dav6tigers unban request....plz read

mutigers5591 · February 2nd, 2007, 01:18 AM

about 3 months ago if i absolutely have to find the thread i will i guess

a member by the name of dav6tigers was banned unfairly i think....

he was staked by canamco (no longer active) in a 17 dollar 3.40 series stake

however instead of playing the 3.40 series, he lost 8 dollars of it in cash games, then lyed about it, which infuriated canamco...in his rage, he requested a ban, and being neverbeg god at the time, everyone assumed he had to be right and that dav should have been banned cuz what canamco says, goes apparently..dav admitted wrong doing AND later payed canamco all the moeny back which is also included in a thread if i must find them...however he requested the ban to stay

where i think this story goes bad is the fact that dav is banned when in fact he should have DNS for sure cuz what he did was bad but it was his FIRST OFFENSE and is only dns worthy.... i think he should be unbanned and placed with dns....he already payed back canamco and could become a valueable member of this site like he has a couple of other sites

ALSO i would vouch for him in that if he ever rolled soemoen again i would pay that person back in full or i will dns myself

ty for reading this

midconnector · February 2nd, 2007, 01:53 AM

I'm against this. This is only half the story. He used Canamcos money to STAKE another horse in an MTT. This is deceitful. If the person staked would have won, Dav6tigers is golden, and Canamco is none the wiser. If this was a normal DNS case I wouldnt be. I just think there is something very underhanded about that.

I also know dav6tigers original account was closed for some reason, and rather than Dav6tigers trying to get it back, he just created a new account. That makes me wonder.

mutigers5591 · February 2nd, 2007, 02:21 AM

u r right about that part mid i did forget about that but at the same time it was a first offense and that is always a dns not a ban i just dont think a ban was in order

but its not my call

philivey123422 · February 2nd, 2007, 03:06 AM

I'd also vouch for half of the rollings if he was unbanned and decided to roll someone again....mutigers and I would cover half each to fully compensate the person that was rolled

Just in case he decided to do some sick ass plot with someone and fake a $500 stake and act like he rolled....I'll only insure up to $100....

mutigers5591 · February 2nd, 2007, 03:24 AM

i appreciate that sentiment but now this thread looks like he is a huge threat to roll someoen lol which is not the case he will NOT roll anyone....

emery91792 · February 2nd, 2007, 06:27 AM

i say unban.. hes a good guy. give him another chance

midconnector · February 2nd, 2007, 08:32 AM

Does he have a valid excuse for why his other account was locked?

AmazingSully · February 2nd, 2007, 11:57 AM

I think the ban should stay, what he did was EXTREMELY low. The worst part of doing this is that if he succeeds nobody knows, he just plays it off as if he won with his own money. He may be trustworthy to most of you, but by simply doing what he did i could never, and would never trust him again.

shim456 · February 2nd, 2007, 05:19 PM

i say UNBAN! i have staked him so many times never had a problem with him.

midconnector · February 2nd, 2007, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmazingSully

I think the ban should stay, what he did was EXTREMELY low. The worst part of doing this is that if he succeeds nobody knows, he just plays it off as if he won with his own money. He may be trustworthy to most of you, but by simply doing what he did i could never, and would never trust him again.

Yeah, and this doesnt even mention the Frozen account.

mutigers5591 · February 2nd, 2007, 09:25 PM

i understand ure guys points and that u can never trust him again or whatever but the fact remains that it was his first offense and when he is unbanned he would be stricken with dns, thereby not even allowing him to good big stakes in all likelihood anyway....

1st offense NEVER equals ban (except in this case for some reason where the monetary amount of the "rolling" was 8 dollars and only 3 of it was used to actually stake someoen...) i have no info on the account situation btw so i dunno bout that

regardless of the decision it is partimepoker's i assume and i would rly appreciate it if he would make a decision one way or another so i can be done with this thread

midconnector · February 2nd, 2007, 09:42 PM

Mu, why was his other account frozen? I honestly think that plays a large part in this.

mutigers5591 · February 3rd, 2007, 03:24 AM

Dav6Tigers (9:23:49 PM): i was running a 4.40 stakeDav6Tigers (9:24:09 PM): and i had to leave and i had someone play for meDav6Tigers (9:24:19 PM): thats how my account was frozen

this is why his account was frozen i guess

mutigers5591 · February 4th, 2007, 10:21 PM

what the hell

feel free to acknowledge this thread partimepoker instead of ignoring it for some reason while answering all the other threds

PartTimePoker · February 5th, 2007, 06:52 AM

doesn't look like you have a majority of admins voting to reverse a ban, and the frozen acct issue doesn't seem fully covered, so it looks like things will stay as they are.