Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Hughes
Remember when this thread was not about Oski and Lott, but about Benny Binion at the end, and methods of collusion?
Well, the collusion discussion is D.O.A.; however, we have moved to another topic. If you want to start a new thread about this, go ahead.
Let's back up a bit:
1. Johnny, I never really thought you were anything beyond a pen-name, or at the very least the collector and teller of tales (with some license). No problem there.
2. Lott comes around and puts the question directly to you. Rather than offer proof, or address the issue head on, you seem content to throw mud at him and villify him. Once I see that, I point out that I have had doubts all along, and I am curious as to the truth behind it.
3. Now, you purport to be a long-time college professor. If so, why can't you appreciate the intellectual integrity of the question? You are an author of Poker Books, you post on this site, and your identity has come into question. Correct me if I am wrong, but you hold a healthy skepticism of what lies on the other side of the internet. Of course, you questioned Admo's willingness to swap funds with a "stranger." Of course, this is not the same situation, but the question still arises.
4. Who are you? You have a web site, but it is devoid of personal information. You will not willingly prove your authenticity, and you invited us to look you up on a Texas Website. Well, I did, and you claimed to be a Director of a Department at Texas Tech that doesn't exist. Furthermore, most people who would hold such an esteemed postiion at a major univiersity would not be shy
about mentioning it on their website.
5. Also, given the position you claimed to hold, there is no doubt that you would be more known as "that professor that plays poker with the crossroaders, or someting like that" as opposed to just a poker player. That makes no sense. You should not be offended that these questions are asked, becuase you invited them by not offering proof of your identity.
Listen, for the sake of the question itself, I don't really care who you are. To me, you are a collection of stories: some good, some bad, some ugly
. Lott called you out, you didn't address him or his question in a reasonable way, thus you have a hand in creating an issue bigger than it needs to be.
By the way, just because we want to know who you are doesn't mean we dislike you or you work (or should I say "hater" as you 70-year-old crossroaders seem to say these days).