And I thought it was original. Bummer.

By far my favorite prank next to Arnold. Using Arnold, the only reflection for Yarbles would be the, "Agahahagaha aahga" or "It's not a tuma!(true rng)"

Dear TvSa,

That is because IP addresses are tracked here and matched to the correlating IP addresses on the sites you play. Once you have smarted off or sarcastificated in the direction one of the shills, they flip The Switch Of Doom.

Sincerely,

DonkoTheClown
Self Mediation Specialist
Leader of The Bad Beat Minions
www.DonkoTheClown.com
Donko@DonkoTheClown.com
800-Bad-Flop
13 Donko Lane
Clown Point, Isle of Donko 12345

Sadly I have clicked the www.DonkoTheClown.com link more than once now, only to hit a GoDaddy parked domain name

where did F did bible say anything about dinosaurs?

Hello,

Have you by any chance lost your kitty?

where did F did bible say anything about kitties?

"A Dinosaur Named Sue begat a dinosaur named Sue.." Jubilees (Ethiopian Orthodox) chapter 3 verse 50

Isn't that because they shamelessly recycle them?

Riggie conspiracies or soap opera plot lines?

I never thought online was rigged til rush poker was brought in.

Both!

I'm sure you get more suck-outs an hour with rush.

Yes of course. Obviously its not rigged,I just like to say it to myself so i feel better when i go through down swings. Lol!

Moi?

If spade's investigation was an iPoker one, then I'd be interested in discussing it with him and looking into it in greater detail than I have at the moment.

Would save me a lot of time of having to conduct my own investigation, that's for sure.

That's a bit pointless, investigating a site, but not telling us which one it is.

There are what hundreds, (thousands ?) of online poker sites out there, each one runs separately from the others, so each one would need to be analyzed individually.

A lot of people seem to have got into the mentality of either, 'online poker is rigged,' or 'online poker is not rigged.' There are many, many different poker sites, the most likely outcome would be that some of these sites have fair dealing and some do not. Each one would need to be investigated individualy to find out which ones are which, we can't just investigate one and then claim online poker as a whole is completely above board or completely rigged.

You don't 'have to' conduct your own investigation.

The only reason to 'conduct' an investigation is because you refuse to accept responsibility for your poor results and are clinging, desperately, to the belief that the reason you cannot win - or cannot win at the rate you think you should be - is because the site upon which you play is deliberately acting against you.

It's a standard rigtard mindset.

You would be much better off investigating books or other methods of improving your poker that 'conducting an investigation' into the fairness of the deal.

There's no problem with pointing out people's errors in their views regarding the fairness of online poker. It was shooting people down on irrelevant matters, (which I've seen extend as far as their lack of knowledge of 17th century literature,) that I thought was unnecessary.

I think you've severely contradicted yourself by saying, 'Who is allowed to do what is a matter for the site owners and the moderators, not the shills, riggies or 'tards,' as you are probably the worst person on here for telling people what they can and can't do, or what they should and shouldn't do.

I was saying that the moderators weren't doing their job properly, by allowing someone who has been banned several times to continue to post.

I certainly don't believe the site is 'deliberately acting against me,' I'd like to make that clear right now. Why would they do that ? I've never once suggested that.

You keep telling people to investigate and come back with evidence, so please don't have a go at me now that I've decided to take you up on that suggestion.

I've been investigating books and other methods of improving my game for many years and will continue to do so whilst also analyzing my hand histories.

Not really as rigtards operate on all sites and the sheer volume of hands tells us that the larger sites must be included.

Bzzzzz.

Wrong!

The networks are just that. Networks of sites that run from the same servers. So all ipoker skins get the same deal.

Not true.

The shills say that on line poker is probably not rigged. That applies to all sites.

The rigtards say that it's rigged and they probably believe it applies to all sites.

Some riggies merely have concerns and they may well believe that some sites might be rigged and others aren't.

Oh, good grief!

What a moronic statement.

That's what we do.

We just let each rigtard (or, indeed, anyone else), investigate the sites at which he plays.

As soon as one finds evidence of rigging we mark it up as a rigged site.

At the moment the list of sites marked with evidence of rigging is as follows:


-------------------------------------------------------------
Sites for which evidence of rigging has been shown:


-------------------------------------------------------------

Fated, out of curiosity, how many HHs do you currently have saved on your computer?

Collateral damage.

I have precisely no authority whatsoever to tell anyone what they can and cannot do here so I very much doubt that I'd waste my time instructing people on matters that I have no power to enforce.

You do realise, I suppose, that if someone says: "You can't say <x> without evidence", they mean: "You can't say <x> without evidence and expect to be taken seriously"? Since it's fairly obvious that you can actually make the post. Other than that I'd like to see evidence of where I've given anyone instructions about their posting habits. (Sorry to use the 'E' word again).

Do you have any Evidence that I've been 'banned several times?

Do you even have any Evidence that I've bee banned once?

Yeah, I'm aware all iPoker sites get the same deal. I was talking about iPoker as one 'site,' I'm aware we wouldn't need to investigate every iPoker 'skin' separately.

Again, if you're going to say something's a 'moronic statement,' you'd be expected to give even some sort of indication as to why. Nothing less than you'd expect of me or anyone else.

'We just let each rigtard (or, indeed, anyone else), investigate the sites at which he plays.' Thankyou. Thankyou for your permission. Can you please then let me do that, like you just said, instead of biting when I suggested I was going to do such a thing.

As an afterthought, has anyone else noticed a pattern in FTP's posting?

He seems to pop up, make a couple of post about gathering or analysing evidence, and then make umpteen more whining about the way people respond.