I hate poker.

We're constantly in the pursuit of money. We are mindless soulless zombies trying to maximize every edge we have against the degenerate gambler who is gambling with his rent money.

Everytime we bust someone for a buyin we will put them in a bit of a financial bind. He will curse his life. He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut.

Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent.

Are we better than them because we can sit down and calmly play 8 tables all day losing or gaining thousands of dollars and not really caring? No we are worse, we are fully cognizant of our actions but persist in the pursuit of money.

When a friend or family member asks you how you make money, do not tell them the truth that you are soulless. Lie to them and make up a job. At least then they wont see us for what we truly are, the scum of the earth.

Some people have to learn the hard way! So by kicking their kid in the face, they will face the consequences thus learn.. i think that we are good..

:D

A fool and his money are soon departed. Id rather he gave it to me than some other retard. Don't make this into some sort of philosophical thing. If he didnt dump it to you, it'd be somewhere else anyway.

Meh, Maybe I'm a bit of a sadist, but that thought allways makes me smile.

in quebec we dont mind at all coz its the same way our government is making money.. with degenerate gamblers.

On December 28 2006 10:51 SKoT wrote: A fool and his money are soon departed. Id rather he gave it to me than some other retard. Don't make this into some sort of philosophical thing. If he didnt dump it to you, it'd be somewhere else anyway.

Might as well jump on the carcass before any other vulture?

On December 28 2006 10:55 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 10:51 SKoT wrote: A fool and his money are soon departed. Id rather he gave it to me than some other retard. Don't make this into some sort of philosophical thing. If he didnt dump it to you, it'd be somewhere else anyway. Might as well jump on the carcass before any other vulture?

In any form of competition winning means somebody else lost. I don't see what's different about poker.

On December 28 2006 10:58 RaSZi wrote: So you're gonna quit?

No. I'm soulless and will continue to take advantage of, and steal from, people who know no better.

what is your problem? you are fully aware of poker for what it is: gambling. there are winners and losers, just as in life...people bet on sports, horse racing, billiards, and even on stupid shit (prop bets) like who can drink more beer before passing out, etc. (my roomates did this). stop acting like we are evil because of this. people gamble and speculate on the stock market. no one is forcing people to gamble, and no one who does play poker is stupid enough to think that there is no risk involved. posting this is just a cry for attention.

the overwhelming majority of gamblers are recreational and they play for fun.

those who are compulsive and lose should seek help. i ain't their father, but, believe it or not, i do make an effort to help them (ref 2+2 psycho forum).

if they weren't compulsively losing their ass online, they'd be doing it at the racetrack or buying 200 in lottery tickets every week or having lots of unsafe sex or whatever. i have no problem with them losing their ass to me as stars vigs them. they should still seek help.

gambling is legal. i'm no drug dealer. just say no to socialist fairy guilt trippers.

On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent.

uhm.. almost no one I win money from can afford it. since most people that can afford it are of equal or higher skill.



I feed from the weakness and misery of others.

On December 28 2006 11:05 chris201322 wrote: what is your problem? you are fully aware of poker for what it is: gambling. there are winners and losers, just as in life...people bet on sports, horse racing, billiards, and even on stupid shit (prop bets) like who can drink more beer before passing out, etc. (my roomates did this). stop acting like we are evil because of this. people gamble and speculate on the stock market. no one is forcing people to gamble, and no one who does play poker is stupid enough to think that there is no risk involved. posting this is just a cry for attention.

Yea thats it....

Do you honestly believe that by not losing their money to us they wouldn't find some other outlet to waste it on, whether it be alcohol or other forms of gambling. I work in a casino dealing to these people and believe me the money is easy go no matter how hard it comes, so just do yourself a favour; stop thinking about it and try take it before someone else does.

If it helps, think of it as you're providing them with a form of entertainment wherein they have the chance to make a little money by gettting lucky or they lose and your service is paid.

On December 28 2006 11:06 lucifer wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent. uhm.. almost no one I win money from can afford it. since most people that can afford it are of equal or higher skill. I feed from the weakness and misery of others.

Pretty much.

In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most.

Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity.

You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line?

On December 28 2006 11:13 kantoiki wrote: Do you honestly believe that by not losing their money to us they wouldn't find some other outlet to waste it on, whether it be alcohol or other forms of gambling. I work in a casino dealing to these people and believe me the money is easy go no matter how hard it comes, so just do yourself a favour; stop thinking about it and try take it before someone else does. If it helps, think of it as you're providing them with a form of entertainment wherein they have the chance to make a little money by gettting lucky or they lose and your service is paid.

Ya I dont for a second believe that their money would go to something else. They are degenerate gamblers and it would go into that vice or another whether we are there to take their money or not. It still does not make the act of us taking their money any better though.

Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else.

And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker.

There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness.

I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre.

On December 28 2006 11:05 chris201322 wrote: what is your problem? you are fully aware of poker for what it is: gambling. there are winners and losers, just as in life...people bet on sports, horse racing, billiards, and even on stupid shit (prop bets) like who can drink more beer before passing out, etc. (my roomates did this). stop acting like we are evil because of this. people gamble and speculate on the stock market. no one is forcing people to gamble, and no one who does play poker is stupid enough to think that there is no risk involved. posting this is just a cry for attention.

i don't think you're getting his point. it's pretty established that gambling is an extreme addiction that many people have problems with. so much problems, that they have hotlines for gamblers. weird shit like that. taking advantage of people with problems.

