Poll: East Coast/Ty Gaston

[savage1]

Homer-lets say if you were EastCoast and thought YOU had been treated unfairly, you might feel differently.
Some things cannot and should not be simply swept under the rug, and in my opinion BC's solution is expedient but at the same time unwarranted.

[wizardofoddz]

savage1

Originally posted by savage1
Homer-lets say if you were EastCoast and thought YOU had been treated unfairly, you might feel differently.
Some things cannot and should not be simply swept under the rug, and in my opinion BC's solution is expedient but at the same time unwarranted.

You call his action unwarranted, and yes that is your opinion. I do believe this is Monte's site, not the state of Bettorschat. Seems to me he should be able to make any decision he likes. It is also very clear to me the members have spoken their say in the poll. Is that not democracy?
I don't mean for this to offend you, but if you were any farther left, you be standing by alone.

[savage1]

From my standpoint if it was clearly stated BEFORE(and that is key word) how each participant would prove to all that money was legitimate, then perhaps the banning action could be taken if the participants had broken the rules.
In this case it seems to me that the rules regading above made up AFTER the contest began and thus someone cannot be punished for something for which guilt does not exist.
Please correct me if I am incorrect.

[Trotter]

When i log onto this site all i see is Sports Service's posts on the front page, isn't there a way that only the 'Sports Discussion" posts would be seen on the front page instead of everything else?

If people want to read what a service has to say i wish they would have to go to the area instead of seeing it on the front page mixed in with our posts, and then they always bump them up and it looks like a shit hole...

Maybe you could have a link offsite that people would have to click on to go look at the Service threads...:confused:

[BettorsChat]

Trotter,

No there's no way of doing that.

Savage,

I don't think what I did was unjust when members that are actually posting on the forum are voicing their opinion about them being banned. I have to look at this from a business decision which is not losing my regular posters over a few services.

[savage1]

Well-if you put business over ethics and unsubstantiated allegations, that is your choice, but I disagree.

[BettorsChat]

Originally posted by savage1
Bettorschat-you should be ashamed of yourself for taking such an arbitrary action especially as there were no rules concerning this PRIOR to contest and since it has not been proven that the $100000 was bogus.
The burden of proof is on you, as in this country one is innocent until proven guilty.
You should really take a step back and read some of the other posts before doing this.
Why don't you ban everyone who used foul language and contributed to and incited the debacle (without proof )and ran personal attacks on those charged with the "high" crime?
You call this democracy? You are very selective on who you choose to ban.

Savage,

I don't have to prove shit as my integrity is not on the line. If you don't like it stop posting at the site. And you should be ashamed of yourself as the majority of the people want them banned. If you read the poll 72% want them gone. I guess I should let them stay so I can lose regular contributing members over services trying to sell plays.

Also these 2 made up the contest and didn't run jack shit by me. As I stated before I should have gotten involved from the get go and made them give me proof before.

What's funny is you don't like services yet you're defending these 2 like it was yourself. It's very simple they can either prove the claim of the money or they can't prove it. And don't give me any crap about me having to take care of it as it's not my job nor my integrity on the line. You need to take a step back and look at it from the 72% voters and my standpoint from a business prospective.

[BettorsChat]

Originally posted by savage1
Well-if you put business over ethics and unsubstantiated allegations, that is your choice, but I disagree.

You always disagree.

You are a person that is very opinionated and sticks to his decision like a lock and key. For some reason you have a hard time being impartial and looking at things from a different perspective.

[savage1]

BC-just the opposite.
I don't fly off the handle and ban people with no proof when rules were never set in the first place prior to the start of the contest.
The best bet on the board is that if this thing ever went to court based SOLELY on the evidence and rules stated BEFORE and not AFTER the contest began, not the namecalling and hearsay and circumstantial evidence, then Ty and EastCoast and Ty would be found guilt of nothing and neither would be banned.
Have a nice day.

[BettorsChat]

Originally posted by savage1
BC-just the opposite.
I don't fly off the handle and ban people with no proof when rules were never set in the first place prior to the start of the contest.
The best bet on the board is that if this thing ever went to court based SOLELY on the evidence and rules stated BEFORE and not AFTER the contest began, not the namecalling and hearsay and circumstantial evidence, then Ty and EastCoast and Ty would be found guilt of nothing and neither would be banned.
Have a nice day.

savage1,

Wrong i've never seen such a person that is so argumentative as you. You keep this thing going on and on. You should really go join a Political forum as I think you would really enjoy it.

And this is not a Court of Law which I'm very familiar with. This is a business and it's mine. I'm not losing posters over 2 services and if you can't see that then that's ashame.

[savage1]

BC-do as you want.
I am simply stating that in my opinion what you did was unjustified and unwarranted based on the evidence at hand.
Even more laughable and more relevant is that you have not addressed the issue of ALL those using vile language and name calling.
If anything detracts from this(your) site, it is that and NOT whether someone paid or did not pay $100000.
In my opinion in order to improve this site you, wayne and anyone else who is interested should take steps to "clean" up the language and disgusting and childish posts of some here to ensure that debacles like this do not arise again.
Banning people is a bandaid approach and doesn't ensure a similar situation will not arise in the future.

[Lucky Leo]

Savage I think it is time you just shut the hell up! Maybe you should be banned too!! I seem to recall a few months back you and Ty always arguing every single day. Then he was wrong and should be banned for yelling at an old man. Remember that. I do!!! So stop defending them and move on. BC is in the right. They are liars as of right now. If they prove otherwise I will welcome them back. But if they want to make that claim to everyone here they should have to prove it if we so ask. WE ARE ASKING AND THEY ARENT' SHOWING!!!

[CoverBoy]

Savage

Not for nothing but a while back I tore into Ty Gaston for calling you a Jew .

Thats what he did .. I saw it ... it nauseated me ... I stepped in. That ignorance is unsupportable ... Here ... or anywhere else.

Whether or not you are has no bearing ... Ethnic backgrounds do not matter here... nor should they.

So I need to ask you a question now. Given your intelligence ...WHY do you even recognize him .... much less defend him ?

I'm expecting a direct and very much to the point answer .

[savage1]

Lucky Leo- As much as I had questions about what Ty stated and still do, I decided attacking/bashing was not the way to go.
People here can read his posts and those of anyone and make their own decisions.
Name calling by both sides, personal attacks , etc is juvenille and accomplishes nothing.
I can see why folks like Memphis might leave.
Your insinuation shows that you have no tolerance for anyone else's view but your own;I have never told anyone to shut up.
Banning me would be just another step into turning this thread into a undemocratic one.
I say let there be established and written rules, and if rules are broken, then and only then do what is necessary to the perpetrators.
In this case, in my opinion it is sad that the simple "lynch mob" philosophy has taken over in this thread with no substantial evidence that anyone has committed any crimes worthy of being banned.

[Lucky Leo]

I by no means bashed anyone. I was stating the fact that you used to go at Ty every day now defending him tooth and nail. I just don't fully understand that. We are all grown ups here and for the most part all act like that. We don't need any rules. We are old enough to know right from wrong. Do we not know if we are doing wrong? I think we all know that and can accept any consequences if we get too far out of line. I feel Ty may have been there several times. East Coast not so much but the lie of 100,000. I know the money shouldn't even come into this but it is if it was a lie I don't trust that person. It isn't a little lie but a 100,000 lie. I for one hope that they can prove it so they come back. But if they can't prove it I will support Montes decision. You should too.