A $10,000 wager

Arnold's Synder's wife posted on BJF (where I cannot respond) that I violated a non-disclosure agreement with the Speed Count people. I never signed any such agreement. I never even made any such oral agreements. In fact, it was never disclosed to me by them. I guessed the Speed Count, told one of the principles my guess at a party and he confirmed it. I was also told how it works by many other people. Actually, it's obvious from the ad. Even though I never signed any non-disclosure, I said nothing about the methodology for a year and a half until after the method had become public.

I e-mailed Arnold and demanded a retraction. Karen intercepted the e-mail and responded:

Hi Norm,
This is Karen.
F*** you.

I will wager Karen $10,000 that I never violated or even entered into any contract related to Speed Count. Put up or shut up.

Nobody cares.

If it really bugs you that much, sue for defamation of character but, please, leave us out of it.

I'm making a wager.

Nobody cares.

Look, she made an accusation using my real name. And I'm the only person with that name in the country. I am a real person with a real career that requires that I sign non-disclosure agreements with large corporations on a regular basis. A public accusation that I violate such agreements must be contradicted. I cannot post on BJF, so I posted here. If she retracts the accusation, I will remove this post. A civil suit takes years.

> A civil suit takes years. <

But you'll probably get your retraction 15 minutes after the papers are served.

Posting here serves absolutely no purpose other than to keep some kind of private pissing match going, especially since none of your "large corporations" would ever read anything posted on this board and, even if they did, give it any credence.

I renew my request: please keep us out it.

You think this is a "private pissing match"?

If I start arguing that Don Schlesinger has cheated my friends out of their money or that Stanford Wong is giving players' names to casinos, and a row starts between them and me, would you call that too a "private pissing match" ?

Get your prioritites straight. This is not an argument about private, non-BJ matters, an argument about Norm's car or Arnold's computer. This is something that is of relevance to Blackjack and the BJ community, whether you like it or not. So do yourself a favor and get the hell out of the thread, if you are not interested in it.

put and end to the sniping before we serious posters all leave this site.

"Stanford Wong should step in and put and end to the sniping before we serious posters all leave this site."

Mine was a post that simply affirmed my own interest in the OOP imbroglio, because a poster claimed "nobody cares". I also believe that Norm Wattenberger (and I don't care if he's right or wrong here) has every reason to post his side of the story here - and all those who are bored by the "soap" can tune out anytime.

If this hurts your feelings, assume the lotus position and practice your mantra for an hour. It'll pass.

other than to esculate it further with no end in sight. Both camps will eventually come to some agreement through privite emails because it's in their best interest to do so. If they can't, then calling themselves AP players is laughable because they can't solve a simple problem. No need for a mantra, only common sense.

Actually, you gave the answer yourself!

"Both camps will eventually come to some agreement through privite emails because it's in their best interest to do so."

Maybe. Perhaps. Precisely !

If this happens, and the "two camps" agree on the merits of the OPP, wouldn't you rather learn about it? And hear all the pro and con arguments, in the process? Also, if issues of integrity and honesty are raised, concerning BJ ?

To cut this short, I for one am interested -- in all this. If you're not, no problemo.

The object of the allegedly defamatory statement is well known in the BJ software business. He, and I think it clear, we, as past and potential customers of his, have an interest in at least hearing him say it's not true. It seems to me that you are saying that you are not interested. Okay. But it's beyond your reach to say that we are not interested.

p.s. As one who makes a living from litigation, it is my opinion that filing a lawsuit everytime you have a dispute is not a practical method of doing business.