On December 28 2006 11:20 mOney wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:05 chris201322 wrote: what is your problem? you are fully aware of poker for what it is: gambling. there are winners and losers, just as in life...people bet on sports, horse racing, billiards, and even on stupid shit (prop bets) like who can drink more beer before passing out, etc. (my roomates did this). stop acting like we are evil because of this. people gamble and speculate on the stock market. no one is forcing people to gamble, and no one who does play poker is stupid enough to think that there is no risk involved. posting this is just a cry for attention. i don't think you're getting his point. it's pretty established that gambling is an extreme addiction that many people have problems with. so much problems, that they have hotlines for gamblers. weird shit like that. taking advantage of people with problems.

And a baker takes advantage of people who have a problem called 'needing to eat to live'; so should we go out and condemn all the bakery's for fueling a life threatening addiction?

On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre.

i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value.

On December 28 2006 11:21 kantoiki wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre. i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value.

I used to tell myself that but I dont think I provide people with entertainment. They arent on to have fun, they are sick.

I remember when I took all the money from a guy, he was playing with all his money (like 600$) at nl600, he was telling me about how much he needed the money, and I told him that its really stupid to play with all your money at the same table, but he didn't understand why. And after a while of playing I pick up a flushdraw on the flop and hit my flush on the river, and I pushed all in, like 300$ into 600$ or something like that, and hes like "I have the straight, do you have a flush" and I dont say anything, but then he says, please tell me, and im like, no I dont have the flush call me, and the stupid moron called me and lossed all his money tt.

i was unaware that eri had opened a second account

On December 28 2006 11:30 PoorUser wrote: i was unaware that eri had opened a second account

Na I'm old timer starcraft.

On December 28 2006 11:26 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:21 kantoiki wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre. i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value. I used to tell myself that but I dont think I provide people with entertainment. They arent on to have fun, they are sick.

They turn their computer on, open the program and start to "play". To me this indicates that they chose to play, and in playing like everyone else they also risk losing but they are happy to take this risk because the enjoyment of winning is entertaining for them. Add to that their liking of the game, or wanting to play a few hands because they just watched a donkament on tv i think its a fair call to say that they are being provided with a service that they would otherwise not have if we weren't playing.

On December 28 2006 11:35 kantoiki wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:26 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:21 kantoiki wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre. i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value. I used to tell myself that but I dont think I provide people with entertainment. They arent on to have fun, they are sick. They turn their computer on, open the program and start to "play". To me this indicates that they chose to play, and in playing like everyone else they also risk losing but they are happy to take this risk because the enjoyment of winning is entertaining for them. Add to that their liking of the game, or wanting to play a few hands because they just watched a donkament on tv i think its a fair call to say that they are being provided with a service that they would otherwise not have if we weren't playing.

Yes but what compells them to put a months rent on a table is a little more than the desire for entertainment.

On December 28 2006 11:26 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:21 kantoiki wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre. i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value. I used to tell myself that but I dont think I provide people with entertainment. They arent on to have fun, they are sick.

Obviously there are some people who are addicted and such and need the money but can't stop themselves from playing - no I wouldn't want to take money from those people, but I think they are a tiny tiny minority in all the players. Obviously when I think of 'average fish' I think of some guy with a 60k job who can afford to toss a buyin or two, when you think of fish you think of some guy who can't pay his rent and is psychologically addicted to gambling.

I'm guessing you had either a personal experience with or read about a degenerate gambler/addict etc, and like most people you are now superimposing that example on the entire body to conclude statistics - ie 'my brother' is an addict/lost his house/committed suicide/etc so now I see all people who gamble as addicts (hypothetical example). Am I right about this? Did you read or deal with personally a moving example and now view most fish as having some sort of addiction and losing more than they can afford to lose?

I think the statistics are that a large majority of poker players (most of whom are losers of course) are actually well off and recreational players who can afford to lose - there was a study a year ago with these conclusions, I'll try to google it.

On December 28 2006 11:43 bigbb33 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:26 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:21 kantoiki wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:19 bigbb33 wrote: Work a fucking $8 hour (canadian) job doing hard labour for 10 hour shifts with a dumbfuck boss who has authority over you and you'll stop the 'woe is me' crying pretty quick. Poker is an opportunity to earn money without having to kiss someone's ass or be limited (or helped) by anyone else. And welcome to capitalism: everything costs someone something else. When you buy bread from the bakery, the baker is taking people's money. The people are getting bread in return. When people go to a movie, they pay money in return to see a movie. When someone plays poker and loses, they pay money in return for the opportunity to win money and the experience of playing poker. There is no free lunch in a capitalistic system, and poker is the most capitalistic. You live or die by your own abilities, not locked into an 'equal to everyone else' communist system where one person's abilities and effort are either unrewarded or unpunished in relation to their effectiveness. I have no more guilt taking someone's money than I would if I ran a bakery or a movie theatre. i agree, the idea is to make profit off a product, the only thing i used to question was what product it was that we as poker players offered; entertainment value. I used to tell myself that but I dont think I provide people with entertainment. They arent on to have fun, they are sick. Obviously there are some people who are addicted and such and need the money but can't stop themselves from playing - no I wouldn't want to take money from those people, but I think they are a tiny tiny minority in all the players. Obviously when I think of 'average fish' I think of some guy with a 60k job who can afford to toss a buyin or two, when you think of fish you think of some guy who can't pay his rent and is psychologically addicted to gambling. I'm guessing you had either a personal experience with or read about a degenerate gambler/addict etc, and like most people you are now superimposing that example on the entire body to conclude statistics - ie 'my brother' is an addict/lost his house/committed suicide/etc so now I see all people who gamble as addicts (hypothetical example). Am I right about this? Did you read or deal with personally a moving example and now view most fish as having some sort of addiction and losing more than they can afford to lose? I think the statistics are that a large majority of poker players (most of whom are losers of course) are actually well off and recreational players who can afford to lose - there was a study a year ago with these conclusions, I'll try to google it.

