Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views and gossip.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-30-2009, 11:58 PM   #351
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 28,002
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

With all the Internet freedom supporters on Twitter, I believe we can make this viral. So, let's all send Pawlenty tweets with our opinion of this action. To participate:
  1. Log onto Twitter
  2. Click here to retweet the Twitter message
  3. Click "update"
That's all! It takes just 15 seconds!

Last edited by Rich Muny; 05-01-2009 at 12:11 AM.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:00 AM   #352
iMsoLucky0
Pooh-Bah
 
iMsoLucky0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: gimme the 3
Posts: 3,599
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

zen, you really think the government should be monitoring how its citizens gain utility and forcing them to maximize it? You also really think that your "feeling" about online poker is more substantial than studies that have been done on problem gamblers?

Quote:
The director of Harvard Medical School's Division of Addictions says that, surprisingly, online gambling shows players using more restraint and control than at land-based casinos. Dr. Howard Shaffer also says that, despite the exponential increase in gambling in the US over the last twenty years, the rate of problem gambling among the general population has stayed the same.

Using the worst enemy of religious, family-first demagogues, scientific research, Dr. Shaffer says,"The very first thing we learned (studying Internet gambling patterns), which we didn't expect, was that the vast majority, the overwhelming majority of gamblers online gamble in a very moderate and mild way."

Dr. Shaffer goes to explain that the scientific community has predicted that increased gambling proliferation would lead to an increase of gambling disorders, but that has not been the case. In fact, the incidence of problem gambling among the population has ever so slightly declined from the '70s until today, from 0.7 percent to 0.6 percent.
iMsoLucky0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:50 AM   #353
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 28,002
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

iMEGA is planning their suit. Read/digg: http://digg.com/d1q31B

Click here to Tweet

April 29, 2009 - The Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS), through its Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED), has ordered Internet service providers to block state residents’ access to 200 Internet gambling Web sites. Minnesota referenced a Federal law, the Wire Act of 1961, for justification of its order to the ISPs, claiming the law made “online gambling is illegal in all U.S. states.”
The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA), which was alerted to the blocking order early this morning by a Minnesota reporter seeking comment , immediately set it’s legal team to work challenging the DPS order. iMEGA requested the list of the 200 “black listed” Web sites from DPS, but the request was denied on the advice of DPS counsel, which was apparently debating whether the black list would be made public.
“Again, you have an example of state government exceeding their authority and operating in secret to deny citizens their freedom to use the Internet as they see fit in the privacy of their own homes,” said Joe Brennan Jr., chairman of iMEGA. “What is most concerning is the shaky legal pretext that Minnesota has used to fashion their order. There is simply no Federal law that exists that makes it illegal for all US citizens to gamble on the Internet. None.”
The Wire Act of 1961 made it a criminal offense to use telephones or telegraphs to transmit wagers. Though the US Congress has taken the matter up a number of times, it has never amended the law to include Internet gambling. However, the US Department of Justice has broadly interpreted the Wire Act to proscecute individuals connected to Internet gambling operations in other countries.
A press release from DPS noted that this may only be the beginning of their efforts to block Minnesota residents from accessing certain Website content deemed “illegal” by the state agency, according to DPS director John Willems.
“Acknowledging the effort as an initial sample, Willems anticipates the program expanding to address thousands of sites, depending on compliance. He notes that the required technology to restrict geographic access to particular sites is a relatively straightforward procedure on the part of service providers.”
iMEGA and its legal team, fresh from their Court of Appeals victory blocking the Commonwealth of Kentucky from seizing 141 Internet gambling-related domain names, expressed concern that DPS was signaling a new form of government censorship that would stretch well beyond the Internet gambling sector.
“When Mr. Wilhelm expresses his intention to extend his ‘program’ to thousands of other sites, just what kind of sites will he be targeting?” Brennan asked. “And will he be making the determination which sites are ‘legal’ and which are ‘illegal’? Because as far as we can tell, there is nothing in Minnesota or US Federal law that makes these gaming or any other sites illegal, just their opinion.”
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:57 AM   #354
candyman718
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,076
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGambool View Post
Again, why does the state allow the lottery then? I was at the Coinstar machine last week and a lady walked by me, bought two scratch tickets, scratched them, then turned to me and loudly complained that "all she did was break even, no income from the scratch tickets like there should be". That's clearly an f'd up utility function/overpay no? So why does the state encourage this form of gambling? They'll let her throw her whole paycheck into that vending machine without batting an eye.

