sounds like you have no idea what the deal actually was and have no leg to stand on

can assure the forum that I didn't steer her wrong at any time, despite the fact she didn't even know what the deal was

So that's at least twice where you embezzled staking funds.

Let me spell this out to you since you obviously still don't understand. Stake money does not belong to you! It is not yours to do with as you please. It's not for you to pay your bills with. It's not for you to use to play in games outside your staking agreement. You don't get to just decide to keep it. Not even if you have some disagreement with the staker.

The stake belongs to the staker! You get paid from the profits, based on whatever the agreement is. Stake money is not to be co-mingled with your personal funds. That money is not yours, it never was yours, and anyone who would enter in a staking arrangement with you after all this is a complete fool.


Psst: That would be you, "Justin".

Jesus. Either stop playing under-age or get a ****ing job, loser.

Apparently the dude who has to slowpay a $221 debt is going to hire a lawyer and sue me too. What was Saul's number again?

no vested interest here at all, but wow is this

bobo and cmar doin' work as usual.

It'll get epic status when RJ finally files in small claims and we get the TR.

Seeing as how none of your backers will defend you it looks like the issue is on your end. If you cannot have amicable relationships with backers then it seems that you shouldn't have marketplace privileges because your behavior invites drama. Even if you're correct it doesn't benefit the forum to promote your services.

Plus it looks like you're a liar and scammer.

OK, so it seems you both remember the basics of the deal fairly similarly, although the details are a bit vague. But the basic principle of profit being split and losses going to makeup seem to have been agreed upon. The problem seems to be the numbers.

The $235 figure that I think I've seen both of you use - am I correct in assuming that was the money that was taken from the stake for other uses? If so, I would hope there's no argument on that being owed.

Then there's the actual stake. Are you both in agreement that it was $750? Did it ever get low enough to have to top up again?

For JB's claim that no money is owed beyond the $235 to be valid, I believe he'd have to be in MU for the entire amount of the stake - it seems pretty surprising that both of you would be confused about that much money. One of JB's emails said that he thought he owes around $1,000 (yes, I know JB has since said that was a guess, or something to that effect), and RJ doesn't even think JB was in MU - it seems strange that you both would have been out that much in your reckoning. This is where JB's figures would come in handy.

Edit to add: I must be misunderstanding something. For JB to owe nothing from the stake, the money would have to all be gone. How could the bankroll be down to $0 without anyone knowing?

Sigh.

Yes, she's not clear on all the details, and it seems you guys don't have any kind of contract and would have a hard time proving a verbal contract so she may have a tough time of it in front of the legal system. Is that really important? Sure, you can just blow the whole thing off and try to say "you can't prove I owe you money" if you like. You always could have done that. But I thought the idea was to arbitrate this and come up with something close to a fair solution. It's the right thing to do, and is the only hope for some scrap of redemption here. But it being the right thing to do should be what matters most.

What you still don't seem to understand is that you are your own worst enemy. We can completely ignore everything RJ has posted and get a very clear picture of who you are just based on your own posts.

The posts where:

- You admit to owing her money for three years.
- You state you are not going to repay that money unless your sundry demands are met.
- You admit that three years ago you confirmed the amount owing was ~$950.
- You admit that you recently offered her ~$950 if she would vouch for you with a new backer. (Way to start off that relationship with the new backer by screwing him from the getgo!)
- You admit to making other offers years ago to cover that amount, including a personal loan and selling the debt to a third party in return for her reference. Offers which are entirely one-sided and to which she has every right to decline.
- You now dispute that amount presumably since nobody else is going to pay it for you.
- You keep claiming you have "proof" of this new amount which you have yet to post despite your making 72 posts in this thread.
- You admit that none of your other backers will vouch for you.
- You admit that you have slowpayed another backer.
- You have threatened multiple frivolous lawsuits.
- You claim that you always knew she only wanted a "witch hunt". And is a horrible mod and horrible person. Even though you have been out of touch for years and this was a dormant issue until you contacted her and re-poened the whole thing because you found someone else dumb enough to give you money.

