Turning Stone - rip off

[cleary]

Fargo, whether it's accurate or not, measures match/tournament performance, not spot shot drill or playing the ghost performance. If the best player in the world doesn't bring it playing a real opponent, you're not going to have a good rating.

lol I understand that. Thank you Captain Obvious! Fargo also doesn't have many of my matches against humans in their system. The tournaments I play in, The Predator tour, King of Castle, Tristate tour etc.. are not making their way to Fargo. I tend do to well in most tournaments I play in, against "real opponents". It's kind of funny that instead of milking my incorrect rating for favorable games like most of you upstanding pool players would, I'm trying to say I'm better than my rating shows lol amazing.

 

[Jaden]

Lol...

I see your point.. You can make any comparison that you want, and I could think up a few myself.. However, I still believe that offering a refund will cause more harm than good.

Since every event has filled for the past 10 years, I would suggest that the majority of players don't have a problem with the policies.

In the ussr, every bread line was full and they always sold out, dio you think the Russian populace didn't have a problem with the 12 hour wait?

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

Sorry Lynn

Andrew,

Every Turning Stone event has been held on the dates listed. Every TS event has been full at 128. Every player who cashed in any of the events has been paid immediately. In the pool world of today, it's a miracle. You won't ever play in a TS event. I can understand that. You and your NYC friends can boycott all of Mike's events if you wish to. You are correct about one thing, Mike won't care about your complaints. He has way over 127 other potential players to worry about! Whether you agree or not, Turning Stone billiards events are some of the best run. EVER!

Lyn

I agree with you on a lot but not on this. Like I said in the USSR there were plenty of people that were in line to go buying toilet paper and bread and they sold out every time that didn't make what they were doing right or the fact that they had to wait in line for 12 hours right.

Doesn't matter that you have someone willing to put up with b******* it's still b******* and he's just calling it out for that doesn't matter if the rest of the tournament is run perfectly or better than any other tournament that's probably why he has more than 128 players every time but that doesn't make pocketing and double dipping correct or the best business practice and people can call him out on that.

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

Where tf are you coming from?

It's not shady if you were made aware of it, were not misled in any way, and you voluntarily agreed to it. You have no complaint when you get exactly what you agreed to get.

Although it is immaterial, Mike just so happens to have a number of good reasons for this policy which were already laid out in the thread. I know you don't agree that they are good reasons, but they are. But again, it doesn't matter because if you voluntarily agree to it, and you get what you agreed to, then there is no legitimate complaint because you got exactly what you agreed to get.

Now if your agreement was specifically "I agree that I won't get a refund only if you don't replace me on the bracket with someone else", or if your agreement was "I agree that I won't get a refund only if you spend my forfeited $200 in a certain way", and then he doesn't honor that, then you have a legitimate gripe because he didn't honor part of your agreement. You don't get to have a say in things after the fact outside of what you contracted for though. If there were no agreed stipulations as to what he would have to do with the now empty spot on the bracket, or with what he would have to do with the forfeited entry money, then it isn't any of your business what he chooses to do regarding those things as it was never a part of the agreement or even the discussion. If they were important, then you should have included them in your agreement with him but since you didn't you have no right to now expect things that were never part of the deal.

Being aware of a shady policy makes it no less Shady that's idiotic. You do know that there are like lemon laws and renters rights laws and all kinds of laws that apply whether you sign an agreement to something or not that protects you from Shady business practices right?

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

Sorry, your illustrations aren't equivalents...

That is fine for Cleary to disagree with the rule, and to make his opinion known.

What is not fine, is for him to insist that he has 'higher moral and ethical standards' than everyone who disagrees with him. That is the problem that we have in America today... When a person or a group does not agree with an opinion, it's because they are 'stupid', or 'uneducated', 'ignorant', or have no morals..

Disagreeing with the opinion of others does not make you better than them. Insulting a person's moral and ethical standards is not acceptable.

Accept that you hold a different opinion, and move on. No insults necessary.

What he's stating is a fact it is a higher moral code to not believe in that type of practice than it is to believe that it's alright that's not up for debate that's not an opinion that is a fact it's a higher ethical standard.

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

What crack are you smoking?