So I assume you either want all gambling banned or your main argument is that people are using their time incorrectly since poker takes a long time to play?? The second argument would be very odd indeed. Are we going to have the Government optimize leisure time utility functions now?

Final point...this isnt legislation, its a civil action by a member of the executive branch. Banning online poker explicitly or passing legislation to block content on ISP's would at least allow for an open debate. That's not what's happening here, the state is deciding they would like a certain outcome but don't want to have to go through the whole legislative process to do so, instead they'll just try and mangle existing law to produce their desired outcome. That is much worse than passing legislation.
While we're at it outlaw the ****ing Coinstar Machine too. How dare they take 9% to count your change. We need to be protected from this type of ****. I've even seen kids using a Coinstar machine unsupervised. Children don't realize how stupid it is to give up 9% of their money.
candyman718 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:59 AM   #355
4ObliVioN4
veteran
 
4ObliVioN4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: on the bubble
Posts: 3,296
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by killsadie View Post
lol if you cant control yourself and your money you deserve to lose it. i know it all to well that blaming others for your own problems is extremely ******ed and solves nothing.
+10000000. its *supposed* to be a free country ffs, if you cant control yourself thats your own problem. people should be able to spend their money however they want.
4ObliVioN4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:31 AM   #356
pairtheboard69
old hand
 
pairtheboard69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,520
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen_Approach View Post
I simply feel that using a study about online sports gambling to draw conclusions about the merits and dangers of all forms of online gambling is unreasonable. People are placing their sportsbets online similar to how they would have called those bets into their bookie. I think that the differences between online poker and live poker are larger than the difference between online sportsbets and live sportsbets.

Using this study in the manner that it being used is making the inherent assumption that sportsbetting and poker is equivalent.

A credible study that specifically addressed online poker would be more convincing.



I think the problem here is that people assume that if someone loses $1000 gambling, it means that they gained $1000 worth of utility. In the case of gambling, I think this isn't always true.

When someone decides to gamble with $1000, they aren't necessarily writing off the full value as 'entertainment' because they know that there is some chance of a win. However, if they estimate this chance too high (a likely problem with many gamblers for various reasons), then they are overpaying for the entertainment value that they are actually getting.

It is also important to consider the time spent gambling. For many people, they end up spending more time gambling than they initially planned, and given that time is valuable to them, they have again 'overpaid' for the entertainment that they received.

Where I'm going with this is that when people spend their money on a football game, or decide to spend an evening watching the game on tv, odds are pretty good that they are making a rational, utility maximizing decision.

However, with gambling, the outcomes are uncertain, which increases the likelihood that the decision is not one that maximizes utility for the amount of money and time spent.

I am not saying that gambling does not provide some utility, but that it creates a situation where many people will make a mistake in allocating their resources, so simply making the argument that people always spend their resources the correct (utility maximizing) way is not true in the case of gambling.

So when an online poker player wins $100,000 in a year, one cannot assume that the player created $100,000 worth of entertainment value, while for the NFL player this assumption is much more valid.


I don't mean to hijack this thread; I am presenting my perspective which is also likely the perspective of some of the supporters of this legislation.
NFL players, actors, musicians, comedians all bring no productive value to society. We need to open reeducation camps to retrain this entire society. We may all be drones, but at least we won't be wasting our time.
pairtheboard69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:42 AM   #357
GeniusToad
veteran
 
GeniusToad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sleeve of wizard
Posts: 2,008
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
iMEGA is planning their suit. Read/digg: http://digg.com/d1q31B

Click here to Tweet

April 29, 2009 - The Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS), through its Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED), has ordered Internet service providers to block state residents’ access to 200 Internet gambling Web sites. Minnesota referenced a Federal law, the Wire Act of 1961, for justification of its order to the ISPs, claiming the law made “online gambling is illegal in all U.S. states.”
The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA), which was alerted to the blocking order early this morning by a Minnesota reporter seeking comment , immediately set it’s legal team to work challenging the DPS order. iMEGA requested the list of the 200 “black listed” Web sites from DPS, but the request was denied on the advice of DPS counsel, which was apparently debating whether the black list would be made public....

