John Bond's apology to Mason, posted on rgp

[JohnBond]

John Bond apology to Mason Malmuth
JohnBond Apr 28 2005 11:01 PM


Some years ago in a heated exchange here on rgp I apparently made some
inappropriately personal comments to Mason Malmuth that would probably best be
characterized as flames.

As the Web has matured, so have I. While I can get a jab in here and there I try
not to flame.

I often disagree with Mason – and lots of other people. The value of BB
exchanges is diminished when we take them personal, and I was wrong.

Permit me to extend a public and sincere apology to Mason to the extent I was
inappropriate. As I noted in a 2+2 post there are circumstances where have been
known to be overzealous, go overboard and be outtaline --- Apparently this was
one of them.

Mason, I apologize without restriction or reservation.

Best,

jb

[Mason Malmuth]

You should also make an apology to "Doc Optic," the other person you attacked in the same posts in which you lashed out at me.

MM

[JohnBond]

Cmon Mase, gimme a break.

I barely remember the incident, have no clue who Doc Optic is. You asked for a public apology and I made one not only here where you asked for it, but over there where the incident occurred. I can be a dick sometimes and say things I regret later. You know how that feels, right? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I am happy to extend my apology to any and all persons I treated inappropriately in that incident. If Doc Optic is among those, great.

My apology to you is personal, and you deserve it because we have a history, and because you are right. You deserved better from me. Please take it in the spirit in which it is given.

That good enough?

Best,

jb

[Josh W]

John -

I don't know you, and as far as I know, I've never even met you. But I have read every post you made on here in the last few days, and, well, dammit, you just don't fit in.

You are too quick to admit fault.

You are willing to rescind a statement made in error.

You are a straight shooter.

You aren't worried about what people think, only that good discussion gets going.

A few years ago, yes, this would have been welcomed here. But recently, sorry. That attitude just doesn't fly here anymore. I like what you bring to the table, but unfortunately, I feel that I am in the minority.

You started talking the the RC thread (I'm calling him that only to reduce keystrokes), and it looked like you were trying to instigate discussion. Mason shut it down with a "take it with a grain of salt" and "you owe me an apology" replies.

He sure seemed interested in shutting down discussion.

I haven't dealt a lot with Mason, and all of my dealings have been very unpleasant.

He banned Abdul Jalib, saying he could come back if he limited his discussion to poker and poker theory. I asked him (MM) if that meant Abdul couldn't write in the stock market, sportsbetting, internet, or othertopics forums. MM said he never put such stipulations on AJ.

I played 15-30 with MM and "Diane from Green Bay" at the Bellagio 3 years ago at the bellagio during the WSOP. MM got called for his 30-60 seat after playing for about 20 minutes, and as he left, the heated discussion they were having turned into a brief shouting match. This was 3 years ago when good games were a little tougher to find. The two or three tourist fish in that game then left. By the time they racked up and left, Mason was long gone. When I asked MM why he did this, he replied with "that isn't what happened", as if he'd even know. As I said, he was long gone.

About two years ago on these forums, Mason responded to then-poster DJ who said:

[ QUOTE ]
I refuse to believe that every poker game I sit in is 100% clean 100% of the time, no matter what the limit or the place.

[/ QUOTE ]

with:
[ QUOTE ]

As I have told other people in the past, if you feel this way, then you should absolutely never sit in a poker game.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I asked if they could ever play, ya know, for fun, MM replied to me with:

[ QUOTE ]

I never siad what you attribute to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

EVEN THOUGH I QUOTED HIM DIRECTLY. Many pro-MM people supported MM saying he said it, but certainly didn't mean it. This was after MM denied even saying it, which was after MM was directly and accurately quoted as saying it.

Instead of apologizing for his misleading comments and comments out of ignorance (re: the Diane situation), he pretends he did no wrong.

And then he demands apologies out of you. You create multiple posts (here and RGP). He implies its not good enough.

But the kicker of it all is he thinks you owe him an apology because: [ QUOTE ]
especially since you now realize the value of participating in our forums

[/ QUOTE ].

