Marc Wright aka dean23price/railtard1 still scamming July 2012

[CHIPPYMAN]

5 pages ago i made a post that i thought would lock this thread untill next week when me and lewis would have this matter closed away from the forum, but for the last 5 pages people have spoke about the staking board on blonde. Which has little to do with this thread. Do mod's not think it wise to open a seperare flaming threads for the blonde staking thread instead of drag this thread on further? Its my name at the start of the thread, so seems slightly unfair.

No.

A sensible discussion, about important issues.

It can carry on

Yesssssssss Ruchard u tell them whose the boss here

[CHIPPYMAN]

so seems slightly unfair.

lol, you have to love this guy.

lol at u man. dont u have anything better to do with ur time?
I mean, this thread has been blown ridiculously out of proportion. We DIDNT make a swap for that large a %. He was under the impression we did (genuine impression i think), and to stop any grief, im going to pay 5% as soon as on english soil.
Thats it, the thread should of been locked, but obviously people love trolling.

If u paid him the minutes u came back from EPT Berlin,
This thread won't b up and running. Its ur fault dude & don't blame
it on others .   

[Simon Galloway]

Still concerning that he has agreed to pay under duress, but still adamant he is not in the wrong 

[aaron1867]

Still concerning that he has agreed to pay under duress, but still adamant he is not in the wrong 

Not exactly going to admit it really...

Not helped himself by comments in the thread...

"I'll snap sort it"
"Lock the thread"
"this doesn't seem fair"

He is very lucky that he has swapped it with this Lewis guy who sounds a nice bloke.

[rfgqqabc]

He has also contradicted himself, when stating over and over that he would never swap 5% when in make up and then later admits, when he has to, that he swapped 5% with someone else.

Whilst i understand completely what you are saying, Marc always said he wouldn't swap 5% with someone he didn't know. For all we know the other guy is his best mate.

[Amatay]

haha A* Keith once more !

I must be getting really thick skinned/ruined by gambling world but this whole thing really isn't that big of a deal, it's obviously shit and it's tragic when it happens but if you're going to go and enter into multi-figure financial agreements with people you don't know then this sort of thing is going to happen to you, as Keith says it's completely inevitable.

The way I personally conduct my business is I have a network of people who I trust 100% with money dealings, I make regular 4/5figures transactions with them and I don't bat an eyelid, if someone who I don't know/haven't dealt with before comes along and I need to deal with him, I will ALWAYS and I do mean ALWAYS ask if he's dealt with any of my friends before and get a reference from them. I also never assume that one successful deal = 100% trust. Sometimes (despite me double bolding above) I might decide to go ahead without a reference, in these circumstances I am willing to accept the chance of me getting knocked is was higher than it usually is.

Even people on blonde who aren't overly involved in the poker world can still use this system, people on here/fb like me/toby/flushy/dubai/brammer or anyone like us would be (i might be putting words in their mouth but I doubt it) more than willing to vouch/not vouch for people (don't have to say "he's a c**t he did X Y etc, just a question, would you deal with X person, and i'll answer yes or no). I actually get quite a few PMs asking "is X person trustworthy they say they have dealt with you" and people who i deal with regually know they are more than welcome to offer people to reference them to me. This really is the only/best form of policing and it's 30x anything blonde could do/should do.

Personally if I was Lewis I would NEVER have agreed the swap with Marc, all he knew of Marc was his past and didn't know him personally, obviously I know him personally so it's a lilttle different for me - it's still a terrible situation and I'm delighted Lewis is getting paid in full, which is 100% the right thing, but there is a lesson to learn in here.

The problem with these things is the only way to learn is to get knocked once in a while, I know that's horrible and I hate this about the gambling world but I really think its true Like Gouty and Kieth say reputation really is everything.

I'm glad Marc has seen sense and decided to pay up, the positives of this situation is it further re-affirms to marc he can't do this sort of stuff and expect to get away with it, and although it's been a terrible tilting time for lewis he's managed to survive not being out of pocket.  I agree though that Marc's reformation has been way too easy - he should have been fully repaid the last time for a decent period of time and have another good period after that where he has behaved flawlessly before anyone should have even considered trusting him again. I actually like Marc personally, so a little bit of me is pleased for him to have recovered so quickly but from my position within poker I think it sets a dangerous precedent that he has.

Post of the thread by 1000 miles.

If I could add one small thing it would be that blondepoker is slightly different to other platforms.

They are a lot of casual, recreational players on here, who are not so savvy when it comes to staking/buying shares.

It's why the Blatch thing hurt so much. Many people invested money thy couldn't afford to lose.

Dubai, Rupert, Flushy can look after themselves, but some people need a little protection sometimes.

agree with pretty much everything here

[blueace]

He has also contradicted himself, when stating over and over that he would never swap 5% when in make up and then later admits, when he has to, that he swapped 5% with someone else.

Whilst i understand completely what you are saying, Marc always said he wouldn't swap 5% with someone he didn't know. For all we know the other guy is his best mate.

