| |
Main
Date: 28 Jan 2009 13:55:50
From: Raider Fan
Subject: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
Well done iheartwuzzy. The dingleberry is classic.
On Jan 28 2009 2:37 AM, IHeartWuzzy wrote:
> On Jan 28 2009 2:36 AM, Paul Popinjay wrote:
>
> > "IHeartWuzzy" <a55120d@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:12e556xprj.ln2@recgroups.com...
> > >
> > > Did you know sportsbook.com was named "Best US Sportsbook" by eGaming mag
> > > in '05 and '06?
> > >
> >
> > Ha! Tell that to the players who got stiffed! I'm sure they'll find this
> > comforting.
>
> I figured I'd get this kinda response from ya, fuckface... as you clearly
> couldn't refute anything in my post.
>
> Btw, you do understand you're only hearing one side of the story over on
> your beloved site, don't ya, dingleberry?
_______________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
|
| |
Date: 28 Jan 2009 16:23:59
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
"Raider Fan" <raidersgotscrewed1@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:6s0756xu2h.ln2@recgroups.com...
> Well done iheartwuzzy. The dingleberry is classic.
>
So let me get this right. You think, that because IHeartWuzzy paraded
before us, some industry shills who never criticize ANY offshore books, that
that amounts to me getting pwned? Let me make a poker comparison for you,
Raider. Can I offer you a dollar for every scandal and crooked gambling
company that has been exposed in the pages of CardPlayer? Where should I
send the check?
The truth is, that SBR is a fair and impartial review site. Just like
Casinomeister, they are not afraid to buck heads with powerful crooked
entities, and they are also not willing to sell their integrity out for
money.
IHeartWuzzy, without adding anything negative to the conversation, openly
recommended a "D-" sportsbook to Slim. I felt obligated to step in and tell
Slim that there was more information that IHeartWuzzy irresponsibly failed
to mention. So that's the deal. If you think that qualifies as a
bitch-slapping of me, then go ahead and call it whatever you want. It'll be
a cold day before I let a dingleberry like you bother me with your weak
criticism. I am comfortable that I did the right thing by giving good and
solid advice to Slim. So bite me.
-PP
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jan 2009 18:59:13
From: IHeartWuzzy
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
On Jan 28 2009 7:23 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:
> "Raider Fan" <raidersgotscrewed1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6s0756xu2h.ln2@recgroups.com...
>
> > Well done iheartwuzzy. The dingleberry is classic.
> >
>
> So let me get this right. You think, that because IHeartWuzzy paraded
> before us, some industry shills who never criticize ANY offshore books,
You disingenuous (lying?) a'hole, paul.
You wanna call eGaming mag a shill (named sportsbook.com "Best US casino"
'05,'06) be my guest (although I and others will disagree). But I also
"paraded" CLEARLY independent sites; "never criticize ANY offshore books"
?... you lyin' hole!
The two I "paraded" criticize books, you disingenuous assholio:
http://www.sportsgamblingreview.com/sportsbook-reviews.htm
http://www.sportsintensity.com/blacklist.php
The thing your lil'ol pea-brain can't seem to grasp is I was pointing out
that just b/c SBR has them at D-, that doesn't mean it's gospel. It's all
anecdotal, YMMV. Other independents (not shills, you lyin', effin punk)
have them HIGHLY RATED. Period.
Additionally, as Slim once again confirms today, he was looking for
personal r.g.p.ers experiences and your fuckin' nonsense sent the thread
astray... another thing your lil' ol pea-brain has trouble wrapping itself
around.
>that that amounts to me getting pwned?
It's obvious that you were.
>Let me make a poker comparison for you,
>Raider. Can I offer you a dollar for every scandal and crooked gambling
> company that has been exposed in the pages of CardPlayer? Where should I
> send the check?
More off-the-track nonsense.
How 'bout this, paul: Unlike you, Raider Fan can actually read/comprehend
and follow links to independent sites that clearly prove the examples I
"paraded" were not shills... you disingenuous punk, you!
> The truth is, that SBR is a fair and impartial review site.
No one is arguing that they're not, moron. It's just being pointed out to
you that they're not the GOSPEL truth, not the final authority. Other fair
and impartial review sites have SB rated highly... you just can't grasp
this simple concept, can you?
> Just like Casinomeister, they are not afraid to buck heads with powerful
crooked
> entities, and they are also not willing to sell their integrity out for
> money.
Sportsgamblingreview can be added to this list, numbnuts (ah, I happened
to "parade" them).
> IHeartWuzzy, without adding anything negative to the conversation, openly
> recommended a "D-" sportsbook to Slim.
You're wrong from jump, shithead (hey, tks Beldin!).
(D- only to SBR)
I never "recommended" anything! I only offered up to Slim my personal
experiences, as per HIS REQUEST. If you could read/comprehend properly,
you probably wouldn't get pwned so often, shithead.