Transparently shady??? Is that like "jumbo shrimp" or "military intelligence"? Have you ever put a deposit down on an apt. or house? You know going in you're NOT getting it back and the landlord/realtor can use it to buy say, crack if they so choose. I don't like this policy but i was aware of it and still make the deposit. If i renege on the deal, on what planet should i deserve a refund? How is this pool tournament entry any different?

Of course you get a deposit on a apartment or a rental back unless they can prove that non normal wear and tear is been done that allows them to charge you for it what crack are you smoking.

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

If you think...

Can't believe your cop ass can't just say " an agreement , a contract, is binding and that is that".

If you think that a contract is binding and that is that then you know nothing about business and or contract law a contract is never just what it says on the paper there are things that you can agree to on paper than unenforceable in real life if you don't know that then you know nothing.

Jaden

 

[KMRUNOUT]

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/unethical

Ok. I will assume you are attempting to illustrate to me that you do not recognize the distinctions in meaning between the words listed as synonyms for unethical. Good info thanks.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Call me crazy, but I don't think it would be so horrible for him to say to someone "look, you have a good and legit excuse... I can't offer you a refund but I can offer you a credit towards a future event. If you back out of that after you've committed... sorry. But it's the most I can do." You know, to just be human about it. Is that really so terrible?

I've heard the phrase "to be human" before, and in almost every case, it typically translates to "relax principles, make mistakes, choose worse over better, do the wrong thing because it seems nice" etc. Humans are stupid and riddled with errors and screw ups. Trying to be human is a terrible goal. I'd much rather behave like Data from Star Trek...perfectly logical and rational. This doesn't stop me from having feelings and emotions, it just stops me from being stupid and making bad decisions because of those emotions.

Sorry the "being human" thing is becoming a pet peeve of mine.

KMRUNOUT

 

[Poolplaya9]

Can't believe your cop ass can't just say " an agreement , a contract, is binding and that is that".

This whole post has me confused. It appears that your use of "cop ass" was intended as a derogatory comment and insult. If that is the case where did that come from? You got some long standing grudge? Did I bang your wife or something? I can't recall having said anything to you in like a year. And why would you call me a cop when I'm not a cop? Not that I even find it particularly insulting as I think that most cops are decent people doing a good job and anybody who is willing to do a job helping the public where they could easily lose their life (such as police, members of the military, firefighters, etc) generally has my respect.

As far as saying that a contractual agreement is binding and that is that, well I did say that in different words, right here in this thread, and not just once, but several times. Reading comprehension goes a long way.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Being aware of a shady policy makes it no less Shady that's idiotic. You do know that there are like lemon laws and renters rights laws and all kinds of laws that apply whether you sign an agreement to something or not that protects you from Shady business practices right?

Jaden

You obviously don't know what shady means. By definition if you are open and upfront about something then it isn't shady. If two people voluntarily agree to something they are both fully aware of then it generally isn't unethical either. What specific lemon laws and renters rights laws do you think cover scenarios similar to this one where both parties were fully aware of something and voluntarily agreed to it and then one of them wants to complain about it later?

 

[trifectasss]

Of course you get a deposit on a apartment or a rental back unless they can prove that non normal wear and tear is been done that allows them to charge you for it what crack are you smoking.

Jaden

Am I missing something here? There are 2 kinds of deposits, a holding deposit and a security deposit. What you seem to be describing is a security deposit, the poster you're referring to seems to be referring to a holding deposit.

And how is this lack of morals or ethics a fact as you described it in one of your previous posts? The man runs a pool tournament aimed at bringing in a certain kind of pool player. Those players seem to love the tournament as is. Once he changes the parameters of entering the tournament, the players will change, not all, but some. He doesn't want his entries loaded up with people that will back out and expect a refund. There's many justifications for this. Time spent on extra administrative work is one, and the type of pool player you want is another. Just because you might recommend that he just pull out the extra administrative costs doesn't mean he wants to direct his time toward this. If it was all about money for him, he could easily find a way that would maximize the income more than what he's doing now. Maybe refunding 1/2 would do it. That might mean more unreliable pool players would jump in early. Example, maybe with his current policy, 10 people cancel their entry and he receives 2000 dollars extra. Change the policy to half back and maybe 30 people cancel and he receives 3000 dollars extra. If maximizing the income is his only goal which would probably be the most unethical reason, he certainly can find a better mixture than a zero tolerance that would encourage the maximum cancels with the maximum income.

