Perspective gained

I am writing to thank everyone, both on this page, on the GC page, and elsewhere, for their input on the issue. Thank you all for the civility of your responses, for your maturity, for your direct conversation about these issues, and for your excellent thoughts in this matter.

Let me state the opinions as I have heard them.

First of all, from most people I hear the message that a lawsuit trying to outlaw barring is simply the wrong thing to do. In fact, there are virtually no out-right supporters of this idea. Although AC is the most frequent case cited, the main objection is the fear about the damage this could do to the game.

Next, I hear that most do not want to take any action to regulate the games, via the Nevada Gaming Commission. There is almost no support, and there is a general fear that any such action will hurt the game. Cases were quoted where people followed these actions, and in the past the outcome was never favorable to the proficient player.

Next, I hear that there are some issues that many do support. These issues come from the obvious lack of regard that casinos have for our personal privacy, human dignity, and civil rights. Both publically and in private email, I have had widespread support for issues such as "backrooming" and "sharing of personal information." The list of individual topics that can be listed in the littany of casino abuses is long. In an effort to achieve concensus, I would like to move the thread in this direction, and ask for us to start discussing the changes we would like to see.

I also hear that many would like me to simply stop this thread. If this were a non-issue, no one would have responded to begin with. The fact that there is so much heated opinion about these matters tells me that there is some work left to be done here. I am convinced that we can reach concensus, and it is this goal towards which I will now work.

Please share those ideas that you would support. What could we do to support each other? I am making an honest attempt here to reach for something big, and I hope you will be a part.

--Mayor

Go back to the discussions here, starting about 6 months ago, over the way that credit reporting laws can be used against Griffin.

But don't expect too much and work focussed and fast. The precident is being set to label all nonconformists "terrorists" and thus combatants in our little post 9-11 "war." (Never mind that Assama himself was in a US AID Hospital in Yemen, July 2001, while a $1 meg+ reward was on his head for the USS Cole attack, and he was allowed to pass unmolested, which should make everyone doubt the cincerity of the same.).

PPE needs to be nailed for going past the legally allowed "hey no more 21," while they still can be. But there just ain't any civil right to count anymore than there is a civil right for me to be serviced by an Olypic Female gymnastic team.

Whether we agree or disagree with The Mayor's original proposals, he should be congratulated and thanked for the way he has handled himself with class and dignity throughout the several threads in various venues.

I don't think he ever said he would go forward with ANY action that does not receive the support of the majority of posters to the various sites.

I am one who does not think attempting to mandate game conditions or restrict civilized, professional backoffs is a good idea. As much as I dislike casinos and the way they take advantage of the public, after several years of dealing with them on a daily basis, I do recognize that they do have the right to choose with whom they wish to do business, just as any other private business does.

We are in effect "non-paying customers" of the "entertainment" they purport to offer to the masses. I don't believe that efforts to restrict their rights to select who they wish to do business with, as long as it is not based on discrimination against "protected classes" (race, gender, etc.), has any chance for success, nor should it.

We also have to face the fact that in Nevada, at least, the casinos control virtually all of the government officials, and the courts. It would be extremely difficult to get a reasonable hearing on anything that would be perceived to be "anti-casino" in any branch of Nevada government. This is just the way it is, plain and simple.

The Mayor wrote:

"Next, I hear that there are some issues that many do support. These issues come from the obvious lack of regard that casinos have for our personal privacy, human dignity, and civil rights. Both publically and in private email, I have had widespread support for issues such as "backrooming" and "sharing of personal information." The list of individual topics that can be listed in the litany of casino abuses is long. In an effort to achieve concensus, I would like to move the thread in this direction, and ask for us to start discussing the changes we would like to see."

I agree fully, and wish that all of us would think about what we personally can do to help The Mayor plan an attack in this regard. These are important issues that go far beyond our ability to grind out a living from casino games, and are part of a far bigger problem facing our nation (i.e., information sharing and invasion of privacy, without our consent, by government, insurance companies, banks, etc., etc.) I don't want to go off on a tangent, but abusive conduct by casinos towards us must be stopped! Only by hitting them in the wallet, AND HARD, will they understand this.

The Mayor further wrote:

"I also hear that many would like me to simply stop this thread.

No, Mr. Mayor, don't stop it. Continue listening to the wide array of opinions and ideas presented by many in the blackjack community.

--LVBear584

I do think you listened to others and have summarized the opinions reasonably. A very interesting discussion on a very hot topic. You may have had some pre-conceived notions of what should be done, but you seem to have heard the message.

I also hear that many would like me to simply stop this thread.

No, I think this is a good discussion that has not had such an organized format in the past.

I am making an honest attempt here to reach for something big, and I hope you will be a part.

I'd say that something "big" has nothing to do with it, what matters is doing the right thing- the action if any, that is in our best interest. Doing nothing may be a reasonable conclusion to this, I personally don't know.

