WHY HAVE A POSTING FORUM??

[chestrockwells]

I don't really know why I bother but, a "locked thread" leads me here. For some reason Brian, you chose not to respond to me, but at the same time, responded to my comments...... but directed it to Boots. I have no clue as to the thinking that went into that. But regardless of that, you said:

" there is a mistaken notion on the internet that it is freedom of speech and that site owners have no right to operate their business as they see fit"

Site owners certainly do have every right, but let's call it the way it is. The "posting forums" today are a mere shadow of what they used to be, both in content quality as well as volume. You have a whole site to editorialize all you want, but I find it downright bizarre that you choose to make rambling, pointless posts in the forums and then close the thread when you feel its enough or when you feel the response is not what it ought to be.

You ask why people critisize a clean site like Bettorsworld and yet fail to defend the site or defend you when you're attacked unfairly.
Well I don't post at the other sites, but I will say this with all sincerity.......You sir, would pose a real challenge to anybody who would attempt to defend you. Why??

Well what you posted sums it up "i don't care what anybody believes. those are the simple facts."
Well excuse us all for not running to your defense!
And finally, it's great that the site is doing well. I congratulate you both for getting the recognition and the awards that you refer to, and I mean that sincerely.
But a posting forum is not about awards or about "traffic". It's about discussion and opinion. It's about dissent and diversity. And ultimately, if I may be so bold, a posting forum is about US, the posters..........not you Brian, and your personal beef.

[bgeorgia]

chester,

firstly, i want to make clear the posting forum is a SMALL portion of bettorsworld. it is important to bettorsworld but we are not consumed by it.

there are a number of reasons why the traffic in the forums has deteriorated.
new sites (copycat) are popping up everyday.
some site owners would literally come into our forum, advertise for themselves and leave. for some it worked for others it did not. other people simply expected us to hand over the keys to the building so they could take whatever they felt they could use.

unlike ALL other similar sites we spend our own money to give out promotional items such as shirts, hats and other similar type items. we invest our own money in our forums.
forums run in cycles. we believe our posters will return.
it certainly does not point to any of the reasons you speak of. if that was the case similar sites who fabricate lies about bworld in an effort to chase advertisers would certainly come under the scourge of people like yourself. instead, these sites maintain themselves because they have the rec.gambling type posters who do not talk about picks and plays but about things totally unrelated to sports gambling.

as far as the definition of a posting forum you are correct. it IS NOT however about a new first time poster coming in and defending a sportsbook that made physical threats against the owners. you need to understand that. it appears you don't. it appears you only understand that EVERYTHING is within the limits and that comes with the territory.
when boots was asked to provide SPECIFIC examples of thread deletions he DID NOT. are there some? YES. and we would be able to tell you specifically why they were deleted.
maybe it was an accusation with no foundation or something similar.

and please tell US (JEFF AND ME) where the personal beef is? if you say it is with c--a--m--e--l--o--t this is not personal.
what WAS personal was his THREATS and his demanding ways towards this site.
let me make this clear to you and maybe you can learn something. we have a business that's mainfunction is to promote the great books we have on this site.
our job is also to make the people aware of a situation that the player will want to know about BEFORE posting up with a book.
there is no way in hell we would EVER recommend THAT book to anyone. conversely, we would steer a person away for reasons that go much farther than what you think was a personal beef.
other sites allow slander, lies and threats to go unchecked and with the posters blessing. you can second guess us all you want and that is your right but we will never
allow the GARBAGE that is allowed to stay in a forum for the sake of building up posts.
its not about number of posts, its about someone coming to a forum with good intentions and asking a question or bringing up a valid point.
so chester, i suggest you take a good hard look at what you wrote and edit the piece to reflect the truth of the matter. also, please get specifics on the deleted posts so we can respond accordingly.

thanks
bg

[vito]

Sounds like a desperate response.

[bgeorgia]

i would have though you might address the issues i brought up vito.why waste your time with your response? its very weak.
bg

[chestrockwells]

Brian, I have made no comments, specific or otherwise, about "deleted posts". Nor have I EVER made any comments about people who have been "banned". I'm not sure where you're getting this from.