Yes I guess I do base my views on personal anecdotal experience. I knew someone who would sooner go gamble than go to the doctor. I also know several people who make 60k+ a year at their job and only really play .01/.02 on pokerstars. And I do remember that study you refer to.

What compells them is basically the same thing the makes us play for hours, to win? They put that money on the table regardless where that table is thinking they have a chance to win. True we have an edge on them but ask any gambler in a casino (by gambler i dont mean the ones who are there once every few months or more, the ones who are there days a week) and they'll tell you they either believe they can win or that its so much fun to win, possibly both.
I assume that nearly everyone who plays poker either plays for "fun" (even though other people can't see how the possibility of losing a months rent can be fun its the potentials WINS they can get from playing) or because they believe they are better than other players.

edit: screwed up the quote thing, and also yeah i remember the statistical research but i'd be interested to see it again

On December 28 2006 11:32 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:30 PoorUser wrote: i was unaware that eri had opened a second account Na I'm old timer starcraft.

just a guess but i dont think he meant this literally, more a witty remark that references you share the same (highly questionable) moral objections to playing poker professionally as someone called eri who expressed them here at some point.

to add something else, the commodity we sell by gambling for profit is not "entertainment" but the chance for others to win our money.

when they play for the chance to win our money, are they not entertained when they do so or even in the process of trying?

On December 28 2006 10:55 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 10:51 SKoT wrote: A fool and his money are soon departed. Id rather he gave it to me than some other retard. Don't make this into some sort of philosophical thing. If he didnt dump it to you, it'd be somewhere else anyway. Might as well jump on the carcass before any other vulture?

um... YES
do you think theres something wrong with doing this?

On December 28 2006 11:49 Ket wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:32 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:30 PoorUser wrote: i was unaware that eri had opened a second account Na I'm old timer starcraft. just a guess but i dont think he meant this literally, more a witty remark that references you share the same (highly questionable) moral objections to playing poker professionally as someone called eri who expressed them here at some point. to add something else, the commodity we sell by gambling for profit is not "entertainment" but the chance for others to win our money.

Eri sounds like a smart guy who probably gets laid constantly.

On December 28 2006 11:52 kantoiki wrote: when they play for the chance to win our money, are they not entertained when they do so or even in the process of trying?

if theyre desperate problem gamblers, the type who maynard makes out to be the true victims of our evil ways, then i doubt it. anyway whether or not they happen to be entertained by playing is irrelevant, all im saying is the commodity we "sell" to worse players is the chance to win our money.

as an analogy, the commodity sold by a prostitute is sex, it is not entertainment, although the "buyer" might experience entertainment as a result of doing business with the seller. whether this is or isnt the case is not the concern of the seller. the buyer is solely responsible for his own decisions and all subsequent consequences, not the seller

Tillerman quote:

Poker is about as close to soulless as you can get. I am cursed with being good at it!

On December 28 2006 12:00 pinbaLL wrote: Tillerman quote: Show nested quote + Poker is about as close to soulless as you can get. I am cursed with being good at it!

Very insightful and true.

On December 28 2006 11:59 Ket wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:52 kantoiki wrote: when they play for the chance to win our money, are they not entertained when they do so or even in the process of trying? if theyre desperate problem gamblers, the type who maynard makes out to be the true victims of our evil ways, then i doubt it. anyway whether or not they happen to be entertained by playing is irrelevant, all im saying is the commodity we "sell" to worse players is the chance to win our money. as an analogy, the commodity sold by a prostitute is sex, it is not entertainment, although the "buyer" might experience entertainment as a result of doing business with the seller. whether this is or isnt the case is not the concern of the seller. the buyer is solely responsible for his own decisions and all subsequent consequences, not the seller

sooo we're much like a lottery, where we sell the tickets?

On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line?

i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear ur answer.

I dont actually understand how in purchasing something like a lottery ticket, or sex from a prostitute for that matter isn't the purchase of a form of entertainment?

On December 28 2006 12:00 pinbaLL wrote: Tillerman quote: Show nested quote + Poker is about as close to soulless as you can get. I am cursed with being good at it!

WHUT CAN I DEW?

On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer.

I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling.

