Dejavu... GD, calling something conspiracy doesn't change the facts.
- VIEW PROFILE
- MY PROFILE
- WINNERS
- PLAYERS
- BLOGS
- CREATE A BLOG
- COMMUNITY FAQ
- LEADERBOARDS
- THIS WEEK
- THIS MONTH
- THIS YEAR
To AA, Part Deux
By AxmanJun 17, 08 02:48 PM

Thanks, AA, for responding to my question:
"AA, are you going to quit?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To which you replied:
Yes, I have already quit playing for the most part. Once and awhile I play a few hands for a laugh at the software. Not sure why I am under attack for stating the obvious that the software is not random or secure. Looks like there is a gang on here now determined to smoke and mirror the obvious. (few typos in my other post, please delete)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To which I replied:
Done, AA, as requested. Well, it may not be so much what you say, but the way you say it. But, when your theories and accusations are based on faulty assumptions, like the Gambler's Fallacy, then I will speak up to point that out. Thanks for the reply, and GL out there with your game. Stop by and give us an update.


COMMENTS
This makes me want to watch the "Seinfeld" episode with the magic spitball at the baseball game. You have to have seen it....
Sorry Bro, my examlpe of hiting a royal, I know sounds like it comes across bragging, (Not like I built it myself), but my real intention is, I feel like people use online big hands to prove a site is juiced, So I usually come up with and example of a live action game. to show they happen live too.




gdmfsob
AA, you must be really bored if you play poker to laugh at software.
Maybe since you have so much spare time you can write a book on your conspiracy theories.......
GD