hasnt been. Anyone else surprised. Well, probably not........

[jsearles22]

Quote made by LLL when all of this originally went down back in May....



Spot on from the very beginning.


As far as Druff ruling on this, that's already been done...

So jsearles is in effect asking for an appellate court to review Dan's decision.... not sure where that would come from .... or he is creating never ending process to get out of the bet. I like the earlier idea of a radio version of a trial. Perhaps Dan invites 2-3 people to be on a panel to hear oral arguments and decide.

Have you ever actually read the threads? If you get bored, you might want to do so. This thread is the 2nd of the long winded threads. It pretty much contains all of the arguments made:
http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...searles/page16

At this point the arguments are just being regurgitated. I have to just copy and paste now:

Vegas originally said he would agree to these grammar police as long as they would read the thread. Someone noted that he could in fact lose and now Vegas is backing off. He doesn't want a fair resolution, he only wants a resolution that he knows is in his favor before he ever agrees. Funny, that's how this bet started; Vegas thought he had a free roll.

Druff is in fact one of the smartest, honest, most ethical people in poker. The problem is, again, that he has already rendered a decision. No one in their right mind would agree to a judge like that.

[Hockey Guy]

Not sure why this is being discussed now. There is no fucking way jsearles or vegas will agree on the 3 impartial arbitrators let alone the escrow holder.

I'm sure I'll be long dead before these are agreed on.

[jsearles22]

Not sure why this is being discussed now. There is no fucking way jsearles or vegas will agree on the 3 impartial arbitrators let alone the escrow holder.

I'm sure I'll be long dead before these are agreed on.

This is being rehashed again because Druff is refusing to rightly pay me funds owed from TheTemplar scam based on his feelings that I lost the bet. Yeah, the same Druff that everyone is now clamoring for to be the escrow holder and "impartial" judge..............

[Charham]

So jsearles is in effect asking for an appellate court to review Dan's decision.... not sure where that would come from .... or he is creating never ending process to get out of the bet. I like the earlier idea of a radio version of a trial. Perhaps Dan invites 2-3 people to be on a panel to hear oral arguments and decide.

Have you ever actually read the threads? If you get bored, you might want to do so. This thread is the 2nd of the long winded threads. It pretty much contains all of the arguments made:
http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...searles/page16

At this point the arguments are just being regurgitated. I have to just copy and paste now:

Vegas originally said he would agree to these grammar police as long as they would read the thread. Someone noted that he could in fact lose and now Vegas is backing off. He doesn't want a fair resolution, he only wants a resolution that he knows is in his favor before he ever agrees. Funny, that's how this bet started; Vegas thought he had a free roll.

Druff is in fact one of the smartest, honest, most ethical people in poker. The problem is, again, that he has already rendered a decision. No one in their right mind would agree to a judge like that.

sounds good, i have not read through anything earlier on the bet topic. I did follow all of the templar stuff though in detail, thus this thread peaked my interest. (some of this thread energy could be put towards calling templar every day until he pays up :-) ) the actual content of the bet sounds tedious to me to dive into but the process of deciding is more interesting. i like the idea of a radio segment, controlled back and forth and some "expert" opinions deciding. perhaps no escrow or agreement to follow the expert opinions, but a controlled chance to try and hash it out.

[vegas1369]

or he is creating never ending process to get out of the bet.

That right there is EXACTLY what he has been doing since this all started.

Charham, if you really want to understand this all for yourself, read from this post on where it all started and draw your own conclusion. Jsearles linked you to a thread that was made after all of this went down. Here is where it all began.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...ll=1#post18567


Also, I will escrow to Tony within 24 hours of Jsearles doing so. No more discussion needs to be made on that. So there you go jsearles. Escrow to Tony.

[Hockey Guy]

That right there is EXACTLY what he has been doing since this all started.

Charham, if you really want to understand this all for yourself, read from this post on where it all started and draw your own conclusion. Jsearles linked you to a thread that was made after all of this went down. Here is where it all began.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...ll=1#post18567


Also, I will escrow to Tony within 24 hours of Jsearles doing so. No more discussion needs to be made on that. So there you go jsearles. Escrow to Tony.

What the fuck is wrong with you vegas. Can't you fucking read. He obviously said he was willing to discuss tonyb as the escrow. He never said he would accept him.

Learn to read motherfucker.

[vegas1369]

That right there is EXACTLY what he has been doing since this all started.

Charham, if you really want to understand this all for yourself, read from this post on where it all started and draw your own conclusion. Jsearles linked you to a thread that was made after all of this went down. Here is where it all began.

http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sho...ll=1#post18567


Also, I will escrow to Tony within 24 hours of Jsearles doing so. No more discussion needs to be made on that. So there you go jsearles. Escrow to Tony.

What the fuck is wrong with you vegas. Can't you fucking read. He obviously said he was willing to discuss tonyb as the escrow. He never said he would accept him.

Learn to read motherfucker.

LOL!

[Anal_Hershiser]

Not sure why this is being discussed now. There is no fucking way jsearles or vegas will agree on the 3 impartial arbitrators let alone the escrow holder.

I'm sure I'll be long dead before these are agreed on.

This is being rehashed again because Druff is refusing to rightly pay me funds owed from TheTemplar scam based on his feelings that I lost the bet. Yeah, the same Druff that everyone is now clamoring for to be the escrow holder and "impartial" judge..............

Instead whining about the people you DON'T want to escrow. Why don't you actually pick somebody you WILL trust to escrow. No more, "I'll discuss so and so". Who the fuck DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT? Enough discussion. FUCKING PICK ALREADY.

[vegas1369]

Also, I will escrow to Tony within 24 hours of Jsearles doing so. No more discussion needs to be made on that. So there you go jsearles. Escrow to Tony.

[Anal_Hershiser]

Instead whining about the people you DON'T want to escrow. Why don't you actually pick somebody you WILL trust to escrow. No more, "I'll discuss so and so". Who the fuck DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT? Enough discussion. FUCKING PICK ALREADY.

[peter mcneil]

has fatty actually disappeared? I would not be surprised.

[vegas1369]

has fatty actually disappeared? I would not be surprised.

He must be having a hard time coming up with excuses as to why Tony isn't a suitable escrow holder. He has been posting on Tyde today, so he obv has been lurking here.

One can only hide behind bullshit for so long.