Robert Hm, who banned him and why??

[tikay]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

[Longy]

You can always rely on Mr Papertits to make stuff interesting.

[tikay]

Boring 3.5 year old thread finally delivers.

Great bump Cos.

You shit stirring git!!

My eyes are bad, I can't read that small bit.

[gatso]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

yeah, you may well be right. I'd struggle to think of anyone I know for who I'd consider this to be more out of character

[TightEnd]

You can always rely on Mr Papertits to make stuff interesting.

quite. Hearsay, nonetheless.

[Longy]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

Isn't Robert a lawyer? I find it hard to believe he is that naive.

[kinboshi]

You can always rely on Mr Papertits to make stuff interesting.

quite. Hearsay, pure and simple.

FYP

[tikay]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

yeah, you may well be right. I'd struggle to think of anyone I know for who I'd consider this to be more out of character

Exactly. It was just a coming together of circumstances. I really don't think Robert would have realised the implications of his attempt to get reimbursed. Nor do I think he can fairly be described as the villain of the peace here.

Poker & money, it does some weird things when it gets out of control.

[gatso]

You can always rely on Mr Papertits to make stuff interesting.

quite. Hearsay, pure and simple.

FYP

wiiii, 23,996 posts and finally kinboshi delivers

[The Camel]

Can someone pm me with a complete list of scandals and reasons for bannings on blondepoker I might have missed please.

[tikay]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

Isn't Robert a lawyer? I find it hard to believe he is that naive.

Yes, but does not mean he cannot be naive in certain areas. Many years ago, at the very height of their fame, The Stones were in court with Marianne Faithfull over a drugs bust. Confronted with Mick Jagger, the eminent Judge, when given Jagger's name, said "who?". We all have blind spots.

[GreekStein]

Although tbf, It says something about the poker world that I'm more surpirsed at Robert's behaviour than Dave's (which ethically was far worse obviously).

For the 2nd time in 15 hours, Camel nails it.

how? dave never set out to screw anyone but ended up doing it as he's a degen and got out of control

robert however, if what cos tells us is true, set out to intentionally screw his mates by the sounds of it

No no, that's certainly not what I meant to convey.

I don't know whether Robert just wasn't thinking or was asking for his money back as his plan was to leave blonde and he knew he wouldn't get in contact with Dave again once he left. It could have been a whole number of reasons - I'm not accusing him of intentionally setting out to screw his mates.

My point was that he is a bit hypocritical to try and take some sort of high ground amongst the mods when his actions in this instance do not resonate of morality

[The Camel]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

Isn't Robert a lawyer? I find it hard to believe he is that naive.

Yes, but does not mean he cannot be naive in certain areas. Many years ago, at the very height of their fame, The Stones were in court with Marianne Faithfull over a drugs bust. Confronted with Mick Jagger, the eminent Judge, when given Jagger's name, said "who?". We all have blind spots.

If all the facts are as presented Tony, I think your judgement of Robert is pretty lenient.

I really like Robert, I hope he has not disappeared from Blonde for good, but I am certainly disappointed with his behaviour in this, and if I had been in the staking syndicate I would have been very very angry.

[tikay]

Although tbf, It says something about the poker world that I'm more surpirsed at Robert's behaviour than Dave's (which ethically was far worse obviously).

For the 2nd time in 15 hours, Camel nails it.

how? dave never set out to screw anyone but ended up doing it as he's a degen and got out of control

robert however, if what cos tells us is true, set out to intentionally screw his mates by the sounds of it

No no, that's certainly not what I meant to convey.

I don't know whether Robert just wasn't thinking or was asking for his money back as his plan was to leave blonde and he knew he wouldn't get in contact with Dave again once he left. It could have been a whole number of reasons - I'm not accusing him of intentionally setting out to screw his mates.

My point was that he is a bit hypocritical to try and take some sort of high ground amongst the mods when his actions in this instance do not resonate of morality

Again, he did not. He was simply miffed that most of us understood the gravity of the risk, & he did not, & he thought we should have warned him. And we assumed he would have known. It was a simple misunderstanding, not an act of deception.

[tikay]

So Robert ends up as the primary villain here?

well, I went into the stake fully aware of the risks as I knew what dave's like. I fully expected it to go tits at some point and I fully expected to get paid eventually as well. I have no problem with what dave did to me
I do however have a problem with someone I consider to be a mate intentionally trying to screw me

That's the difference between you & Robert - you knew & understood the score, & were happy to take your chance. Robert did not. I don't actually think Robert tried, deliberately, to "screw" anyone, either. He just though, perhaps naively, that once the thing had gone awry, it was every man for himself. A naive thought perhaps, but Robert, if I may say so, was not worldly wise in these matters, whereas you are.  When he realised that everyone else had understood the risk, & nobody had told him, me included, he was "a bit cross". I'm not making an excuse for him, but he's not a deliberately dishonourable man imo.

Isn't Robert a lawyer? I find it hard to believe he is that naive.

Yes, but does not mean he cannot be naive in certain areas. Many years ago, at the very height of their fame, The Stones were in court with Marianne Faithfull over a drugs bust. Confronted with Mick Jagger, the eminent Judge, when given Jagger's name, said "who?". We all have blind spots.

If all the facts are as presented Tony, I think your judgement of Robert is pretty lenient.

I really like Robert, I hope he has not disappeared from Blonde for good, but I am certainly disappointed with his behaviour in this, and if I had been in the staking syndicate I would have been very very angry.

Possibly so Keith, possibly so.

But you need to take account of one thing. I never knew, & I don't think any of my mod colleagues knew, until Cos Posted it less than an hour ago, of the alleged arrangement Cos suggests Robert tried to make. That was complete news to me. And I'd want to hear both sides of that story before rushing to judgement, too.

Until we do, we can't verify "if the facts as presented are true", can we?