I do understand that you and Jeff were wronged and threatened by Mark Del owner of C A M etc. In fact I made a post about that which was fully supportive of you guys. And no, I don't think that everything under the sun should be allowed in here, nor do I think that it should become a three ringed circus.......a point that Jeff and I have discussed on a couple of occasions. And finally, unlike some that come here, I do understand the realities of business and like you, am a business owner too. My comments about the posting forum are not due to my ignorance about the "realities of your business" for I realize that in the years I've been posting here, I've never sent you any money! Rather, my comments are about the posting forum, because that's the only part of this operation that we, the posters, have any interaction with and essentially can "help steer" for lack of a better term. I don't deny that your business poses certain unique challenges and that there have been people who come in with very specific agendas to promote........but that has always been the case......and I recall a time when it was mostly the posters who eventually weeded these people out or to the surface.
But you need to look at yourself and your posts objectively and I challenge any impartial observer to conclude that you haven't been "over the top" with the C A M E L O T thing. I'm not saying that you're not justified being angry or even violent, if you wish. But don't deny it's not personal and spin it as a "we're doing a public service" by steering people away from it bs. I would NEVER send money to them, for reasons that I've stated in previous posts. But for most people it's "will I get paid" and up to now, it "seems" that they do pay. Brian, there are many sportsbooks that have ripped people off. I don't see continuous posts about them from you. And it really IS very outrageous to suggest that they may be the worst sportsbook ever. Based on what?? Come on, now.
And finally the one thing that you said in your post that all of us posters/readers need to be keenly aware of...........Brian wrote:

"let me make this clear to you and maybe you can learn something. we have a business that's mainfunction is to promote the great books we have on this site"

I have no problem with that, but let's not confuse that with "objectivity" and let's not confuse that statement with being an unbiased "watchdog". It doesn't take a genius to smell a conflict of interest.

[bgeorgia]

chester,

i must disagree with you. the only over the top action was taken by del. does his book pay? i don't know. i don't care. why don't i care?
because to me getting paid is LESS important than NOT being threatened. in addition, i will never go by what the freaks over at the island claim.
consider this; they voted for the top 5 books over there not so long ago. del's book was voted higher than olympic, wwts royal and other well know books. laughingly, wwts was given a meager 3 votes.
if there were 2 books side by side and one paid but threatened people and one did not pay and DID NOT threaten people, who is worse? i value my well being. it is so easy for someone to make light of the issue and start pointing fingers the other way which is apparent here but difficult to take the ridicule that we have received because of a decision that we would make the same way today. remember, there was no apology given for his threats only a post that spouted "i screwed up".
what is the real reason for your concern here?
our intentions are two-fold.
1)promote bettorsworld books
2)make it clear to players what books they should avoid and why they should avoid them.
we do this through the clink and also through posts.

bg

[DOGS THAT BARK]

This would apply to all watch dog sites so not pickin on you Brian.The bottom line is revenue.How do they get revenue?By supporting books that pay the bills.Who is the primary concern,the books or the punters?With that being said I believe Jeff to have done fine job and could think of few that are as knowlegeble are have spent more time in their endeavors however no sight owner can be unbiased to their golden gooses.If you think you can, answer 2 questions with "no spin" please.Given all criteria who is the best book you represent and who is the worse?
While there are many factors in choosing or discounting books I can assure you rifts between who ever for what ever reasons regardless who was right or wrong has little influence on punters.I would say longevity,customer service,payment history and lines offered are of the utmost with the latter two being primary.Just my opinion for what its worth.

[jlpblade]

It seems one man's challenge is always going to be another man's threat. Where is REALITY when we really need him?

Jeff

P.S. I'm still not a c a m account holder, nor do I play one on tv.

[Jeff]

Dogs- you make some valid points but one oversight I believe.

The valid points of course concerning the potential conflicts of interest that exist due to the fact that there is advertising involved.

Your points on choosing a book are crucial as well. Longevity, Payout record, customer service. All important. I have preached those points for 6+ years.

But the part about "rifts between whoever for whatever reasons regardless of who was right or wrong having little influence" I have to disagree with.

Sure, if two guys had an argument about something unrelated to this business, then it should have little bearing on anything.

However, when the rift is as a result a business owner not being able to handle the comment that his business is simply to new, then I think that does have influence and does matter.

Let's face it. This industry exists to seperate the player from his money. Like it or not. The sports service industry should be a measuring stick for that.

But this industry is in some serious trouble when you look at what it has to offer for the player.

We have one joker who had the audacity to claim NASA was the # 1 book in the world, knowing full well their refusal to pay a BW beard.

One year later, not only is NASA no longer #1 in his eyes, but, HE is now a BW beard! Yeah, please get me some advice from this guy.

On the other side of the street we have a posting forum poll actually give the title of best book to a book that has been in business less than 6 months!

Look, all in all that nonsense doesn't bother me. I'd like to think most people take it all with a grain of salt and make their own decisions based on their own research.

As far as answering your questions on who is number one and who is the worst, of the books on this site, let's face it, there is no pulling the wool over anyones eyes here. The books that are the best have proven themselves time and time again for many many years and not aknowledging them, or putting a brand new book in the same sentence as them is like calling yourself a fraud.......I would never insult the intelligence if the players like that.