>I felt obligated to step in and tell Slim that there was more information
that IHeartWuzzy >irresponsibly failed to mention. So that's the deal.
The "deal" in reality is that Slim came on today to tell you that he was
only looking for personal r.g.p.ers experiences and that the thread got
sidetracked (thanks, DINGLEBERRY!).
>If you think that qualifies as a bitch-slapping of me,
To those that can read/comprehend it was a fairly obvious bitchslapping of
you...
>then go ahead and call it whatever you want.
Uh, RF called it properly: PWNED.
>It'll be a cold day before I let a dingleberry like you bother me with your
weak criticism. I am comfortable that I did the right thing by giving good
and solid advice to Slim. So bite me.
>
> -paul
WOW... lookey here... PWNED again, fuckface!
______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jan 2009 20:43:51
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
"IHeartWuzzy" <a55120d@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:1li756x48k.ln2@recgroups.com...
>
> You disingenuous (lying?) a'hole, paul.
> , you disingenuous assholio:
>... you disingenuous punk, you!
>
> (thanks, DINGLEBERRY!).
>
>... PWNED again, fuckface!
I'm not so sure I'm comfortable with the tone of this.
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Jan 2009 06:50:50
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
> I'm not so sure I'm comfortable with the tone of this.
lol
"The tone"
lol
========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
========
BOOM byae
John
----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Jan 2009 06:34:06
From: IHeartWuzzy
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
On Jan 28 2009 11:43 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:
> "IHeartWuzzy" <a55120d@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1li756x48k.ln2@recgroups.com...
> >
> > You disingenuous (lying?) a'hole, paul.
>
> > , you disingenuous assholio:
>
> >... you disingenuous punk, you!
> >
> > (thanks, DINGLEBERRY!).
> >
> >... PWNED again, fuckface!
>
>
> I'm not so sure I'm comfortable with the tone of this.
You disingenuous (lying?) sweetpea, paul.
you disingenuous buttercup
..you disingenuous doodle bug, you!
(thanks, CUPCAKE!)
..PWNED again, pumpkin!
***************************************
There... feeling all better now?
_______________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jan 2009 21:45:54
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:59:13 -0800, "IHeartWuzzy"
<a55120d@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>On Jan 28 2009 7:23 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:
>
>> "Raider Fan" <raidersgotscrewed1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:6s0756xu2h.ln2@recgroups.com...
>>
>> > Well done iheartwuzzy. The dingleberry is classic.
>> >
>>
>> So let me get this right. You think, that because IHeartWuzzy paraded
>> before us, some industry shills who never criticize ANY offshore books,
>
>You disingenuous (lying?) a'hole, paul.
>
>You wanna call eGaming mag a shill (named sportsbook.com "Best US casino"
>'05,'06) be my guest (although I and others will disagree). But I also
>"paraded" CLEARLY independent sites; "never criticize ANY offshore books"
>?... you lyin' hole!
>
>The two I "paraded" criticize books, you disingenuous assholio:
>
>http://www.sportsgamblingreview.com/sportsbook-reviews.htm
>
>http://www.sportsintensity.com/blacklist.php
>
>The thing your lil'ol pea-brain can't seem to grasp is I was pointing out
>that just b/c SBR has them at D-, that doesn't mean it's gospel. It's all
>anecdotal, YMMV. Other independents (not shills, you lyin', effin punk)
>have them HIGHLY RATED. Period.
>
>Additionally, as Slim once again confirms today, he was looking for
>personal r.g.p.ers experiences and your fuckin' nonsense sent the thread
>astray... another thing your lil' ol pea-brain has trouble wrapping itself
>around.
>
>>that that amounts to me getting pwned?
>
>It's obvious that you were.
>
>>Let me make a poker comparison for you,
>>Raider. Can I offer you a dollar for every scandal and crooked gambling
>> company that has been exposed in the pages of CardPlayer? Where should I
>> send the check?
>
>More off-the-track nonsense.
>
>How 'bout this, paul: Unlike you, Raider Fan can actually read/comprehend
>and follow links to independent sites that clearly prove the examples I
>"paraded" were not shills... you disingenuous punk, you!
>
>> The truth is, that SBR is a fair and impartial review site.
>
>No one is arguing that they're not, moron. It's just being pointed out to
>you that they're not the GOSPEL truth, not the final authority. Other fair
>and impartial review sites have SB rated highly... you just can't grasp
>this simple concept, can you?
>
>> Just like Casinomeister, they are not afraid to buck heads with powerful
>crooked
>> entities, and they are also not willing to sell their integrity out for
>> money.
>
>Sportsgamblingreview can be added to this list, numbnuts (ah, I happened
>to "parade" them).
>
>> IHeartWuzzy, without adding anything negative to the conversation, openly
>> recommended a "D-" sportsbook to Slim.
