WHY THREAD IS CLOSED

[Skybook]

Im sick of threads getting locked and no reason why. We would like to be given a reason by administrators why they close threads. We here at Skybook do not advertise with the OSGA , THE PRESCRIPTION, or any other similair site. The reason we advertised here is becuase we thought this was a legitimate site to speak your mind. Where the players and books can have real forums. So far I have seen to forums closed with no reason given. The only one I can see is that the truth was coming out about paid advertisers and this site didnt want to lose them. Well you will lose Skybook and others I assume if this is how you operate. We for one dont want our reputation to be a part of these practices
Steve

[bgeorgia]

to skybook and anybody else.

the sportsbooks who are accused of this practice have been mentioned and it is noted in this room.
if there are others that choose to do this, then you may bring it to the attention of the posting room and have responses made to that post.

as you notice, these posts do not get deleted but are left up so people can make up their own minds and make their own decision.

after the facts have been stated, there is no reason to beat a dead horse. we noticed skybook started the same post in the prescription. bworld holds steadfastly to our policy. the facts as you know them have been stated and they remain on the board.
what more is there to say?
from here in it seems like your going after the throats of these other books.

the policies are now here, they will stay. if the books want to respond they may. if they choose not to and let the reputations and players to defend them, that is ok too.

if a sportsbook chooses to leave because of this policy then they are welcome to. bworld will not tolerate any sportbook or player continually bashing a sportsbook-any sportsbook with REPETITIVE posts.

if this causes you to leave bettorsworld then we are sorry but we will NEVER change this policy.

that is final.

brian/jeff/willy

[This message has been edited by bgeorgia (edited 12-08-1999).]

[Skybook]

Like I said
You just confirmed it for us . You are interested in protecting your paid advertisors and that all. We were not beating a dead horse at all. The thread was only open a few hours if you noticed . It was a good thread to protect bettors, the clients. Which is what we originally thought this site was about. We here at skybook have no intersest in going and attacking other books at all. Maybe you should read more and see the point it is to protect the bettors. Any company with these rules should be exposed and thats a FACT. to bad if its an advertisor of this site. This site to make the claims it does shouldnt except these advertisors anyway. Skybook works along side with,is happy with , and looks up to with respect,trying to learn more and more from the other top books. So before you accuse us of going after other books learn what your talking about. We want to expose books that can cheat clients. Thats all , very simple.
Also now that you have shown your true colors
Im sure you will lose advertiors who are legit and keep the ones who arent. Like I said before we only joined this site because we thought it was legit. We speak our minds,which are based on facts only. So you dont want us telling the truth no problem. We will leave today and you can keep books that pay to advertise no matter what their practices are.

[bgeorgia]

YOU are the one who has confirmed what myself and my partners thought was the case with your posts.
if our intentions were to "protect" and hide the truth from our visitors then the post would have been deleted. what will happen when skybook has a policy people do not like?
i guarantee the sites like WWTS, BOWMANS WSEX and i would venture to say everyone else on our site would simply go about their business and let the public scream.
their main concern would be to run their own business and that is why you do not see them here joining your parade. They do not need to. They do very well with their own promotions without playing a pied piper or even worse a leader looking angrily for the Frankenstein monster.
It is painfully obvious that you have one objectve. This is not to "save" the players from the big bad nasa or intertops (ha!) but only to get them to play at skybook. a lame way to attract customers.
i know another book who tries that and fails miserably every time.
we have a special area on our site for people to file complaints with any book on our site. if someone has been cheated then they can fill out the form and we will pursue
their concern.
in leading this weak attack on several sites i believe you have alienated many players and sportsbooks alike.
we wish you luck with your sportsbook but you sure as hell aren't going to be the spokesperson for the industry. this forum is about the players voicing concerns without getting fired up by a shill like you.

brian

[Skybook]

RENO
How about a lttle support here. I know your reading this. You stated yourself your betting for a syndicate. How would you like to be told your not allowed to make those bets or your not getting paid because you made those bets. Im asking becuase i know you carry a lot of weight in these forums. I like hearing what you have to say. My point was to protect you and other bettors from being stiffed. We will go on record saying we will attack and accuse the books that think they reserve the right to do this.As far as all the other top notch books that dont practice this we have only but the highest respect for you and wish you like always the best
Steve