On December 28 2006 12:00 pinbaLL wrote: Tillerman quote: Show nested quote + Poker is about as close to soulless as you can get. I am cursed with being good at it!

meh i'm going to go to bed and wake up a little further from heaven i guess since i'm not going to quit poker tonight

On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling.

as mentioned before by someone, degenerate gamblers who can't afford to lose make up a small percentage of the fish

On December 28 2006 12:05 kantoiki wrote: I dont actually understand how in purchasing something like a lottery ticket, or sex from a prostitute for that matter isn't the purchase of a form of entertainment?

In its purest sense they arent. Realistically I think there is a big difference between buying a dollar lottery ticket and logging onto PS and sitting down with several hundred even a few thousand dollars.

On December 28 2006 12:09 kantoiki wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling. as mentioned before by someone, degenerate gamblers who can't afford to lose make up a small percentage of the fish

Even if its not a degenerate gambler we are taking advantage of a working man who is sitting down with a big percentage of his expendable income. He has no idea that he has close to 0 chance of winning or holding onto his money.

lol u have to be kidding fish take my money all the time.

On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling.

do cigarette companies have a moral obligation to put the welfare of their clients before their own livelihood?

On December 28 2006 12:14 Ket wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling. do cigarette companies have a moral obligation to put the welfare of their clients before their own livelihood?

Many would say that selling cigs is morally wrong.

On December 28 2006 12:12 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:09 kantoiki wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling. as mentioned before by someone, degenerate gamblers who can't afford to lose make up a small percentage of the fish Even if its not a degenerate gambler we are taking advantage of a working man who is sitting down with a big percentage of his expendable income. He has no idea that he has close to 0 chance of winning or holding onto his money.

In not having any idea that he has no chance of holding onto his money, does he believe he has an edge over us/ other players? If so doesn't that make his mindset similar to ours? In that we play believing we are better and while we play or at least while i play i am being entertained? The result of losing or winning doesnt' affect the entertainment had on the way, although it does take away or add to the overall enjoyment of playing.

thank you for smoking
interesting movie

On December 28 2006 12:16 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:14 Ket wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:07 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 12:03 Fraser wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:17 Fraser wrote: In life there are a million and one ways to win and lose, financially, socially etc... Poker is just one of them, although admittedly the wins and losses in poker are more explicitly defined than most. Some wins and losses we cant control (disease, earthquakes, whatever), poker however is a voluntary competition. People have the freedom to make their own decisions, and thats all you can give them. In the end, if a person is self-destructive theres no way you can protect them from themself without taking away their freedom, and at the same time, their humanity. You can help a single person, or maybe a few people, but you cannot protect all people from themself. If there was no poker, no gambling at all, people would still lose, still die, still make bad choices. If we're going to stop competition in poker where do you suggest we draw the line? i hate to quote myself, but i wanna hear where ur answer. I dont think it we can realistically stop the self destructive from doing what they do. But is it morally wrong to enable them? You say poker is voluntary, it is, but I think compuslive gamblers arent really voluntarily gambling. do cigarette companies have a moral obligation to put the welfare of their clients before their own livelihood? Many would say that selling cigs is morally wrong.

the vast majority wouldn't. in the modern world morality is defined by the mass opinion

addiction is hard to define.......
new studies are suggesting that food is addtictive to the obese in much the same was as crack is addictive to crackheads.

On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: We're constantly in the pursuit of money. We are mindless soulless zombies trying to maximize every edge we have against the degenerate gambler who is gambling with his rent money. Everytime we bust someone for a buyin we will put them in a bit of a financial bind. He will curse his life. He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut. Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent. Are we better than them because we can sit down and calmly play 8 tables all day losing or gaining thousands of dollars and not really caring? No we are worse, we are fully cognizant of our actions but persist in the pursuit of money. When a friend or family member asks you how you make money, do not tell them the truth that you are soulless. Lie to them and make up a job. At least then they wont see us for what we truly are, the scum of the earth.

I stacked your mom last night

did she punch you?

This dude is obv a beggar that spends his spare change trying to grind nl5.

EDIT: And doing very poorly at it.

On December 28 2006 12:05 bigbb33 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 12:00 pinbaLL wrote: Tillerman quote:   Poker is about as close to soulless as you can get. I am cursed with being good at it! WHUT CAN I DEW?

LOL

On December 28 2006 12:27 4gotmepass wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: We're constantly in the pursuit of money. We are mindless soulless zombies trying to maximize every edge we have against the degenerate gambler who is gambling with his rent money. Everytime we bust someone for a buyin we will put them in a bit of a financial bind. He will curse his life. He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut. Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent. Are we better than them because we can sit down and calmly play 8 tables all day losing or gaining thousands of dollars and not really caring? No we are worse, we are fully cognizant of our actions but persist in the pursuit of money. When a friend or family member asks you how you make money, do not tell them the truth that you are soulless. Lie to them and make up a job. At least then they wont see us for what we truly are, the scum of the earth. This dude is obv a beggar that spends his spare change trying to grind nl5. EDIT: And doing very poorly at it.

just like you then

^^^^^ I dont do poorly u azz, I just dont play 4 real unless i got no skool.

I really feel absolutely no guilt.

If they don't lose their money to me, they'll just lose it to some other gambling outlet. It's their problem, not mine.