>
>You're wrong from jump, shithead (hey, tks Beldin!).
>
>(D- only to SBR)
>
>I never "recommended" anything! I only offered up to Slim my personal
>experiences, as per HIS REQUEST. If you could read/comprehend properly,
>you probably wouldn't get pwned so often, shithead.
>
>>I felt obligated to step in and tell Slim that there was more information
>that IHeartWuzzy >irresponsibly failed to mention. So that's the deal.
>
>The "deal" in reality is that Slim came on today to tell you that he was
>only looking for personal r.g.p.ers experiences and that the thread got
>sidetracked (thanks, DINGLEBERRY!).
>
>>If you think that qualifies as a bitch-slapping of me,
>
>To those that can read/comprehend it was a fairly obvious bitchslapping of
>you...
>
>>then go ahead and call it whatever you want.
>
>Uh, RF called it properly: PWNED.
>
>>It'll be a cold day before I let a dingleberry like you bother me with your
>weak criticism. I am comfortable that I did the right thing by giving good
>and solid advice to Slim. So bite me.
>>
>> -paul
>
>WOW... lookey here... PWNED again, fuckface!
>
Heh.
You got him.
This is a proper bitch-slapping that Popinjay won't soon forget.
Good job.
Popinjay has really been annoying me lately.
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jan 2009 21:01:08
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
"FL Turbo" <noemail@notime.com > wrote in message
news:7o82o49t5go2nqu7msguh0crtrf8php49s@4ax.com...
>
> Heh.
> You got him.
>
Do you think it was right of him to describe his "flawless" experience with
that sportsbook to Slim, without mentioning that they were rated a "D-" by a
top review site? Or was it like I suggested, quite irresponsible of him?
If he had qualified his advice in the first place by saying that he had had
good experience with that sportsbook, regardless of the fact that they are
rated 'D-' by SBR, then I probably would not have taken issue with him.
It's not so much what he said that irked me, but rather it was his flagrant
and carefree irresponsibilty, and his disregard for maintaining the
integrity of RGP.
Frankly, I would like to continue this conversation with him, but
unfortunately his insolent attitude and vicious ad hominem has put me off.
I'm not sure that I want to converse with someone who is so lacking in the
basic niceties of civil discourse and who is most assuredly of questionable
character.
-paul
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Jan 2009 06:52:23
From: IHeartWuzzy
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
On Jan 29 2009 12:01 AM, Paul Popinjay wrote:
> "FL Turbo" <noemail@notime.com> wrote in message
> news:7o82o49t5go2nqu7msguh0crtrf8php49s@4ax.com...
>
> >
> > Heh.
> > You got him.
> >
>
> Do you think it was right of him to describe his "flawless" experience with
that sportsbook to >Slim,
I never used the word "flawless", you disingenuous dumplin' (and using it
the way you did here infers I did).
>without mentioning that they were rated a "D-" by a
> top review site? Or was it like I suggested, quite irresponsible of him?
For those that can read/comprehend Slim's OP (unfortunately, this leaves
you out) the concept of my, Dean's or Check's "irresponsible" response was
never in play; we provided to Slim what he asked for, period.
Why can't you understand something so simple as this?...you boneheaded
Cutie-patutie, you!
> If he had qualified his advice in the first place by saying that he had had
> good experience with that sportsbook, regardless of the fact that they are
> rated 'D-' by SBR, then I probably would not have taken issue with him.
1) For the smart kids in the class, they understood that Slim's OP already
"qualified" any responses that were forthcoming; he was looking for
personal experiences.
2) You are simply bullshitting... everybody saw how eager you were to jump
in and attack my, Dean's and Check's responses to Slim.
Cards on table (anyone interested can easily verify this): Slim asked, he
got polite, contextual responses... then YOU jumped in being nothing more
than a discourteous meanderer... PERIOD.
> It's not so much what he said that irked me, but rather it was his flagrant
> and carefree irresponsibilty, and his disregard for maintaining the
> integrity of RGP.
You are clearly WRONG and many see it, paul.
Bluntly, you are out of order, sir!
> Frankly, I would like to continue this conversation with him, but
> unfortunately his insolent attitude and vicious ad hominem has put me off.
TRANSLATION: I've been totally pwned... best to just stop now.
> I'm not sure that I want to converse with someone who is so lacking in the
> basic niceties of civil discourse and who is most assuredly of questionable
> character.
>
> -paul
Dingleberry, heal thyself.
--------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Jan 2009 05:59:31
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Popinjay gets pwned!
|
"Paul Popinjay"
> Frankly, I would like to continue this conversation with him, but
> unfortunately his insolent attitude and vicious ad hominem has put me off.
But he did write:
" ... you disingenuous punk, you!"
Being called a "punk" should have brightened your day a little.
|
|