[Skybook]

Wow Brian
I cant believe you would go on record admiting your sites practices. When the truth be told about a paid advertisor look what happens. An administrator comes out of the woodwork to close the thread and defend the advertisor. Agian you just make things up to sound good and trick the reader.Those books you said are great books as is EVERYBOOK THAT DOESNT RESERVE THE RIGHT TO STIFF A CLIENT. This is all we are saying . LEt the books be exposed that have the stiff policys and look what happens. Here you come to the rescue because 2 of them happen to be paid advertisors. Also I assume you weighed you options and more of your advertisors pracice these methods so youfigured you would jump in and defend them and accuse a book like ours , which has no rules what-so-ever
You bet and win you get paid. That is our rule as well as the rule foe all the other top books around and all the other paid advertisors that you have that dont practice the stiff rules.
It really seems funny to me how you came out or the woodwork firing statements that we never made. Here is our point one more time and then you can please tell me again why you have such a problem with us makeink it.
Our point
A book should not reserve the right to pay a customer because they fell he is a syndicate, or a pro. Thats it . The whole point is that.
Anyone should be able to bet the same lines offered to the other clients and should be paid when they win.
So now tell me again why you have such a problem with us making that point to the readers. We arent lloking for customers from this get real. You said something about WWTS
we agree thay are awesome. We recomend them to everyone. Ill say it here join them not us
if your a reader and isnt sure who to join.
What i am saying is dont join places that can stiff you.
As to your ridiculous claim we are trying to get clients by bashing other books. No reader is being fooled by you. I will go here on record praising many other books.

[Skybook]

BRIAN

Also we and im sure the intelligent reader knows we have nothing to gain and can only hurt ourselves by having arguements with administrators. Nobody carrys more weight in this site then you guys. We only felt it neccessary to tell the truth.I guess its just your way of gambling. You can come in attack and accuse us and lose us as advertisors, or you can come in and protect the advertisors you have which practice these rules. So far 3 have been expose and im sure there are more. So keeping 3 is better then losing 1. I saw how quickly you jumped in to protect them. I think the right and only thing to have done
would have been to do nothing. That thread was fine and only going to get better. It should not have been closed. It had no threats or uneccessary insults. It was facts and more were to come. Also Ill have you know we are very friendly with many of these books and if you think they dont feel the same way and arent mad about competing with frauds your wrong. The reason they havent come foward like you said is simple. Look what happens to the book that comes foward and speaks the truth . You come in bashing.
The owners of Skybook are very friendly with a lot of the advertisors on the left, Lets remember that most of the advetisors on the left do not practice these stiff rules and agree with us fully they should not be practiced

[reno]

Steve, no one has bashed Intertops more in Bettorsworld than I have. Innumerable times in this forum, I have ripped them for kicking bettors out for winning and for accusing bettors of fraudulent activity and syndicate betting. And not once has Bettorsworld seen fit to censor or delete my posts regarding this matter. Also, posts concerning NASA's reprehensible policy of reserving the right to not pay someone because of perceived syndicate betting have been left uncensored in Bettorsworld more than once before.

If I ever felt that Bettorsworld had been inappropriate regarding censorship, I'd have spoken up. And to be honest, I have never felt the need. From my perspective, Bettorsworld has no problem with posters bashing books that advertise with them. So in this case, I think it is more than the message; it is the fact that Bettorsworld, rightly or wrongly, perceives you, as a sportsbook to be mis-using the forum.

Skybook is undoubtedly an outstanding sportsbook. And I think it would be a shame if this disagreement led to Skybook defecting from Bettorsworld as an advertiser. Good luck in resolving this conflict.