(edit for length)
yessssss.
GeniusToad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:44 AM   #358
djnef01
banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 55
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Deleted completely unrelated political comment. Lets try to stay on topic everyone. Thanks. If you want to argue or make observations about what the liberals or conservatives think about one thing or another we have a completely different forum for that.

Last edited by MicroBob; 05-01-2009 at 04:05 AM.
djnef01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:47 AM   #359
pairtheboard69
old hand
 
pairtheboard69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,520
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ObliVioN4 View Post
+10000000. its *supposed* to be a free country ffs, if you cant control yourself thats your own problem. people should be able to spend their money however they want.
This unregulated poker industry even has measures in place to help people control themselves. There are deposit limits and self exclusion.

If people don't want to control themselves there is no legislation that will save them. Saying that no one is allowed to play because there are a few people who went crazy sounds like kindergarten.
pairtheboard69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 02:04 AM   #360
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman718 View Post
While we're at it outlaw the ****ing Coinstar Machine too. How dare they take 9% to count your change. We need to be protected from this type of ****. I've even seen kids using a Coinstar machine unsupervised. Children don't realize how stupid it is to give up 9% of their money.
Amazon gift certificate commission free FTW, otherwise Id agree

Surprised you cant get paid out with scratch tickets, Im sure thats coming
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 02:26 AM   #361
PBJaxx
2010 WSOP November 9er
 
PBJaxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,329
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen_Approach View Post
I simply feel that using a study about online sports gambling to draw conclusions about the merits and dangers of all forms of online gambling is unreasonable. People are placing their sportsbets online similar to how they would have called those bets into their bookie. I think that the differences between online poker and live poker are larger than the difference between online sportsbets and live sportsbets.

Using this study in the manner that it being used is making the inherent assumption that sportsbetting and poker is equivalent.

A credible study that specifically addressed online poker would be more convincing.



I think the problem here is that people assume that if someone loses $1000 gambling, it means that they gained $1000 worth of utility. In the case of gambling, I think this isn't always true.

When someone decides to gamble with $1000, they aren't necessarily writing off the full value as 'entertainment' because they know that there is some chance of a win. However, if they estimate this chance too high (a likely problem with many gamblers for various reasons), then they are overpaying for the entertainment value that they are actually getting.

It is also important to consider the time spent gambling. For many people, they end up spending more time gambling than they initially planned, and given that time is valuable to them, they have again 'overpaid' for the entertainment that they received.

Where I'm going with this is that when people spend their money on a football game, or decide to spend an evening watching the game on tv, odds are pretty good that they are making a rational, utility maximizing decision.

However, with gambling, the outcomes are uncertain, which increases the likelihood that the decision is not one that maximizes utility for the amount of money and time spent.

I am not saying that gambling does not provide some utility, but that it creates a situation where many people will make a mistake in allocating their resources, so simply making the argument that people always spend their resources the correct (utility maximizing) way is not true in the case of gambling.

So when an online poker player wins $100,000 in a year, one cannot assume that the player created $100,000 worth of entertainment value, while for the NFL player this assumption is much more valid.


I don't mean to hijack this thread; I am presenting my perspective which is also likely the perspective of some of the supporters of this legislation.
First of all, I appreciate you posting your opinion. Of course, though, I very much disagree.