I would like to hear opinions on the civil rights infractions of the Griffin Agency and related information passing networks. This issue moves outside of Nevada, as Griffin is national and international.

motheye

I mentioned here a few months ago that I knew someone who wanted to sue Griffins and actually had a case and no one here seemed to give a sh*t. He even called Robert A Loeb and basically got told "have a nice life". I think that suing Griffins and certain casinos is a good idea but my prediction is that it will all turn out to be all talk and no action. Where were all you people when I was asking for help then???

The thread that your case was discussed is here:

http://bj21satellite.com/misc_bj/index.cgi?read=111027

In particular, CardCounter gave exceedingly well thought out and researched advice. I ask that you re-read your final response to the thread at the bottom.

You should know that Bob Loeb has the following opinion about the matter (I am quoting):

"As to privacy, Griffin and Biometrica, defamation, improper use of photographs, fair credit violations, etc., the law is not so obviously and clearly established. We have a lot of theories as to how our rights have been violated, and many of them are good theories, but we have to assert and vindicate those rights in court before they will be recognized by the casino industry."

Please let us know where this case stands today, and what issues are personally important to you.

Thank you,

--Mayor

You and I agree on damn little. What you are trying to do would
set things back 40 years. That is when the NGC protected the player.
The state eventually learned that if the casinos lost money, that
was not good for the state. So up front the state is going to go
along with the casinos. Now we still have these inspections and checks. This opens the door to under the table pay offs. Any where
there is money, there is greed and coruption. I personaly believe
that big biz in gambling is worse than the mob. (old school) However
you are trying to take on a MONSTER that learned from the mob. Consider that big BIZ has no conscience any more than the mob.
One difference- they will not make you an offer, you can't refuse.
Sooner or later you will step on toes or get too close-that could be
any CEO or some civil servant on the take and there is an endless
supply of unmarked graves in the desert. You should be able to
win consistantly as well as lose; but it ain't worth dying over.

I'm glad the focus is now squarely on player protection. Regarding the futility of player education (discussed elsewhere) I can only say that sometimes you can't lead a horse to water. We can put out the information on the junk games- but we can't expect everyone to care. A campaign is being made to sell inferior games- bad word of mouth is the least we can do to oppose their spread.

For player protection against casino harassment, I'd like to see a resource that:
A) prepares a player for the possible extremes that might occur in a barring and how to handle it in the best manner.
B) a list of actions for the player to take (gathering evidence, witnesses, and who to contact, and in what order- police, gaming commission, lawyer, press etc).

The invasion of privacy by the casinos sharing customer information is a serious issue. This is something the public is largely unaware of, and is much worse than having your info sold to a junk mailer or telemarketer. There are documented cases where a customer leaves a casino, the casino has their name and photo faxed out, and the customer finds someone "lying in wait" for them at their next stop. I do not trust the casinos' judgment on when (and to whom) my information should be shared.

Sentry

Frank;

They aren't under the table in Nevada. It's not uncommon for gaming comission people to wind up on the payroll as employees or consultants of casinos they are supposively overseeing. The same is true for politicians; e.g. former mayor of Las Vegas now works for Harrah's. The deck is stacked against advantage players in Nevada (and probably elsewhere), but it's certainly not "under the table"!

I just checked out the Mayor's site- he has updated it again, and now has a message board and links to stories on barrings such. Check it out.

Sentry

(Copy, previously posted on rge21, containing some minor changes)

It is not an easy issue you bring up, though, a very interesting one.

Players have been backroomed, harassed, distributed of personal information, etc., for the last decads. Solving this problem will be tough, if not nearly impossible.

If a law sue will be filed against the casinos, we might experience similar results as back in the 80�s, when Ken Uston successfully beat the casinos in court. The casinos defended themselves by applying a various of countermeasures. They immediately reduced the players' odds of beating the popular game of blackjack. Therefor, if casinos are being sued, they might deteriorate the rules. As a result of this, they will get rid of the overwhelming majority of advantage players, and keep the most of the non counters and bad players, who are not initiated with odds. Though, there's nothing that promises that the insults, backrooming, etc., will cease.

If we do not file sues agains the impolite casinos and casino operators, the rules will remain, and the harassments will keep on.

I think (note that the information above, is according to my opinion), that the best solution is to simply ignore the insults and harassments (despite it might be very hard), since the casinos probably will keep commiting these offences. Why would they change now? They haven't changed in the last 50 years. It is better to maintain the present blackjack rules offered, and be harassed, than to sue the casinos, have the ruled deteriorated and still being harassed.

Sadly, I believe the persecutes is the price proficient blackjack players have to pay for their success.

By the way, isn't that one reason of why the Gaming Control Board was established, to control and prevent player harassment, and making sure everything inside the walls of the casinos follow the law? Sure, the gaming control board is limited to a staff, which patrols the entire Vegas. They don't play, but simply cruise around the casinos making sure everything's alright. Why don't they (gaming control board) hire skilled card counters, which they send into different casinos, working under cover. If a casino harasses one of these workers, or any other players, they are there to withness the event, and may invalidate the casino's licence. Knowing there are players working under cover for the state, and the benefit of the players, the casinos would probably think twice before commiting an offence, such as harassing, distributing personal information, backrooming, etc.

Best regards, Robert V. Lux