Did I miss anything?


Please, please, please contact a lawyer! Even though we'll never hear about it, it'll be amazing when he asks you for a $5k retainer (hey, maybe Justin will stake you?). And then you suggest he take it on a contingency basis. And then he reads this thread and has you thrown out of his office.

This guy is one of the most delusional characters I've seen on this forum in quite some time.

no it's not important to me.

what's important to me is that she get all the money she is owed, and I've said that to her numerous times. I made a mistake because I was wrong about when she dropped MTTs. I admit to dodging the issue after that because when I tried to tell her she started calling me a thief and referencing "her thread". I told her that I'd carry the makeup to a new backer so she could get all the money she thought she was owed. I even decided to call it an interest loan pending my return to poker, but that was because I was afraid of her. She still refused that remedy. Earlier this week I told her I'd give her everything plus interest in return for a reference for a stake and she still refused. So I think everyone should question her motivation.


the reason why the money seems weird to you is that the stake lasted over a year and was well into profit

if people want to go through the trouble of calling out my other 3 backers, all of whom got paid promptly, I'm sure they'd all say they trust me to pay even if they don't like me

if that's necessary, ok, that's fine, I can show profit graphs for each one of my stakes and the amount paid and they can confirm they got every penny

if we have to go through all the work of culling through 1 year of data on my tournament play, it's not going to be fun because it took me 2 days to do it

I'm pretty sure my numbers were correct but I did them on a laptop that I no longer own.

She doesn't have any evidence except an email I sent her when I hadn't worked out the chop yet, which said that I thought it was 1K, but she missed an 800 win that I got in the MP, that I thought was on her tab

I'm absolutely certain she did not buy any of my MP action after she dropped MTTs

I've also been calling it makeup from the time I figured it out to now. There is no ambiguity AFAIC. I was very scared of her because of what's going on right now. People taking her side because she's green. So I tried every remedy I could think of to satisfy her. I think she should take the 235 and drop it.

I'm hoping these are some simple questions you could answer that would help make some progress:

cry me a river: you sound like every teenage poster in here and it's no wonder this forum is the way it is

bobo

the actual stake was to be 900, but she only had to put up 400 to start and I don't think she ever had to put in more than that. Remember that every time I chopped out some, she got some too, so it was a lot of money going back and forth and it wasn't that easy to calculate everything especially since the chop amounts changed

that's why I was so wrong about the money, I had to go through a year of data and calculate the chops, which changed in the middle and at the time I told her 1K, I thought that she was in on a tournament cash that she actually wasn't

I stipulated from the beginning that in order to play for her I needed to cash out weekly, and we had two different chopping protocols during the stake

I actually didn't know how much makeup I was in because I really wasn't in makeup that often, I just went through 1 big DS, after which she dropped MTTS

I had 1200 in my account at BF and figured out that 235 was what was left of her staking money, the rest I'd earned in the MP selling my action after she dropped MTTs

does it make more sense now?

OK, that's the second question answered, from your perspective. What about the first and third questions?

No, this is the money that was left in my account that belonged to her

No as i recall the total staking amount was 900 and yes, we topped off and chopped throughout the stake, that's why it wasn't easy to calculate

OK, so what about the money that you took from the stake money that was used for something other than poker? Was that in some way repaid? I would think that would have to be repaid by you directly, not made up for by winnings like makeup would be.

Also, this part seems contradictory, but maybe I'm misunderstanding:

oh and 1 other thing bobo

as soon as I was contacted for another stake, I disclosed the 235 I owed Nicole and 665 MU.

I also would have paid her the 235 immediately upon recieving it from PS, but if I pay her the money I want all claims dropped. Otherwise she would have gotten the money 2 years ago.

I never took any money from the stake. I don't know what she's talking about. If anything I withheld our weekly chops until I absolutely needed it. If I took more in one week it's because I'd taken less in another. That was part of our deal. I sometimes had to explain to her that I needed the money.