I'm looking at a framed picture of the New York Times from roughly 4 years ago, and pictured on the cover is the bettorsworld homepage from that time. The books visible in the picture are Carib, WSEX, WWTS and SOS. You can't go wrong starting your search there if you're looking for the best. Of course who the best is is totally a matter of opinion.

As far as the worst, well, picking books is like picking a mutual fund. There's risky, aggresive funds and there's safe, conservative standbys.

It stands to reason that the newer a book is, the riskier it is. The less of a track record they have, the more of a chance you're taking. It's really that simple.

We're in an industry where it is a virtual certainty that you can take the risk out of getting paid and come as close to 100% as possible that you will be paid if you use the right books.

As you expand your horizons and have some success, you can afford to start taking some more risk.

As always, anyone who wants an opinion about a book can contact me at [email protected]

The list of players I correspond with OFF THE SITE continues to grow.....you'll always get the best available information I have.

[Hartley]

Since it appears I've been un-banned, I will respond quickly with my opinions on this (take it for what you will).

In Canada a couple of weeks back, a record store owner (Sam Sniderman of Sam the Record Man) declared bankruptcy. He was one of the original record store owners and was known as a pioneer in the industry.

In his announcement of the bankruptcy, he blamed Napster, he blamed the larger record companies (HMV, Tower Records etc.), he blamed the Canadian government for allowing too much competition etc.

When people on the street were interviewed about it, they seemed disappointed but stated that the only one to blame was Sam Sniderman himself for not taking the initiative to keep up with what the public wanted. If he worried more about building his own business than what the comptetition was doing he may still be around today.

As well, while other companies were progressive in promoting new talent and coming up with innovative new ideas, (i.e. letting the public hear cds in store before they purchased them - similar to Napster), Sam the Record Man instead chose to rely on its reputation and past laurels, figuring that people would continue to buy from him because he was after all a pioneer in the industry. In the end, it wasn't good enough and he was forced to declare bankruptcy.

Contrary to what you two believe nobody owes you anything. Nor do you owe anybody anything. That's the idea of a business - it's a 2 way street. People post here because they get something from it but they will stop posting if it no longer is worth their while. When you take on the attitude that "this is my site and I will run it like I want, take it or leave it," most people will leave it - particularly if there are other places to go. And contrary to what you believe Bettorsworld would be of little interest to most of the advertisers if the posting forum didn't exist.

Rather than taking criticism personally why not listen to the criticism and see what merit there is to it. The fact that the likes of Dogs That Bark, Chestrockwells and Myself (some of your first posters) are showing great frustration with this site should raise eyebrows.

Think about it.

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Hartley ]

[Jeff]

1)You were never banned to begin with.

2) My favorite part of your post:

"While other companies were progressive in promoting new talent and coming up with innovative new ideas"

BINGO

That is something we NEVER have a shortage of.

YOU can judge by how many people post on forums.

We'll let our innovative new ideas and the people they attract take care of themselves.

1)Bettorsworld and all it has to offer

2) http://www.freesportsmonitor.com

3) ????? coming soon!


Incidentally, some of you may experience password problems here on the forum from time to time.

We are integrating usernames and passwords from the posting forum into a new product we will unveil soon.

Stay tuned!

Hartley, try not to let your bitterness get the best of you. It comes through loud and clear in your post. :D

[Hartley]

Well I was receiving a message stating that I couldn't post messages in the forum when I tried before. And when I mentioned this on M.W., not once did you or Brian or you state that I wasn't banned, but Brian made it quite clear I was no longer welcome here.

>>Update
i read the post and whole-heartedly agree with jeff's decision. your energies would be much better served over at ** and not bw.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: bgeorgia ]<<

As for my being bitter, of course I am bitter. I'm bitter that I was snubbed by a place I put my efforts into for years for simply stating an opinion.

Also don't kid yourself. Most people visit these sites for the contests and the posting forum. If they want news or similar they'll go to a place like Rolling Good Times or River City Group.

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Hartley ]

[Jeff]

Don't worry my friend. I would never dream of kidding myself.

I've got a very good handle on why people visit. That's why we run our numbers several times a day. To keep tabs on what's popular and what's not.

They certainly don't visit to see you argue with me about nonsense.

Or anyone else argue with anyone else about nonsense.

Keep it to sportsbooks.

[chestrockwells]

And I'm sure they don't visit here to listen to or read about why one of the owners here is upset about C A M E L O T again and again.

[Cashew]

YO HARTLEY BRIAN DOES NOT WANT YOU ON THIS SITE YOU GEEK BUT HE IS TO POLITE TO TELL YOU TO GO F YOURSELF

SO I WILL

GO F YOURSELF AND DON"T COME BACK!!!!!!!

YOU PIECE OF SH|T!!!!