I do, however, feel like I contribute nothing to society. Which is why I'm planning on doing a lot of volunteer work once I get up to 10/20 (3 levels up).

I also hate poker, but not for the reasons you mention. I hate it because it's incredibly boring to me, but I'm still forced to do it every day.

On December 28 2006 11:30 PoorUser wrote: i was unaware that eri had opened a second account

oh please regardless of how i feel about poker i'd never make a thread on a poker forum about how bad it is for society and for people playing it or whatever
:D

nor would I judge poker players.

On December 28 2006 11:55 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 11:49 Ket wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:32 Maynard! wrote:   On December 28 2006 11:30 PoorUser wrote: i was unaware that eri had opened a second account Na I'm old timer starcraft. just a guess but i dont think he meant this literally, more a witty remark that references you share the same (highly questionable) moral objections to playing poker professionally as someone called eri who expressed them here at some point. to add something else, the commodity we sell by gambling for profit is not "entertainment" but the chance for others to win our money. Eri sounds like a smart guy who probably gets laid constantly.

of course, this is also correct

i take money from fat people because they are addicted to the chocolate i sell. i feel bad about it and have decided to give more to charity whilst warning customers of the dangers by wearing a tshirt saying 'im great at poker' on the front

If you think poker is a cesspool that breeds misery, you would be correct

Nobody that plays poker regularly is an overall happy/contented human being

But I believe this can be manipulated by volunteer work and charity. I think the overall malaise is just because they all know they're contributing nothing to society and they don't get satisfaction from their work. Solution? Volunteer work and charity?

Dunno I guess I will see

Soup kitchens and homeless people in my future

i havent read through the topic, so its probably off topic (i read the first post only), but: I FUCKING HATE POKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if I ended up serving soup to a homeless man that bankrupted his family at 2/4 NL.

It's their choice to play poker.
It's their choice to risk their rent money.
It's their choice to gamble away their life savings.

A lot of people are perfectly responsible with their money and also play poker.

It's not my fault if some idiot loses his rent money.

On December 28 2006 13:12 Spambuckle wrote: Nobody that plays poker regularly is an overall happy/contented human being

Seems to change people a bit.

wtf poker rules and people losing money at poker is no different from them losing money at slot machines or other table games. they pay for entertainment and a chance to win some money. there is an inherent -EV aspect to playing slot machines, because the odds are unfavorable compared to the payouts. There is also an inherent -EV aspect to playing poker because of the rake and the presence of profitable players. whatever, it's sad that people gamble away money they shouldn't gamble with, but it's not morally wrong that they do so, nor that we win it from them.

also, to whoever said poker players aren't happy...wtf? i'm the happiest i've been in my entire life since i started playing poker seriously. poker is awesome and if it doesn't make you happy then.....that's weird because it's good, easy money you can make by playing a fun game LOL how much happier do you want to be?

poker killed my father

and raped my mother!

this thread reminds me of the catch phrase for trying to get online poker banned
"they are clicking mouses and losing houses!"

Dont get me wrong I love poker in a sense but I do hate it and realize the damage im causing other people.

After every time I stake someone, I Butcher a cow and drink its blood to that persons good fortune.

i h8 myself now

It change nothing there is and always will be gambling, what is deference if somebody loose money to better player or to other gambler. If there would be no poker they would waste money on machines, power ball or other form of gambling, if small % of people can't control and got addicted help them not change hole world into boring place whit nothing that can harm you. The only thing that poker player can feel bad about is that he delivers nothing to other people (in his job), maybe one of the reasons why some want to help other poker players, write books to feel contribution.

LMAO
is this topic serious?

I can not stop laughin...but getting serious and my thoughts on this:

That guy who gambles his rent money and puts himself into financial trouble by gambling... deserves to loose every $ and I hope he goes broke in a slow painful way...

Its his choice, i just hope if he punches his kid, the kid stick a knife up his ass when he is sleep.

On December 28 2006 14:06 tilted fish wrote: LMAO is this topic serious? I can not stop laughin...but getting serious and my thoughts on this: That guy who gambles his rent money and puts himself into financial trouble by gambling... deserves to loose every $ and I hope he goes broke in a slow painful way... Its his choice, i just hope if he punches his kid, the kid stick a knife up his ass when he is sleep.

are you underaged

On December 28 2006 13:15 iamalex wrote: It's their choice to play poker. It's their choice to risk their rent money. It's their choice to gamble away their life savings. A lot of people are perfectly responsible with their money and also play poker. It's not my fault if some idiot loses his rent money.

i think this is comparable to saying when a 14 year old prostitute herself, its her choice to do so and its correct to exploit her.

No that person isnt.... wise enough to take her own decisions. i think same goes for degenerates. But wtf can we do about it. Nothing

On December 28 2006 14:15 Fayth wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 14:06 tilted fish wrote: LMAO is this topic serious? I can not stop laughin...but getting serious and my thoughts on this: That guy who gambles his rent money and puts himself into financial trouble by gambling... deserves to loose every $ and I hope he goes broke in a slow painful way... Its his choice, i just hope if he punches his kid, the kid stick a knife up his ass when he is sleep. are you underaged

No I am 22, how old are you sweetheart?