Remember that she wanted to change the chop amount and we changed it, then after awhile longer she didn't want any chops, so she was pretty much fighting the original deal the whole time. If I got money for anything it was because chops were overdue. I don't remember much of that, I just know that when I crunched all the numbers it came out to 235 + 665

as for the other question bobo

we agreed to a 900 stake but she didn't have to start it with the whole 900, but she promised a 900 stake, which started with a 400 transfer to me

after that, I don't think it ever got to a point where she actually had to come out of her own pocket for more money. if she ever had to replenish, which occured somewhat often, since it was over a year stake, it was out of the money we chopped out of the first 400

does that make sense?

also according to my numbers she made out pretty well on the investment. she made money on the deal even with me being in makeup when it ended

OK, it sounds like I've got all I can from you without you going back through your results and figuring it out. If we really want to get this sorted out, that's probably what's going to have to happen.

But wouldn't the easiest way to figure out what went where to be to go through your transaction histories? Transfers between the two of you should tell the whole story.

Anyway, I'm off to bed now and I don't know if I'll have much time for this tomorrow - I fly to London tomorrow afternoon. But I will check in when I can over the weekend; hopefully next time I do there will be more information from you and RJ that will help to determine what went on. Given that even this taking of money from the stake is in dispute, it sounds like there's quite a bridge to cross.

guys, according to the verbal agreement which was explained in such a way so that rj didn't understand it, $100/week from December to April was cashed out and added to makeup. rj is the one who owes money on this deal if anything.

the math is complicated and it'll take a while to do it and I don't have sharkscope or records and I don't want to do it anymore and my infant son just broke his leg so w/e I'm done here

I'm still searching for the name of one of the backers but if you want to know

theskillzdatklls staked me for cash and some tourneys

brad2002TJ staked me for 12/180s

and the owner of the GR88 skin staked me on merge, his real name is Chris Neville but I can't find his sn here

the only glitch I had was cashing out some of the stake money on brad, what happened was that we chopped and reset the stake, and I needed a couple bucks and cashed out 2 something, which I was going to replace the next day when I got my cashout. Unfortunately PS was having a glitch and it took two months to get my wire transfer. So brad was a little pissed but I paid him the moment I got it.

All of these stakes finished in the black.

All of these guys will probably say I deal in good faith, and I think Nicole knows also that I deal in good faith, because she's indicated that in the past.

screaminAsian posting as though he's attentioone?

It looks to me stakee acted as if 50-100 has been cashed out weekly and added to makeup regardless of profit/loss, and profits were chopped (and i guess stakees share was then his withdrawal for that week) so that steakees share of profits rarely got to pay off any makeup.
stakee is contending that this was mutually beneficial for both parties but appears to be a surefire way for backers stake money to be withdrawn from the account and converted into makeup. How is this fair on the backer?

So, according to you, none of your alleged backers like you? What does that tell you? How many backers does someone playing $20 tournaments need, anyway??

And you've slowplayed (slow-payed seems more accurate in this context) at least one other person as well. That statement doesn't help your case at all. Just the reverse, in fact.

I'm not familiar with small claims courts in Maryland, but don't claims in them have to involve people/companies being in the same town or county? I know that this is how it works in at least some other states.

Also, RJ might quite reasonably figure that this guy doesn't have any money to pay a judgment, so why bother? Why spend time and money collecting wallpaper? (That's a term used for a judgment that can't be collected on, for those not familiar with these things.)

Lastly, it appears that this debt is years old. Is there a statute of limitations issue here? I have no idea, but there could be.

So, if you want to pay her, why not just pay her?

So then just pay her!

A. Why are you afraid of her? Has she made any threats in regards to your health and safety?

B. Of course she refused your remedy. She strikes me as being an honorable person - why would she lie to help out someone she knows to be dishonest?


Ok, so who are these 3 backers? After all, none of us can contact them if we don't know who they are.

How convenient for you.

She also has all of the statements you've made in this thread alone which support her side of the argument.

I don't see any sign of anyone in this thread taking her side because she's a green. I see every sign that people are taking her side because:

A. She comes across as having a consistent, if sometimes vague on the details, story here.

B. You're being a total jerk about the whole thing.

Lee