See, to Mason, if there is no value in an action, there is no reason to make it. Who cares if it's the right thing to do!!

I admire the effort you have put into creating a situation where good discussion can take place. However, as MM is making blatantly clear, he is not interested in that.

Josh

[JohnBond]

Josh --

thank you for your kind words. Abdul is also an old B&M as well as internet friend, and if he's been banned from here then the forum is certainly the poorer for it. He is passionate, articulate and knowledgable about poker -- if not always right and who among us is?

Diane is also an old pal.

I've known Mason a long time. I take everything he says in the context of how he views the world -- and if you understand that, and cut him some slack on account of it, he's really not a bad egg. Insensitive? Always. Ungracious? Sometimes. Unreasonable? On occasion. Forgiving? Never. But not bad. We in the poker world are better off for him being here. And I personally am better off for knowing him.

Not to say he can't be a jerk -- but once again who among us doesn't that apply to?

I dropped in here because somebody told me the Roy/Russ thread had taken on a life here. I'm likely to appear intermittently with lots of posts, then disappear for long periods with none.

But I do know many folks here, and am glad to have come by to visit.

Thanks again for your welcome.

Best,

jb

[Josh W]

[ QUOTE ]
We in the poker world are better off for him being here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree without reservation, and hope my post didn't imply otherwise.

Josh

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I think this needs to be pointed:

John Bond wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
I've known Mason a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't spoken to nor seen John Bond for perhaps eight years. This is the first contact I've had with him since then.

With that being said, Bond is certainly welcome to post his views here.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

There are a couple of things in this post that I'm going to address. Normally I leave these things be, but in light of the other posts and threads now on this forum I think it's appropriate to make an exception.

Josh W wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
He banned Abdul Jalib, saying he could come back if he limited his discussion to poker and poker theory. I asked him (MM) if that meant Abdul couldn't write in the stock market, sportsbetting, internet, or othertopics forums. MM said he never put such stipulations on AJ.


[/ QUOTE ]

Abdul was barred from here because he made literally hundreds of posts that were insults towards us with most of them aimed towards me. The last few of these, and the "straw that broke the camel's back," claimed that I hit women in the cradrooms.

Another thing that you don't know is that over a period of about three years I had several private conversations with him in an effort to solve the problem, and David Sklansky and I together also had a couple of conversations with him. None of this really helped, but we still told him, and it's our position today, that if he could get just stick to theory or other worthwhile topics, something he was pretty good at, he would be welcome back.

As for the other person you mention, she also posted (in other places on the Internet) hundreds of insults and I hardly even knew her.

Josh: You need to get your facts straight. If what you said was even slightly close to true, I believe that these forums would be devoid of people and posts. We have strict rules for how these forums are run and everyone, including myself, must abide by them.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Josh W]

[ QUOTE ]


Another thing that you don't know is that over a period of about three years I had several private conversations with him in an effort to solve the problem ...

[/ QUOTE ]

A lie. I'm sure you had these conversations, and have no idea why you would say I didn't know that.

I'm not supporting AJ or Diane from Green Bay. My problem here lies with your behaviour (because that is what I have witnessed first hand). My problem lies with you now changing the stipulations you put on Abdul (it was previously strictly poker, now you've included "other worthwhile topics")

I do not know all of the details between you and Diane, nor do I care to. What I am upset with is you ruining the game (not really a big deal), then lie about it later on here (a much bigger deal), saying that it didn't happen that way, even though you were accross the room by the time it happened.

You then say I need to get my facts straight when it is clearly you that are distorting facts. I urge you to show me even one time here where I have distorted facts. I've shown a number of times that you have.

I've done this before, too. Then, you would not apologize for your blatantly misleading comments. I'm guessing that will continue to be the case, though a sign of maturation on your part would be a breath of fresh air at this point.

If you cannot show how I am a liar, then I do expect you to apologize. Am I out of line for this?

Josh W

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
None of this really helped, but we still told him, and it's our position today, that if he could get just stick to theory or other worthwhile topics, something he was pretty good at, he would be welcome back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can Vehn come back too? [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]