On December 28 2006 15:56 Floofy wrote: i think this is comparable to saying when a 14 year old prostitute herself, its her choice to do so and its correct to exploit her. No that person isnt.... wise enough to take her own decisions. i think same goes for degenerates. But wtf can we do about it. Nothing

The main thing society can do is educate... but not that classroom bullshit. life skills.

On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut.

or both at the same time if shes pregnant.

this thread is really gay

On December 28 2006 15:56 Floofy wrote: i think this is comparable to saying when a 14 year old prostitute herself, its her choice to do so and its correct to exploit her. No that person isnt.... wise enough to take her own decisions. i think same goes for degenerates. But wtf can we do about it. Nothing

When a man lives by his own and pays his own rent he has to be responsible, he doesnt have to be wise... but he doesnt have to put himself into a shithole either. Gambling involves luck, no matter how good he is, he KNOWS that going broke is a possibility...

When he has a family, its not even about him anymore, even if he doesnt care risking going broke, he shouldnt gamble just because he may put his family through hell.

how can you compare his situation to a 14 year old girl?

FYI, underage prostituation is associated with poverty in almost everycase... families who cant support their kids financially or otherwise (fathers who gamble their rent money away?...maybe)

and like I said if the OP is worried about those kind of guys, either he is one of them or he is a victim who gets slaped by his gambiling father.

There is a reason why gambling requires a certain age...

Let me summerize this. I am 22, it is my right to decide I want to gamble... I am financially in trouble. Since I do not have a family I can risk going broke... it is my decision. This one isnt so bad.

Now if I have a family and same situation .. personally I dont care about going broke, it will be wrong for me to gamble because I know I can go broke and put my family in a bad situation.
I will get a shitjob that pays...

the guy who is risking his rent money is choosing the easy way out of his financial shithole... if he is alone thats fine with me.
If he has a family well I hope those things that I mentioned in my original post really happen to him.

this discussion is endless and pointless

lets get rich, and let the suckers go broke

donate half your winnings to charity

On December 28 2006 13:39 Day[9] wrote: poker killed my father and raped my mother!

ROFL

i think we should fine pokerstars infinity billion dollars

According to the National Council on Problem Gambling

"2 million (1%) of U.S. adults are estimated to meet criteria for pathological gambling in a given year. Another 4-8 million (2-3%) would be considered problem gamblers; that is, they do not meet the full diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling, but meet one of more of the criteria and are experiencing problems due to their gambling behavior. Research also indicates that most adults who choose to gamble are able to do responsibly."

http://www.ncpgambling.org/about_problem/about_problem_faq.asp

Those are statistics I can live with.

On December 28 2006 15:56 Floofy wrote: i think this is comparable to saying when a 14 year old prostitute herself, its her choice to do so and its correct to exploit her. No that person isnt.... wise enough to take her own decisions. i think same goes for degenerates. But wtf can we do about it. Nothing

thats bull. all the 14 yr old prostitutes ive been with totally ripped me off


sneaky trixxy little hobbitses

gollum gollum

On December 28 2006 15:47 VanDerMeyde wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 13:15 iamalex wrote: It's their choice to play poker. It's their choice to risk their rent money. It's their choice to gamble away their life savings. A lot of people are perfectly responsible with their money and also play poker. It's not my fault if some idiot loses his rent money.

THAT EXACTLY WHAT I TOLD MY FATHER
if we dont do it , someone else WILL

I agree that by playing poker and making money from other people we might not be exactly Jesus but we are not the devil either. I mean we might no get the best best place in heaven but I don't think we would be on the fast lane to hell. Also I'm more of a warm place type of guy

On December 28 2006 17:19 vegable wrote: According to the National Council on Problem Gambling "2 million (1%) of U.S. adults are estimated to meet criteria for pathological gambling in a given year. Another 4-8 million (2-3%) would be considered problem gamblers; that is, they do not meet the full diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling, but meet one of more of the criteria and are experiencing problems due to their gambling behavior. Research also indicates that most adults who choose to gamble are able to do responsibly." http://www.ncpgambling.org/about_problem/about_problem_faq.asp Those are statistics I can live with.

I think that's a pretty big number. I think gambling as a concept is bad and self-destructive for human nature. There is not exactly anything constructive coming from it. It probably causes more problem than good.

Zero-sum games like poker probably creates more problems than other forms of gambling (like lottery).

I'm to egoistic to stop playing tough, to greedy or whatever. So I guess it's a bit hypocritical in a way to think about poker as morally wrong but still play it. Anyway we cant deny the negative sides of poker, and the fact that you earn from other's misfortune.

On December 28 2006 18:21 Logiabs~ wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 15:47 VanDerMeyde wrote:   On December 28 2006 13:15 iamalex wrote: It's their choice to play poker. It's their choice to risk their rent money. It's their choice to gamble away their life savings. A lot of people are perfectly responsible with their money and also play poker. It's not my fault if some idiot loses his rent money. THAT EXACTLY WHAT I TOLD MY FATHER if we dont do it , someone else WILL

your father is probably more tolerant of possible immoral activities tho... you know...


with all the coke dealing

On December 28 2006 18:25 capaneo wrote: I agree that by playing poker and making money from other people we might not be exactly Jesus but we are not the devil either. I mean we might no get the best best place in heaven but I don't think we would be on the fast lane to hell. Also I'm more of a warm place type of guy

You sucker,
you belive in heaven and hell?

