Another Blonde tournament staking required!

[vegaslover]

I like Dave.

He is however a degenerate gambler, i don't mean that in the way we all say it jokingly, he is a proper animal when it comes to money and gambling. That all being said though i expect everyone to get paid back at some time in the future, everyone knows what he is like but a grimmer he is not, he intends to pay back of that i am sure.

Yours Sincerely,

Someone who is owed from a Penly stake.

Whats the difference here?  Fergus was a degen gambler too and when he did the money you were one of the 1st people in there calling him a thief and a grimmer despite him coming back, admitting it and saying he would pay everyone back. Even then, yourself  and others still gave him a hard time before he got banned.

This
Just because Dave has been all cooey wooey (as Tikay would put it) about it, doesn't change what a ***** he's been about the whole thing. Until it's all paid up grimmer is the word that fits imho

[Ironside]

fegus was a troll on the forum who after grimming people was trolling to get banned

dave has spent money that wasnt his in a private arrangement in which blonde doesnt have a say it

to repeat fergus wasnt banned for grimming rather for being a prize pratt

i do hope dave can sort this out soon rather than later

[Boba Fett]

I didnt say he was banned for grimming and Im not here to try to make a case for him to be unbanned.  Im pointing out the ridiculous double standard just because some more people know Dave personally.  It was the same situation, everyone is practically giving the grimmer in this thread a cuddle and telling him it will be ok while in the Fergus thread they personally attacked him (Which caused his reaction imo)

[Eck]

I didnt say he was banned for grimming and Im not here to try to make a case for him to be unbanned.  Im pointing out the ridiculous double standard just because some more people know Dave personally.  It was the same situation, everyone is practically giving the grimmer in this thread a cuddle and telling him it will be ok while in the Fergus thread they personally attacked him (Which caused his reaction imo)

I didn't abuse Fergus, go back through the thread and check if you like. However he has at no time ever made an effort to repay what he took from me so from that stance my view of him is spot on imo.


If Dave subsequently makes no effort to repay the money then my opinion of him will be similar to that of Fergus. We shall see....

[Boba Fett]

Im sorry Dave and Imma let you finish.....but FERGUS had one of the best grimmings of ALL TIME!!!!

[action man]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

[Geo the Sarge]

Could it not be the case that people have learnt from the Fergus example?

Instead of hounding him off the forum, better to give him the chance to make amends.

Fergus wasn't given this chance, even as he was making repayments he was continually being flamed into the reaction he took. I'm not defending him, merely thinking if he had been given the chance I'm sure more peeps would have got their money back.

2 things that do make me wonder though:

In the Fergus case, more often it was people who had no stake in him that were doing the flaming.

In this case we already have stakers stating that they were aware of Daves compulsivness and accept the risk that they knew they were taking.

Personally, after some of the pish on here over the past few months, I find it encouraging that a bit of sense is actually being shown.

Hope it all goes well from here.

Geo

[jakally]

Difference is that Dave's already delivered a return to stakers.

[MANTIS01]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

[bolt pp]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

i can only assume this is a mis-click and you accidentally deleted your post?

[GreekStein]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

i can only assume this is a mis-click and you accidentally deleted your post?

Yes initially it included a definition of the term 'double standards', followed by its history. Mantis then went on to talk about the psychological aspect of this scenario and gave a report from Dave's second year at primary school.

[scotty2hatty]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

Just caught up with this. This is ridiculous, how is it not a grim? He spent staker's money on something he wasn't meant to?

I know Fergus was a farce, but this seems the same.

[riverdave]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

Just caught up with this. This is ridiculous, how is it not a grim? He spent staker's money on something he wasn't meant to?

I know Fergus was a farce, but this seems the same.

Well intention to pay back and the fact i've already returned more than the stake to most of the stakers has already been mentioned, however i don't plan to respond to any more comments from non stakers so this thread doesn't decend any further.

[TheChipPrince]

i kind of agree with bobba here, double standards

Just caught up with this. This is ridiculous, how is it not a grim? He spent staker's money on something he wasn't meant to?

I know Fergus was a farce, but this seems the same.

Well intention to pay back and the fact i've already returned more than the stake to most of the stakers has already been mentioned, however i don't plan to respond to any more comments from non stakers so this thread doesn't decend any further.

Just me who's received nothing at all then? 

[riverdave]

Ok bankroll finished at $2804.80 this is the shareholder breakdown :

30% Me
15% Bongo
5% Silo Graham
5% MC
10% gatso
10% Eck
15% jakally
10% Wardonkey

That means there is $402.40 more to return to shareholders plus their original stake.

Breakdown of who is owed what:

Bongo $360.36
Silo Graham $120.12
MC $120.12
gatso $240.24
Eck $240.24
jakally $360.36
Wardonkey $240.24

Total $1681.68

On top of those i still owe from previous withdrawal:

TheChipPrince $462.33
RobertHM $245.70

Overall Total $2389.71

I tried to pay RobertHM on Stars a couple of months back and it rejected as he had an age verification issue on his account which he needed to resolve i know he was busy with work but has not come back to me since, i think TheChipPrince rightly argues he should get paid first but by the same logic so should Robert.
Can other stakers let me know if they are happy to wait until those 2 are paid before i proportionally pay everyone else?
Hopefully i ship something decent and can pay it all in one go but if not that's the plan.