I remember seeing one of Railtards staking posts in the forum and the name rang a bell. I googled and lo and behold a mass of information about previous scamming came up. But for not having the required posts I would have wanted to mention this information incase there were any uninformed potential stakers. I was amazed that no reference to his past was made in the staking forum.

[rfgqqabc]

He has also contradicted himself, when stating over and over that he would never swap 5% when in make up and then later admits, when he has to, that he swapped 5% with someone else.

Whilst i understand completely what you are saying, Marc always said he wouldn't swap 5% with someone he didn't know. For all we know the other guy is his best mate.

I remember seeing one of Railtards staking posts in the forum and the name rang a bell. I googled and lo and behold a mass of information about previous scamming came up. But for not having the required posts I would have wanted to mention this information incase there were any uninformed potential stakers. I was amazed that no reference to his past was made in the staking forum.

This is a very good point. I would have been in a similar situation but it had been noted in the Irish Open thread, a few weeks before that there was an issue. This probably needs addressing as i doubt many new members feel the need to google prospective horses, especially those other people are buying pieces of.

[Longy]

Why wouldn't you do a basic google search, before committing any money to a potential horse? Obviously have sympathy for people who do get done over, but you have to take some self responsibilities in these spots.

[rfgqqabc]

Why wouldn't you do a basic google search, before committing any money to a potential horse? Obviously have sympathy for people who do get done over, but you have to take some self responsibilities in these spots.

If i saw cambridgealex buy a piece in someone, i wouldn't feel the need to google around for them. I've never taken a piece of someone on blonde but have on 2+2 etc, where rl info isn't always available. SNs can hide a lot. My sn here is completely different to 2+2, for all you know even after googling me, you would get no information, even if i had done something. Friends/fellow blondes buying pieces should be good enough as a vouch, and if i didn't feel this way, i would not buy a piece at all.

[Longy]

Pretty standard to include online sn's and real life names in staking threads these days. I mean you need one or the other to ship money to people and it is rare if you can't find something by using google if there is something shady about someone.

I am sure Alex is a decent judge of people but it doesn't take very long to do a quick background check yourself when you are committing your own dime.

[Doobs]

Why wouldn't you do a basic google search, before committing any money to a potential horse? Obviously have sympathy for people who do get done over, but you have to take some self responsibilities in these spots.

If i saw cambridgealex buy a piece in someone, i wouldn't feel the need to google around for them. I've never taken a piece of someone on blonde but have on 2+2 etc, where rl info isn't always available. SNs can hide a lot. My sn here is completely different to 2+2, for all you know even after googling me, you would get no information, even if i had done something. Friends/fellow blondes buying pieces should be good enough as a vouch, and if i didn't feel this way, i would not buy a piece at all.

I am absolutely not vouching for Marc when I buy pieces in him.  What I am saying is I believe the price is good, this is a very different thing.  I would rather buy on price than reputation, I expect I lose a lot less that way. 

FWIW His history has been on the staking thread in the past.

[SuuPRlim]

One other point this thread has dragged up which I think is 100% incorrect is the old "blonde illuminati" argument.

People actually claim that certain members get preferential treatment to the point that they are defending over scamming scandals over not so established victims? Or that people are actually SCARED to post on blonde because of the "clique backlash"?

Complete and utter nonsense both of these points, as proven by the Blatch thread, this thread, previous Marc thread (and more) and by the fact I could prolly find 10 of the last 120 topics stared in The Rail from new/unknown posters either introducing themselves or asking for advice and in bang on every one of them people are rushing to welcome them or offer help/advice to them.

I agree people who are long standing and active members prolly receive a little more lenience from the mods than unknown posters, but surely after a long history of forum contribution they prolly deserve that?

That whole argument really does just baffle me.

[MANTIS01]

haha A* Keith once more !

I must be getting really thick skinned/ruined by gambling world but this whole thing really isn't that big of a deal, it's obviously shit and it's tragic when it happens but if you're going to go and enter into multi-figure financial agreements with people you don't know then this sort of thing is going to happen to you, as Keith says it's completely inevitable.

The way I personally conduct my business is I have a network of people who I trust 100% with money dealings, I make regular 4/5figures transactions with them and I don't bat an eyelid, if someone who I don't know/haven't dealt with before comes along and I need to deal with him, I will ALWAYS and I do mean ALWAYS ask if he's dealt with any of my friends before and get a reference from them. I also never assume that one successful deal = 100% trust. Sometimes (despite me double bolding above) I might decide to go ahead without a reference, in these circumstances I am willing to accept the chance of me getting knocked is was higher than it usually is.

Even people on blonde who aren't overly involved in the poker world can still use this system, people on here/fb like me/toby/flushy/dubai/brammer or anyone like us would be (i might be putting words in their mouth but I doubt it) more than willing to vouch/not vouch for people (don't have to say "he's a c**t he did X Y etc, just a question, would you deal with X person, and i'll answer yes or no). I actually get quite a few PMs asking "is X person trustworthy they say they have dealt with you" and people who i deal with regually know they are more than welcome to offer people to reference them to me. This really is the only/best form of policing and it's 30x anything blonde could do/should do.