Wake the fuck up?
We don't live in a happy loving and caring world, with unlimited fairy floss.

It's a cruel world, if you want to succeed in life, you have to beat the other guy who also wants the same.
Poker is still a game of skill, even though a lot of luck is invovlved in short term variance. Just like any other competitive game or sport to obtain and edge, we put the time and effort into it to acheive this.

Let's suppose we reverse the situation that someone said earlier about how he took some guy sitting at 600NL with his whole bankroll. The degen gambler has been going in allin over the top preflop everytime time the hero has been raising, let's say this has happened x10, and the hero has folded everytime.
Same thing happens but this time hero holds AA and degen gambler is caught bluffing with 72o, and they're both allin to the fate of the cards. Degen gambler flops a fullhouse off the flop and wins. Hero says "man, ive been so patient waiting for a good hand to bust you, and you fucking draw out on me, i deserve my money back, because i should have won statistically, and as i have put way much more time and effort into this game than you".

Will the degen gambler feel sorry for the hero and chuck him his winning back?
Fuck no, he's gonna take it and be fucking happy about it.
So why shouldn't the hero take his money and be fucking happy about it?

I'm not going to even address how u described poker players as "the scum of the earth" cause that's just plain retarded.

In the end, most of us are selfish mother fuckers, and in order to make money, you have to take it from someone else, that's the way the world goes round. Poker is just another way of doing so.

Whenever I have this stupid argument with ignorant people about my being a poker player I simply tell them one thing.

If you could 100% guarantee me that by me not sitting down that that person will not ruin their life, they will not sit down and waste the money that they so sorely need...I won't sit down. If them being such a degenerate is some how in connection with me sitting at the table, I won't do it.

I'm a poker player, I'm not heartless. Don't treat me as if I am such you ignorant, judgmental little twit. Don't blame me for somebody else's problems. I have no power to stop it and if could stop them I would. But we don't live in a world of rainbow kisses and hippy hugs. I am not contributing to the problem, I am not a part of the problem. Their problems are their own and I have no power to stop it. I wish I did, with all my heart.

That's pretty much end of discussion. I really think anybody with a different view point is completely delusional.

On December 28 2006 15:56 Floofy wrote: i think this is comparable to saying when a 14 year old prostitute herself, its her choice to do so and its correct to exploit her. No that person isnt.... wise enough to take her own decisions. i think same goes for degenerates. But wtf can we do about it. Nothing

it always comes back to 14 year olds with you doesnt it floofy?
j/k, you know i <3 you

I think its not floofy ,
i think there are plenty of underaged whores who had to do this b
because maybe they couldnt fidn a job, or they are not qualified for most of these
so their only out is being that plus many of these have already a baby, so you need money to feed him

tough work

poker players are the scum of the earth? every single major corporation out there has maximizing EV for themselves as its goal, even donating to charity is done to improve their image so that they will have more profits in the future. that is how our society is run.

On December 28 2006 14:06 tilted fish wrote: LMAO is this topic serious? I can not stop laughin...but getting serious and my thoughts on this: That guy who gambles his rent money and puts himself into financial trouble by gambling... deserves to loose every $ and I hope he goes broke in a slow painful way... Its his choice, i just hope if he punches his kid, the kid stick a knife up his ass when he is sleep.

this is absolutely the best way to look at it
knives up the ass for everyone

On December 28 2006 16:24 byrnesam wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut. or both at the same time if shes pregnant. this thread is really gay

this made me giggle

there's also the flip side that bombach is ignoring

if online poker weren't around, i'd be grinding some shit job for mid 40s CAD. the prospects of me ever assembling the capital required to even begin to attempt to impose my will on the world would be close to 0. in short order i'd get mortgaged out and ho'd by various financial institutions and then 2nd mortgaged into paycheque to paycheque oblivion and then discover poker at a b&m and go, holy shit, i could win 80/hr omg that's a huge amount of money, and then realize that i got bills and can't assemble the 5k roll required.

i deserve better. he deserves better. all of us deserve better.

we aren't artists. we aren't dancers. we're thinkers, and throughout history we've mostly lacked the capital to leverage into anything meaningful.

this is ours. the world is ours. our forebearers were denied, but survived, and now we're taking it. fuck old money.

that brought a tear to my eye, Casper

Yay Casper!

On December 29 2006 15:50 Casper... wrote: we aren't artists. we aren't dancers. we're thinkers, and throughout history we've mostly lacked the capital to leverage into anything meaningful. this is ours. the world is ours. our forebearers were denied, but survived, and now we're taking it. fuck old money.

haha well said.. i never realized we were all such heros!

+1 for casper
i love you baby

On December 29 2006 15:50 Casper... wrote: we aren't artists. we aren't dancers. we're thinkers, and throughout history we've mostly lacked the capital to leverage into anything meaningful. this is ours. the world is ours. our forebearers were denied, but survived, and now we're taking it. fuck old money.