[Skybook]

RENO
Thanks for the support, we appreciate it. LIke I said We are not stupid and Neither are you or the other readers. SKybook can only hurt itself by going back and forth with an administrator. Everyone knows we can only lose. Of course that was never our intention anyway. We were just stating facts .
Saw you won , thought you didnt bet hoops. Hey maybe we wont pay you because you won and admitted your a syndicate. OOPS to late your check already went out.
Lots of Laughs
Talk to you later Steve

[Skybook]

Reno
If bettorsworld thinks we are misusing this forum because we want clients like yourself to be protected. Well then I guess we are misusing this forum.
Steve

[bgeorgia]

lets go over some things you are in error with here.
why would we not want to explain our site policies? what your problem seems to be is that you are misinterpreting them.


case in point. firstly, administrators never "come out of the woodwork". that being said lets continue.
you said "we defend our advertisers." yes, many times we do. nowhere in this thread or any thread did we "defend" the practice of not paying players "after" the wager has been made. this is what is being pointed out by skybook. show me where we have defended any sportsbook who does not pay after a wager is made?
you said "let the books be exposed that have "stiff" policies".


i believe my EXACT words above are "if there are other books that choose this policy then you may bring it to the attention of the posting room and have responses made to that post".

i hardly call that "defending" the book.



it is obvious the books have been "exposed" and anybody that comes here can see that. how much more exposure do you want to give it?
it is there in black and white! if another book comes along that has a given policy that is considered a problem then we will post that too.
this has nothing to do with paying advertisers and non-paying advertisers.
you say i am weighing the options and it is in our best interest to lose 1 book instead of 3 yet in another statement you claim that some books will leave because of our policy.
well, which is it?

i will tell you. if any other sportsbook in bettorsworld would like to come in and voice their opinion on this problem then by all means go right ahead.
the thread that you said closed in a few hours, did. however, it did not disappear. it is not going away. i do not believe you will get people arguing the point you have made in that post. it is simple. if you are a betting syndicate and win-you lose. if you lose-you lose. that is the supposed policy that certainly as stated no one would condone.


what more can be said? just 100 people ripping the book. sorry, will not happen here. it is a redundant post that will serve
no purpose other than to enflame an issue that hashad its point made very clearly.


you say "let the books be exposed".


have you not done that here and in other forums already? there was no censorship here.

when you say "Like i said you just confirmed it for US.


who is "US"?


We do a better job at protecting the bettor and the sportsbook than anyone else on the net.
we lay out our customer inquiry form for people who have any problem with a book. we then contact the book and attempt to resolve the issue. it is resolved to the satisfaction of both player and book 99% of the time.


i will say we do feel like the maytag repairmen so to speak because the complaints come few and far in between.


anybody who is serious about being or getting stiffed can use the inquiry forum to attempt to resolve an issue. when they opt for the posting forum, it implies there motives are other than getting the money they claim they have been stiffed. no one can disagree with that.


bworld believes we carry a certain amount of clout that serves as an umbrella so to speak for the player.


we have done a good job choosing which books are on our site. i do not believe anyone carries more books and also serves as a customer support arm for these books.


in closing, again i invite reps/owners of sportsbooks to come in and voice their opinions of nasa and intertops as paying sportsbooks. bworld has yet to receive a complaint in our inquiry forum about either one of these books, this is over a two year period.


your last statement says "we will leave today and you can keep the booksthat pay to advertise no matter what their practices are".


BWORLD hates to lose any good customer. we understand however that this is a volatile business and who is here one day might be gone tomorrow. we accept that.


Our policy will remain as is. No censorship on such posts. No witch hunts either. its that simple.


thank you,
brian



[This message has been edited by bgeorgia (edited 12-08-1999).]

[Skybook]

To all our fellow , highly respected, colleagues (other books ) we hope you dont mind us speaking for you when we say any book reserving the right to stiff should be exposed. We believe like all of you other books when the client wins the client should be paid. End of story. We hope you dont mind that we said many of you agree with us. Those that mind we are very sorry.

To the books that practice the ok to stiff rules. We dont care what you think
Steve

[Skybook]

Brian
Well done your third time around in responding. Almost makes me think you remembered we were a paid advertisor as well.
You happen to be right those to books were exposed , over and over. No need to beat the dead horse i couldnt agree with you more. If you reread the thread again carefully what was said was lets get toghether and expose the others. Thats all. We agree the first 2 were exposed and we like you were done with them.
You dont need to repond because I dont need to go back and forth with you.Your last reponse was much more thought out and prepared and exceptable.
Thanks Steve
Also we couldnt agree more with the hear today gone tommorow quote.

[Jeff]

This entire thread disgusts me.

[phaedrus]

disgust is a pretty strong word.