While you are quantifying these situations pretty well (referring to the utility of going to a football game, etc), you are oversimplifying the situation. A $100 ticket to a football game doesn't equal $100 worth of fun either. There is plenty of uncertainty regarding how much fun you will have at a football game. Obviously, you don't have the same amount of fun at any 2 similar events you go to whether it be a sporting event, a movie, a comedian, or dinner. There are countless variables involved in determining how much fun you will have in any given situation. Guaranteeing some level of utility for an entertainment product is impossible. That is how capitalism and a free market economy work! People pay for the things that give them the most utility for their dollar, and THEY get to choose that. Not you, not the feds, the consumer does.

The argument that the utility of gambling is uncertain and therefore it should be illegal is absolutely ridiculous as any other entertainment product suffers from the same issue. If your argument is that online gambling should be illegal because it ruins lives, then you better take the same stance with casinos, home games, state-run lotteries, alcohol, tobacco, race car driving, driving a car in general, working construction, etc.

If its only when it leads to people losing money in a situation where the outcome is uncertain, you better ban the stock market, all forms of investing, starting your own business, and paying to go to university for the hopes of finding a better paying job.

I am sorry to just go crazy, but there are severe holes in your logic here. I really don't see where it ends. You cannot arbitrarily decide what you think is just too bad and what isn't. You say some 20-somethings don't get to be rich, who cares, at least we save people. Besides the fact that addicts will still gamble, whats next? We can't allow people to put it all on the line to start a new business with a product or service they believe in simply because more of them fail than succeed? I can't even get into how that would affect our economic situation as a country.

I know I carried on forever, but I hope you see my point.

Last edited by PBJaxx; 05-01-2009 at 02:52 AM. Reason: Cleared up my rant a bit for readability's sake
PBJaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 02:44 AM   #362
pairtheboard69
old hand
 
pairtheboard69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,520
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PBJaxx View Post
First of all, I appreciate you posting your opinion. Of course, though, I very much disagree.

While you are quantifying these situations pretty well (referring to the utility of going to a football game, etc), you are oversimplifying the situation. A $100 ticket to a football game doesn't equal $100 worth of fun either. There is plenty of uncertainty regarding how much fun you will have at a football game. Obviously, you don't have the same amount of fun at any 2 similar events you go to whether it be a sporting event, a movie, a comedian, or dinner. There are countless variables involved in determining how much fun you will have in situation. Guaranteeing some level of utility for an entertainment product is impossible. That is how capitalism and a free market economy work! People pay for the things that give them the most utility for their dollar, and THEY get to choose that. Not you, not the feds, the consumer does.

The argument that the utility of gambling is uncertain and therefore it should be illegal is absolutely ridiculous as any other entertainment product suffers from the same issue. If your argument is that online gambling should be illegal because it ruins lives, then you better take the same stance with casinos, home games, bets between friends, state-run lotteries, alcohol, tobacco, race car driving, driving a car in general, working construction, etc.

If its only when it leads to people losing money in a situation where the outcome is uncertain, you better ban the stock market, all forms of investing, starting your own business, and paying to go to university for the hopes of a better paying job.

I am sorry to just go crazy here, but there are severe holes in your logic here. I really don't see where it ends. You cannot arbitrarily decide what you think is just too bad and what isn't. You say some 20-somethings don't get to be rich, who cares, at least we save people. Besides the fact that addicts will still gamble, whats next? We can't allow people to put it all on the line to start a new business with a product or service they believe in simply because more of them fail than succeed? I can't even get into how that would affect our economic situation as a country.

I know I carried on forever, but I hope you see my point.

I like this. Whenever someone buys something or makes an investment there is a component of uncertainty. There is absolutely nothing I can think of where this isn't the case.
pairtheboard69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 03:19 AM   #363
funkyj
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
funkyj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: working without a 27b/6
Posts: 6,416
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pairtheboard69 View Post
I like this. Whenever someone buys something or makes an investment there is a component of uncertainty. There is absolutely nothing I can think of where this isn't the case.
Except when you buy a mortgage backed security that Moodys (or some other rating agency) says is AAA. Then there is practically no risk because Moodys' whole business is based on their reputation so they would never lie to us.

