Quote:
Originally Posted by whosnext
NVG mods individually and collectively work towards the same goals. We frequently communicate with each other via PM and in the private mod forum concerning the current forum issues and posters deserving special consideration. So it truly doesn't matter which specific mod was the one who issued a temp-ban since s/he was acting on behalf of the entire mod team.
Some temp-bans are essentially the equivalent of a lifetime achievement award. There may be no single egregious offense that triggered a temp-ban but rather it may be the result of an accumulation of offenses that on the whole merit a serious mod response.
Mods can, should, and do take into account the views of members expressed in forum threads or post reports. If one person is frequently the subject of post reports and/or critical forum posts, mods may well pay special attention to that person and act accordingly.
Ok. I always read something like, "You need to take it up with the mod that banned you" perhaps that doesn't apply to temp bans. What I am looking for is an ability to post, within the moderation guidelines (including present subjective mod guidelines from present mods) without this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LectorAJ
So why did Nooseknot get banned and unbanned then? The quality of the Galfond thread went right up when he was away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vesku
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nooseknot View Post
Your ev is going to be related to the bets you make and how fast you lose is going to be related to how many bets you make per period. You aren't implying this. You are implying because of the all in factor in poker someone will lose their money faster and therefore given equal ev situations they should play blackjack. You are also implying that the ev of a rec gambler playing blackjack is higher than their ev playing poker.
I forgot to mention that you also implied no limit was created before limit, I was under the impression this isn't how it evolved.
Nonetheless you either direct your friend towards a game in which the house always has a +ev and you can never have one, or a game in which you can have a positive expectation. You have twisted logic to come to a conclusion that they are better off playing jackpot games.
You are clueless about the real world.
I could count/quote tons and tons of these posts about me, in many threads, and 90% are made from accounts with less than 30 posts. And the majority of the rest are made from a small group of recreational 2p2 regs that each hold a very similar opinion on rake which is in contrast to mine.
These posts are contentless and attacks and they are not within the stated NVG guideless and I feel it is "special treatment" versus me that they are allowed and I get banned as a result of the "headache" *I* create.
This is why I would like some citations. Because as I understand, and I reviewed my posts, I was responding with proper counter points to specific points and posters. Otherwise I'm just getting banned arbitrarily with no recourse as to staying within the guidelines.