Tricky situation to be sure, but as I said in one of my posts in the second "update" thread, I agree we do need a standard way of dealing with it, like you suggest Norm. That recent pair of threads was a really good example of such a situation. It was data-supported (collected over several months), stats presented were supported as anomalous (or rather "statistically impossible for a random game", in Don's words), and the fact that suddenly a lot of APs were attacking the OP for killing an advantage play... The allegation had merit, even if it was/is ultimately found to be incorrect. Anyway, no point opening it up again, I guess my point is enough "credible" people were scratching their heads about it that it was an interesting discussion when it wasn't people just screaming at each other. And who knows, some who didn't know about it may do their own (hopefully extensive) research, thanks to the thread and figure out a way to beat it, if it is real, by working on their own data collection to confirm while the whole thing shakes out with Gaming Commission (if someone ended up reporting it).
But, there were problems, like potentially revealing an advantage play that (apparently) several people were benefiting from, as well as turning into a pissing contest at the end (thankfully, Norm stopped that once it got to a silly point). And, indeed, potential legal issues with libel (which I had not considered; good point). I tend to agree with the folks here that a separate forum might make sense if for no other reason than that there is a standard place it could have been put without a doubt that would have been a better location than the main board. Of course, suddenly all of the silly cheating claims (the other 98% of "The CASINO Is cheaTING ME!!!1111one" threads) would end up getting posted there and it might just turn itself into the Disadvantage Forum on its own.
What about this: A "cheating allegations" forum that has VERY stringent posting requirements:
1. Data
2. Other supporting (even if not conclusive on its own) evidence (e.g strange pit heat patterns)
3. More Data
4. How others can verify it.
5. Did I mention data?
6. Bonus points for a "Yeah, this might be a real thing," from a credible board member (though perhaps that's a bit subjective).
Any threads that do not fulfill the above (or at least 1-5) get moved to Disadvantage. Immediately (or as soon as Norm sees them).
The allegations from the threads in question had been brought up before by other members (and on other forums) WITHOUT the supporting data, evidence, and details that were provided in those threads, and the previous ones were right to be laughed away for that reason. But if someone puts in the time to collect a conclusive amounts of data, and it's something that can really be harming APs and/or ploppies, I, for one, would appreciate reading about it somewhere.
Truly, thanks, Norm, for opening up this thread so we can figure out a way to deal with this issue. This is unlikely to be the last time it comes up. Feel free to edit the first paragraph out of this post if it starts to throw this thread of the rails (or if you think it might); that wasn't the intent, I just wanted to suggest that such a thing as "threads about cheating with some amount merit" might exist.
Cheers!
EDIT(s): Grammar. :-P
We could put the “casino cheated me” forum in the subscription area and move threads there. That would likely reduce such threads (possibly resulting in them going to other sites), would likely increase the seriousness of responses, cut down on junk traffic, would reduce the possibility of an AP play going public, and would take them out of public view, decreasing any liability concerns as they wouldn’t be seen by the general public. Realize that only a fraction of readers post. I won’t do this unless there is general agreement.
Last edited by Norm; 07-29-2018 at 11:52 AM.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
"Your honor, with all due respect: if you're going to try my case for me, I wish you wouldn't lose it."
Fictitious Boston Attorney Frank Galvin (Paul Newman - January 26, 1925 - September 26, 2008) in The Verdict, 1982, lambasting Trial Judge Hoyle (Milo Donal O'Shea - June 2, 1926 - April 2, 2013) - http://imdb.com/title/tt0084855/
Norm,
I think your readers would use it and also be attracted to it because it is a place where they can highlight their grievances. It's true that it may also attract outrageous claims but they can be quickly shut down. Placing it in the subscriber section is also a good idea but limits the publicity, however, the responses would be more valid. I suggest a trial in both areas to see what works and then go with that.
Casino Enemy No.1
Bookmarks