Also your analogy to bread lines is ridiculous. Food is a necessity to life. Also, if he had a monopoly on pool tournaments and had this policy for all of them, you might have a slight point. But that's not even near the case and you're not even close. If you don't want to pay the 200.00 for his tournament there are many other tournaments that would refund your money so what's the problem? There obviously isn't any alternatives to the bread lines you're talking about. I mean if there was, there wouldn't be the lines right?

 

[cleary]

You obviously don't know what shady means. By definition if you are open and upfront about something then it isn't shady. If two people voluntarily agree to something they are both fully aware of then it generally isn't unethical either.

Shady and unethical are synonymous. Not refunding the money isn't the shady part, reselling the spot is.

 

[cleary]

I've heard the phrase "to be human" before, and in almost every case, it typically translates to "relax principles, make mistakes, choose worse over better, do the wrong thing because it seems nice" etc. Humans are stupid and riddled with errors and screw ups. Trying to be human is a terrible goal. I'd much rather behave like Data from Star Trek...perfectly logical and rational. This doesn't stop me from having feelings and emotions, it just stops me from being stupid and making bad decisions because of those emotions.

Sorry the "being human" thing is becoming a pet peeve of mine.

KMRUNOUT

Dang you seem like a real gem. Do you run over dogs in the road too?

 

[azhousepro]

Cleary, the horse is dead. EVERYONE now knows your opinion, and I don't see you changing any minds this late in the game.

Maybe let it go?

 

[Poolplaya9]

Shady and unethical are synonymous.

While they can be and often are used synonymously, quite a few people other people see a small distinction and use the terms at different times in different manners. Someone should see if Webster's gives the same definition for both but I'm guessing they are slightly different. I don't feel like looking it up at the moment.

Not refunding the money isn't the shady part, reselling the spot is.

What he does with his money isn't your business. After the player has forfeited what was to be their entry fee, it is no longer an entry fee, because an entry fee requires an entrant. It is now simply a penalty fee and it is Mike's personal money just like any other money that Mike earns through any of the various revenue streams related to the tournament. The only exceptions to what is his personal money are the added money that was advertised/promised, and 128 entry fees (or however many people end up playing if the field doesn't fill up). Unless you had an agreement with Mike as to what he was to do with his money/your penalty fee, then he is free to do with his money whatever he chooses, just like anybody else is free to do with their money what they want. Where or how he chooses to spend his money isn't your business in the least.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Dang you seem like a real gem. Do you run over dogs in the road too?

No. Why would I? I gain no benefit from that. Nor does anyone else. Nor does the dog. You seem to have trouble with certain fine distinctions. Just because you cannot discern between two things doesn't mean they are the same thing.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

 

[cleary]

No. Why would I? I gain no benefit from that. Nor does anyone else. Nor does the dog. You seem to have trouble with certain fine distinctions. Just because you cannot discern between two things doesn't mean they are the same thing.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

That's very human of you to not hit dog just because it was in the road.

 

[cleary]

Cleary, the horse is dead. EVERYONE now knows your opinion, and I don't see you changing any minds this late in the game.

Maybe let it go?

Yea, who knows. You might be right.

 

[BeiberLvr]

While they can be and often are used synonymously, quite a few people other people see a small distinction and use the terms at different times in different manners. Someone should see if Webster's gives the same definition for both but I'm guessing they are slightly different. I don't feel like looking it up at the moment.


What he does with his money isn't your business. After the player has forfeited what was to be their entry fee, it is no longer an entry fee, because an entry fee requires an entrant. It is now simply a penalty fee and it is Mike's personal money just like any other money that Mike earns through any of the various revenue streams related to the tournament. The only exceptions to what is his personal money are the added money that was advertised/promised, and 128 entry fees (or however many people end up playing if the field doesn't fill up). Unless you had an agreement with Mike as to what he was to do with his money/your penalty fee, then he is free to do with his money whatever he chooses, just like anybody else is free to do with their money what they want. Where or how he chooses to spend his money isn't your business in the least.

Except the entry fee isn't a stipend.

It's not paid to Mike Zuglan. It's paid to the prize pool, and it should remain there regardless of whether or not the person that paid shows up.