Haha, great stuff

ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM

I GOT MY MIND MADE UP

CMON

GET IN TO IT

LET IT RIDE

TONIGHTS THE NIGHT

wigger

pedicure manicure kitty cat claws

the way she climbs up and down them poles

lookin like one of them puddy-cat dolls tryna hold m'woody back through my draws

still mad i wouldnt teach you

furious

UP JUMP THA BOOGIE

to tha bang bang boogie while you're bangin on ya baby OGs

On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: We're constantly in the pursuit of money. We are mindless soulless zombies trying to maximize every edge we have against the degenerate gambler who is gambling with his rent money. Everytime we bust someone for a buyin we will put them in a bit of a financial bind. He will curse his life. He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut. Do not lie to yourself and say that this does not happen. That we only take from those who can afford it. As we only see the money online in terms of buyins, our victums see it in terms of rent. Are we better than them because we can sit down and calmly play 8 tables all day losing or gaining thousands of dollars and not really caring? No we are worse, we are fully cognizant of our actions but persist in the pursuit of money. When a friend or family member asks you how you make money, do not tell them the truth that you are soulless. Lie to them and make up a job. At least then they wont see us for what we truly are, the scum of the earth.

You are preaching to the wrong crowd.

On December 29 2006 16:12 capaneo wrote: Show nested quote + On December 29 2006 15:50 Casper... wrote: we aren't artists. we aren't dancers. we're thinkers, and throughout history we've mostly lacked the capital to leverage into anything meaningful. this is ours. the world is ours. our forebearers were denied, but survived, and now we're taking it. fuck old money.

Seriously that was good.

the M in MBOMB stands for MONSTER

wtf u guys think when u play poker?

'this guy is a dumb fish, I'll have his money soon'

...

'lol that was his entire bankroll because he came on the table with 166,54$'

*fish has left the table*

'maybe that was the rest of his rent money, lol I don't care'

lol, <3 casper and Twisted.

WE deserve to win money on this game because we are patient, smart, strategical and logical. Some of us started on 5NL and didnt play 10NL until 250$ bankroll. Some of you builded yourself up slowly and make 300$ per hour at 600NL because you DESERVE to be there and have a bankroll for it. You are there making all this money because of hard work with strategies, good bankroll management (patience), patience with cards, getting advice from your good friends at higher limits etc.

The donkeys lose all their money because they lack these skills. A real friend of mine who is a donkey, I tried to help him out, told him to have at least TEN buyins (when I said 25 buyins he just laughed). How did that go? He lost 2 buyins on 100NL, and sat down at 2000NL with the rest (800$). IMO he deserved to lose the 1000 bucks because he wasnt patient/smart enough.

WE DESERVE THIS IMO

Online poker is a nice example of capitalism - everyone can succeed quite well (ie beating say, 1/2 for 5 bb/100 on 6 tables) if they put the work in, whatever their natural intelligence may be (okay, as long as they aren't completely retarded). But most people don't, because they aren't willing to. Those who are willing to put in effort get the rewards, those who don't, don't.

If poker were modern socialist society, though, all the regulars would have to pay something like 2-3% of their winnings to a fund where all the players who don't put in the effort are allowed to take money from, and that'd be called 'welfare'. A safety net, but unfortunately one that is more of a nest for living.

Capitalism is a double-edged sword - you succeed OR fail by your own efforts, ideally, not getting equal results despite your output, like in a more communist system.

Don't know why I went off on this tangent, but I really admire the succeed-or-fail based on your own merits and effort which poker is an excellent example of.

On December 28 2006 10:45 Maynard! wrote: He will turn around and punch his kid in the face or his wife in the gut.

Poker players are wholly responsible for poverty, addiction, and spousal and child abuse. Shame on all of you.

On December 29 2006 15:50 Casper... wrote: we aren't artists. we aren't dancers. we're thinkers, and throughout history we've mostly lacked the capital to leverage into anything meaningful. this is ours. the world is ours. our forebearers were denied, but survived, and now we're taking it. fuck old money.

fuck, i can dance

lmao

yo. post a vid of you performing servicable c-walk and i will give u $50.

you must also cover some of the medical expenses that will result from the stroke that I will surely get when I laugh so hard my blood vessels explode

This comes from a perspective that you can actually hurt other people, while mine is that you yourself allow outside things to hurt you.

If those ppl need the money badly, but cant get it, then theyre in much more of a trouble than I can put them in. Thats the state of learned helplessness and thats what real evil is. Its refusing to live your own life and blaming others for your poor results. The true source of suffering is in the habits of anger, blaming of others, self-pity, delusion and procrastination, or in short - in misunderstanding your own creative nature.

On December 30 2006 11:30 Rhaegar wrote: This comes from a perspective that you can actually hurt other people, while mine is that you yourself allow outside things to hurt you. If those ppl need the money badly, but cant get it, then theyre in much more of a trouble than I can put them in. Thats the state of learned helplessness and thats what real evil is. Its refusing to live your own life and blaming others for your poor results. The true source of suffering is in the habits of anger, blaming of others, self-pity, delusion and procrastination, or in short - in misunderstanding your own creative nature.

You have trumped Casper's post.

I barely ever practiced C-Walk, not used so much by bboys.. slightly but not so much

that's why he has the green star

pfft taking money from degenerate gambolers? i'm the biggest degen there is.