robgibraltar

You're quite right, it does seem pretty clear, although I was offering the opp. to interpret the above comment in a different context.However, since you force my hand, I wonder why DN thinks that disguising your golf handicap in order to win money is characteristic of a 'lower form of life' when it's someone he presumably doesn't like, but it's ok if one of his mates does it?For someone who took a moral high ground on the same position last year, that seems mightily hypocritical.

I've asked this question in a new posthttp://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...howtopic=125643I'm wondering if DN's comment was taken out of context? As it does appear that he slated Hamilton for deceiving someone with their golf hamilton, and yet PI reportedly did the same thing?

Hi Daniel - could you please clarify what you meant with the following?Daniel called Hamilton "A complete low life who’d cheat his own mother by telling her that he shoots 95 when he can actually shoot in the 70’s just to steal her money." I believe this was taken from a thread on 2+2Thanks - and congrats on your results in the WS btw.

Daniel - to clarify, you encourage constructive debate even if the opinions are against your own, but you will remove anything which is unconstructive?Who decides what is constructive?Does this apply to your established forum members too?Thanks,R.

Ok - I concede the point about perspective, which is why I made it later on.

I don't believe DN made an error getting involved, it's something any good friend would do if asked to, the issue I personally had was the judgement making without knowing the full facts. He is of course entitled to post his opinions, as long as it's clear that they are opinions.

Qualify your statement please.

Toby - I never said DN's account was wrong, I never said it was right either. I believe at the time I was questioning his decision to make judgements on a situation which he himself confessed he had only heard one side of, COMBINED WITH the fact that he is widely read, and (mostly) well respected.I stand by what I say about Ram's reply. It is a thoughtful, rational and coherent account of what happened from his perspective. I believe him, although that is irrelevant to this post and to your criticism.DN's blog entry (by the way, I'm probably not the first, but doesn't the phrase "lol, blogamen

You have no legitimate answer, therefore you respond in true forum behaviour.I don't treat the internet seriously per se, I treat the topic of conversation with the seriousness it deserves. If we were having this discussion over something trivial, I'd probably have replied something along the lines of "lolzzz!!!11!!".However this is a serious discussion (or was until it was debased by idiots) and deserves to be treated appropriately.Thanks,R.

In terms of etymology, I believe that 'yank' is a contraction or modification of a mis-pronunciation of 'english' by native americans.So I guess it depends if you're mainly english-descended canadian or not.I wouldn't normally use the term, it was done to illustrate a point.

And what would happen if I were to post on here something like:"here come all the yanks to back up the conman and the egomaniac"I'd get flamed right? I'd be insinuating that "the yanks" opinions don't count. I'd have been disparaging, which would lead to me casting an immediate doubt over the integrity of your comments because you fall into the group of "the yanks".Anyone who reads anything posted by "the yanks" after that post is less likely to believe it, because someone has already attacked it.If you don't understand what I'm talking about then I'm not going to waste any more time talking a

No - I am offended by someone who thinks that my opinions count for nothing because I belong to a particular group. You are pre-judging me and others based on a class.That just shows how ignorant you really are.

I never expected to see such a prejudiced remark on a public forum. You should be ashamed of yourself.Just because a person is a member of a particular group does not mean that person's opinions are wrong or invalid.I believe Hitler made that assumption many years ago.

edit - quoted the wrong post - pls see below.