Quote:
Originally Posted by DC2LV
I seriously doubt that you've ever "briefly explained" anything in your life. And your response above to my little humorous dig at your penchant to explain absolutely everything is a good example.
Your dig was funny(ish) but discounted some important factors. You are among a growing number of NVG posters who criticise other posters' style of or length of post rather than discuss the issue of the thread. In fact, one of the early posters ITT criticised the length of the OP as did a later one. It's a societal thing of people having a lower attention span than in previous years through texting etc. When I text I use "sup?", "cu l8r" etc as much as anyone, but this is not texting, this is a serious discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreadLightly
He has tweeted probably 10+ times in his hundreds of tweets this week that the floor man who didn't kick the rail out cost him 6 figures in equity (along with a hefty amount of continued insults at diff parties involved). Also he keeps tweeting how WSOP hasn't contacted him yet, wtf does he expect them to do? Pay him out equity he thinks he is owed or phone him to say they are firing a veteran floor man ? Retroactive ban on affleck and his gf?
I agree that he could have handled it much better and that his "demands" are unrealistic. I said as much in a friendly Twitter exchange with him. The problem is that his first response and first few Tweets were quite understandably emotionally charged, so once he'd started off in that vein it becomes difficult for him to back track or to adopt a softer and more conciliatory approach.
I mentioned in a Tweet to Luke that he deserves some compensation, e.g. $10Ks worth of food, drink and accommodation comped plus an apology and that the WSOP are likely viewing the situation as a personality dispute rather than a ruling or equity influencing dispute which is why they'd never pay out a very big amount of compensation or admit any liability or negligence.
I do believe that if he wrote a more measured letter to them or someone representing him did so on his behalf then maybe the WSOP would give him some kind of undisclosed compensation with a no admission of liability and secrecy clause attached to it.
But whilst he is on the all out attack as he is now, I think they will just pretend nothing ever happened and possibly use his *current* tirades as a retrospective justification for them not treating him even handedly during the comp.
From a business standpoint the WSOP will always survive because it is so iconic and historic, in the same way that people will always visit The Statue of Liberty or Buckingham Palace. However, for all 3 of these, if standards start to slip in various areas and certain endemic problems are not rectified then it will lower attendance and cause some damage to the brand.
I am in support of Luke's case but one has to be practical and tactful when trying to effect change and when putting one's case forward for compensation.
Last edited by SageDonkey; 06-15-2017 at 06:26 PM.