Personally if I was Lewis I would NEVER have agreed the swap with Marc, all he knew of Marc was his past and didn't know him personally, obviously I know him personally so it's a lilttle different for me - it's still a terrible situation and I'm delighted Lewis is getting paid in full, which is 100% the right thing, but there is a lesson to learn in here.

The problem with these things is the only way to learn is to get knocked once in a while, I know that's horrible and I hate this about the gambling world but I really think its true Like Gouty and Kieth say reputation really is everything.

I'm glad Marc has seen sense and decided to pay up, the positives of this situation is it further re-affirms to marc he can't do this sort of stuff and expect to get away with it, and although it's been a terrible tilting time for lewis he's managed to survive not being out of pocket.  I agree though that Marc's reformation has been way too easy - he should have been fully repaid the last time for a decent period of time and have another good period after that where he has behaved flawlessly before anyone should have even considered trusting him again. I actually like Marc personally, so a little bit of me is pleased for him to have recovered so quickly but from my position within poker I think it sets a dangerous precedent that he has.

Don't know why you would NEVER agree the swap in this spot when op has the personal reference you recommend. Or you figure op should suspect his buddy pleno hooked him up a roomshare with some underhand character?

Seems to me that untrustworthy people change their behaviour dependant on who they deal with. There's a sliding scale with the influential people being snap paid and the obscure being messed about. No doubt if op was some big cheese he gets paid on the day. So I think people with status should be careful giving out references based on personal dealings rather than full disclosure. People are either 100% trustworthy or they are not. In this eg pleno gets snap paid in prior dealings so happy to recommend on that basis but is let down.

Anyway back to Feldman. I was thinking about the fish he abuses and busts in them HU games. Maybe it's not a big deal afterall. I know it's horrible and I hate this about the gambling world but I reckon it's good for them because the only way to learn is to get knocked once in a while. If he believes the price is good that's what matters.

[jgcblack]

haha A* Keith once more !

I must be getting really thick skinned/ruined by gambling world but this whole thing really isn't that big of a deal, it's obviously shit and it's tragic when it happens but if you're going to go and enter into multi-figure financial agreements with people you don't know then this sort of thing is going to happen to you, as Keith says it's completely inevitable.

The way I personally conduct my business is I have a network of people who I trust 100% with money dealings, I make regular 4/5figures transactions with them and I don't bat an eyelid, if someone who I don't know/haven't dealt with before comes along and I need to deal with him, I will ALWAYS and I do mean ALWAYS ask if he's dealt with any of my friends before and get a reference from them. I also never assume that one successful deal = 100% trust. Sometimes (despite me double bolding above) I might decide to go ahead without a reference, in these circumstances I am willing to accept the chance of me getting knocked is was higher than it usually is.

Even people on blonde who aren't overly involved in the poker world can still use this system, people on here/fb like me/toby/flushy/dubai/brammer or anyone like us would be (i might be putting words in their mouth but I doubt it) more than willing to vouch/not vouch for people (don't have to say "he's a c**t he did X Y etc, just a question, would you deal with X person, and i'll answer yes or no). I actually get quite a few PMs asking "is X person trustworthy they say they have dealt with you" and people who i deal with regually know they are more than welcome to offer people to reference them to me. This really is the only/best form of policing and it's 30x anything blonde could do/should do.

Personally if I was Lewis I would NEVER have agreed the swap with Marc, all he knew of Marc was his past and didn't know him personally, obviously I know him personally so it's a lilttle different for me - it's still a terrible situation and I'm delighted Lewis is getting paid in full, which is 100% the right thing, but there is a lesson to learn in here.

The problem with these things is the only way to learn is to get knocked once in a while, I know that's horrible and I hate this about the gambling world but I really think its true Like Gouty and Kieth say reputation really is everything.

I'm glad Marc has seen sense and decided to pay up, the positives of this situation is it further re-affirms to marc he can't do this sort of stuff and expect to get away with it, and although it's been a terrible tilting time for lewis he's managed to survive not being out of pocket.  I agree though that Marc's reformation has been way too easy - he should have been fully repaid the last time for a decent period of time and have another good period after that where he has behaved flawlessly before anyone should have even considered trusting him again. I actually like Marc personally, so a little bit of me is pleased for him to have recovered so quickly but from my position within poker I think it sets a dangerous precedent that he has.

Don't know why you would NEVER agree the swap in this spot when op has the personal reference you recommend. Or you figure op should suspect his buddy pleno hooked him up a roomshare with some underhand character?

Seems to me that untrustworthy people change their behaviour dependant on who they deal with. There's a sliding scale with the influential people being snap paid and the obscure being messed about. No doubt if op was some big cheese he gets paid on the day. So I think people with status should be careful giving out references based on personal dealings rather than full disclosure. People are either 100% trustworthy or they are not. In this eg pleno gets snap paid in prior dealings so happy to recommend on that basis but is let down.

Anyway back to Feldman. I was thinking about the fish he abuses and busts in them HU games. Maybe it's not a big deal afterall. I know it's horrible and I hate this about the gambling world but I reckon it's good for them because the only way to learn is to get knocked once in a while. If he believes the price is good that's what matters.