Yes, the people on Wall Street are doing honest investment work -- not running some sort of 3 card monte scam on us like a scumbag poker player.
funkyj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 04:57 AM   #364
aarono2690
Pooh-Bah
 
aarono2690's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: "janitor and restroom attendant" MN
Posts: 3,872
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Lol I just transfered 900 to fulltilt. Wish me luck everyone.
aarono2690 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 09:11 AM   #365
absoludicrous
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
absoludicrous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: You like the stache?
Posts: 10,091
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aarono2690 View Post
Lol I just transfered 900 to fulltilt. Wish me luck everyone.
You are in my prayers
absoludicrous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 10:24 AM   #366
faarcyde
veteran
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,388
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

TheEngineer, was there any indication this was in the works or was it a sneak attack?

I don't live in Minneosta but it makes me extremely nervous to know that the powers that be can do something like this without any kind of elongated legal process.
faarcyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 11:15 AM   #367
Skallagrim
PPA Board Member/LSN Dir
 
Skallagrim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: It's a PPA post only if so stated
Posts: 6,713
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by faarcyde View Post
TheEngineer, was there any indication this was in the works or was it a sneak attack?

I don't live in Minneosta but it makes me extremely nervous to know that the powers that be can do something like this without any kind of elongated legal process.
Although directed to TE, I can answer this one.

The statements of the MN official who issued the letters indicates that his office had worked on it for at least a little while. No one outside his office (and maybe other members of MN state government) knew it was coming until he released his press statement yesterday.

You are right to be nervous. Although we lawyers have anticipated such actions in theory, and have responses generally prepared, we too are at a loss as to predicting what state or what state official will try something similar in the future. The "elongated legal process" only happens after they act.

Skallagrim
Skallagrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 11:38 AM   #368
GiantWalleye
worst TR ever
 
GiantWalleye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rest in peace Reefdawg, my friend
Posts: 8,542
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

I just saw the list. LOL at stars not being on there. I don't like FTP anyways, so stars if fine by me.
GiantWalleye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 11:39 AM   #369
Oopspoops
banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 709
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

lol america for the lose.


lets just ban everything because the internets are evil.


i love Canada, no tax EVER, keep 100% of profits every year, and I can actually play poker! wow!
Oopspoops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:06 PM   #370
Dogboy714
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chillin' in MN
Posts: 817
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GiantWalleye View Post
I just saw the list. LOL at stars not being on there. I don't like FTP anyways, so stars if fine by me.
Oh - sweet! I just cashed my roll off of FT a week ago (once I fulfilled my bonus requirement since the bitches won't give me rakeback). So I'm on Stars now anyways...
Dogboy714 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 12:50 PM   #371
uppie_
old hand
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,673
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GiantWalleye View Post
I just saw the list. LOL at stars not being on there. I don't like FTP anyways, so stars if fine by me.
link?
uppie_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:02 PM   #372
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GiantWalleye View Post
I just saw the list. LOL at stars not being on there. I don't like FTP anyways, so stars if fine by me.
Guys, Minnesota is on record as saying they are going to go back and add the rest of the sites if the action is allowed to proceed.
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:27 PM   #373
spadebidder
Actually Shows Proof
 
spadebidder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This looks interesting.
Posts: 7,906
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGambool View Post
Guys, Minnesota is on record as saying they are going to go back and add the rest of the sites if the action is allowed to proceed.
I assumed anything other than this would be too absurd to be possible. Of course they will block all poker sites if they win, and they'll watch for new ones to block. Use common sense people.
spadebidder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 01:33 PM   #374
uppie_
old hand
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,673
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

It honestly doesn't seem to me like the did much homework, missed the site on the 60mins report, missed the largest site, missed sites connected to other sites on the list.
uppie_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2009, 02:23 PM   #375
aarono2690
Pooh-Bah
 
aarono2690's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: "janitor and restroom attendant" MN
Posts: 3,872
Re: Minnesota to Prohibit Access Between Residents and Gambling Sites.

Will it be atleat a few weeks before this gets implemented? Someone sort of answered earlier but it was very vague.

I want to grind some 25nl and 50nl on ft and get some rake back.
aarono2690 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive