Luck

[Ed Tice]

No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

Thanks for everybody pointing out the error in my ways!

I have visited the BJ21 free message board and don't see much activity, nevermind much valuable information. Furthermore the software doesn't work and I have never managed to actually post a message.

I own a number of books by Stanford Wong and, although the content was good, felt a bit uncomfortable with the amount of "plugging" of his other products that I found in the book.

I have no concerns with opening my wallet for things that I consider valuable as I have purchased quite a few books as well as software (including the very expensive CVData).

I have interest in one and only one piece of content to be found in the green chip area of BJ21 which is that I heard rumor that somebody posted an effective counting strategy for the Spanish Fun 21 game.

SInce everybody here is well versed in copyright law, all would agree that there is no such thing as copyright on an idea, only on the expression of that idea. So if somebody were to read the ideas on that site and to express them differently, there wouldn't be a problem. Whether the expression was "different enough" could only be decided by a trial judge.

Since Caitlin is looking to "share" a membership and since I am looking for only one piece of content and probably wouldn't be coming back, it would seem perfectly legal and resonable to me that I could buy the membership, find the one piece of information I need and then sell it to her for half of the original cost.

Or would you find that objectionable?

Would you find it equally objectionable if I bought my counting books used on eBay? (I actually bought mine new). Would it be unethical for me to lend these books to my friend who also wants to learn something about counting. Or he is "stealing" by borrowing my book instead of buying his own. (We aren't talking about copying the whole book here, but borrowing/lending).

Although I respect the opinions of everybody who attacked me, I feel as if somebody were looking to pick a fight without really having all of the facts.

Ed

 

[learning to count]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

Thanks for everybody pointing out the error in my ways!

"I have visited the BJ21 free message board and don't see much activity, nevermind much valuable information."

The archives alone are worth a gold mine. The activity does slow down but when it gets hot it can burn your keyboard. Now arent you being a little bit defensive.

"Furthermore the software doesn't work and I have never managed to actually post a message."

Come on now your scraping the bottom of the barrel for negativity!

"I own a number of books by Stanford Wong and, although the content was good, felt a bit uncomfortable with the amount of "plugging" of his other products that I found in the book."

Please the books are considered the foundation of modern card counting!

"I have no concerns with opening my wallet for things that I consider valuable as I have purchased quite a few books as well as software (including the very expensive CVData)."

You seem well read so why criticize Wong's works?????

"I have interest in one and only one piece of content to be found in the green chip area of BJ21 which is that I heard rumor that somebody posted an effective counting strategy for the Spanish Fun 21 game."

Wow spanish twenty one is a waste of time and getting an edge there well who wants to have to work that hard!

"SInce everybody here is well versed in copyright law, all would agree that there is no such thing as copyright on an idea, only on the expression of that idea. So if somebody were to read the ideas on that site and to express them differently, there wouldn't be a problem. Whether the expression was "different enough" could only be decided by a trial judge."

I agree and since this is a civil matter who cares your not going to subscribe anyway.

"Since Caitlin is looking to "share" a membership and since I am looking for only one piece of content and probably wouldn't be coming back, it would seem perfectly legal and resonable to me that I could buy the membership, find the one piece of information I need and then sell it to her for half of the original cost."

Have at it but rememeber BJ21 does have the right to deny you service and or cancel it.

"Or would you find that objectionable?"

Like I said who cares. There are probably others who are doing the same thing. Especially the casino's

"Would you find it equally objectionable if I bought my counting books used on eBay? (I actually bought mine new). Would it be unethical for me to lend these books to my friend who also wants to learn something about counting. Or he is "stealing" by borrowing my book instead of buying his own. (We aren't talking about copying the whole book here, but borrowing/lending)."

Have at it. Buying used books is legal. The issue here is that BJ21 has a copyright and when a person purchases its information /service it is a contract between the service and that person. Sorta like when you buy a CD.

"Although I respect the opinions of everybody who attacked me, I feel as if somebody were looking to pick a fight without really having all of the facts."

"Ed "

I agree I think we have all been a little hard on you and I apologize. Your action is normal. When I first subscribed to BJ21 I gave some casino intelligence to my cousin Panthercounter. I thought about splitting the cost but he said he would get his own subscription and he wanted to stay above board and be fair. I decided for me that he was right. Plus the cost is minimal for what I have learned and the people I have befriended: LVBEAR, The Mayor, JohnJ, Stanford Wong, Anthony Curtis, Titaniumman, etc.etc......the list goes on. These people on are top of there game and they have taught and influenced me to play a professional level. I hope we can start on a new foot. We can be fair and you can be honest. LTC

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: Unable to post at Card Counters Cafe

Hi Al

I can see where you guys tried to post at the CCC:

10/23/2003 12:30 am alrogers89 <[email protected]> Post sent via web: "Re: Theft of services"
10/23/2003 12:33 am alrogers89 <[email protected]> Post sent via web: "Theft of services"
10/23/2003 12:35 am alrogers89 <[email protected]> Post sent via web: "Theft of services"
10/23/2003 12:43 am chris62vw <Email Private> Post sent via web: "Sharing your bj21.com password"

You have to be a member to post. Neither of Al's emials are members, but chris62vw is a member, but his post hasn't shown up yet. I've invited all three addresses to join.

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: The question is, why didn't you, Rob?

I don't Yahoo. I only occasionally check out CCC, and I go through BJ21's link to get there. I don't know the pecking order of CCC, but you seem to be the head honcho there.

I am assistant mod to John May.

I was having a slow afternoon at work in the Eastern Time Zone today when I read the "BJ21 Conspiracy". I was dismayed. I had already read some of Ed's posts over at RGE, but for obvious reasons, I no longer post there unless necessary.

Where were you reading about the BJ21 Conspiracy? I did a search for it at the CCC but nothing came up.

Since I don't post on CCC, I tried to respond on this site, but my work computer as well as I did not know my password which was at home. I had to wait until I got home to respond to this mess that was posted two days ago on Monday.

Ed seems to be a nice enough guy, but committed a serious error in judgement. I feel I gave him an out by stating he appears to be new to the community, and he should apologize to BJ21. The real culprit is this Caitlin Weaver who is trying to make this deal by private email.

Tighten it up Rob, and deal with Caitlin Weaver. Do the right thing. The smallness of the dollar doesn't matter. I've already proven that. Right is might.

I like to let things sort themselves out. It looks like they have done so now. The aleged perp finds that SF21 is not worth the effort, every hand has been slaped that needs a slap, and no ones hand is in anyones "cookie" jar.

I have my own issues with the site management at BJ21, not with Stan Wong. That had nothing to do with the "sharing incident" posts being left up. I have found that with yahoo, after someone posts the message has gone out to everyone's mailbox. BECAUSE I left it up, you guys got to see it, and respond to it. Below what looks like bad judgement is something a lot deeper.

 

[The Mayor]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

FYI, I joined Green Chip, a full membership, so that I could have a privledge that lasted a single day. The $12.50 was worth it.

Thanks for your response.

--Mayor

 

[Rob McGarvey]

BJ21 Membership

I agree Mayor. As LTC points out, join for the first quarter, rape the archives for everything you can, hang out and listen to the chatter and see if another quarter is in order. If not, pull the plug.

http://bj21.com/ads/green1.html

 

[Ed Tice]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

Thanks for everybody pointing out the error in my ways!

"I have visited the BJ21 free message board and don't see much activity, nevermind much valuable information."

The archives alone are worth a gold mine. The activity does slow down but when it gets hot it can burn your keyboard. Now arent you being a little bit defensive.

>> I am not being defensive at all. I chose not to buy the product! I am being treated as if I owe BJ21 more of my hard-earned money even though I am already a big Stanford Wong customer and just am not interested in the BJ21 site. I would subscribe to CBJN but I happen to live in Europe, so its not really applicable to me.

"Furthermore the software doesn't work and I have never managed to actually post a message."

Come on now your scraping the bottom of the barrel for negativity!

>> I'm not scraping anything to be negative. I wasn't successful with the trial version of the product. I've managed to post on every other message board where I had an interest. If the trial didn't work, why should I buy the full version?

"I own a number of books by Stanford Wong and, although the content was good, felt a bit uncomfortable with the amount of "plugging" of his other products that I found in the book."

Please the books are considered the foundation of modern card counting!

>> I said that the content was good. I might even say great. I said I feel "uncomfortable" with the plugs. I don't like paying for advertisement. Obviously if I didn't think the books were good, I wouldn't own three of them!

"I have no concerns with opening my wallet for things that I consider valuable as I have purchased quite a few books as well as software (including the very expensive CVData)."

You seem well read so why criticize Wong's works?????

>> I am not criticizing anybody's work. But I do feel comfortable in saying that content and advertisement should be clearly separated. As a former journalist I feel that I am qualified to make this statement. Look in any magzine that has multiple-page ads, they always put a border around it that says "special advertising section". This is so that it is clear what is the content and what is the advertisement. I feel equally uncomfortable with "product placement" in movies (where the manufacturer pays a movie maker to prominently display their product). So you certainly can't say that I'm not consistent in this thinking.

"I have interest in one and only one piece of content to be found in the green chip area of BJ21 which is that I heard rumor that somebody posted an effective counting strategy for the Spanish Fun 21 game."

Wow spanish twenty one is a waste of time and getting an edge there well who wants to have to work that hard!

>> Can you say "cover play"? And since the pit bosses don't even know basic strategy for this, I think it might be useful. And I'm willing to pay up to $20 for the information!

"SInce everybody here is well versed in copyright law, all would agree that there is no such thing as copyright on an idea, only on the expression of that idea. So if somebody were to read the ideas on that site and to express them differently, there wouldn't be a problem. Whether the expression was "different enough" could only be decided by a trial judge."

I agree and since this is a civil matter who cares your not going to subscribe anyway.

>> Well according to the other posts it is "theft of services," accusing me of a crime. But no crime has been committed nor has any been planned. The reaction here was more paranoid than the pit bosses at the El C. when they see a green chip!

"Since Caitlin is looking to "share" a membership and since I am looking for only one piece of content and probably wouldn't be coming back, it would seem perfectly legal and resonable to me that I could buy the membership, find the one piece of information I need and then sell it to her for half of the original cost."

Have at it but rememeber BJ21 does have the right to deny you service and or cancel it.

>> Yes in fact they guarantee me exactly NOTHING in return for my membership. One of the main reasons I wont subscribe. That and I don't do business with anybody who requires "recurring credit card billing." No thanks. Bill me once and let me subscribe again if I think the product is good enough.

"Or would you find that objectionable?"

Like I said who cares. There are probably others who are doing the same thing. Especially the casino's

>> The only difference is that the others are dishonest about it.

"Would you find it equally objectionable if I bought my counting books used on eBay? (I actually bought mine new). Would it be unethical for me to lend these books to my friend who also wants to learn something about counting. Or he is "stealing" by borrowing my book instead of buying his own. (We aren't talking about copying the whole book here, but borrowing/lending)."

Have at it. Buying used books is legal. The issue here is that BJ21 has a copyright and when a person purchases its information /service it is a contract between the service and that person. Sorta like when you buy a CD.

>> I have been presented with no contract between myself an BJ21. I read the publically available information on their web site and it says nothing about prohibition of sharing. I realize that the owners might not like this and I didn't set out to upset anybody, just to obtain information. As you said, I'm not going to subscribe anyway, so they don't lose in this deal.

"Although I respect the opinions of everybody who attacked me, I feel as if somebody were looking to pick a fight without really having all of the facts."

"Ed "

I agree I think we have all been a little hard on you and I apologize. Your action is normal. When I first subscribed to BJ21 I gave some casino intelligence to my cousin Panthercounter. I thought about splitting the cost but he said he would get his own subscription and he wanted to stay above board and be fair. I decided for me that he was right. Plus the cost is minimal for what I have learned and the people I have befriended: LVBEAR, The Mayor, JohnJ, Stanford Wong, Anthony Curtis, Titaniumman, etc.etc......the list goes on. These people on are top of there game and they have taught and influenced me to play a professional level. I hope we can start on a new foot. We can be fair and you can be honest. LTC

>> I always try to be honest and fair. The fact of the matter is, I'm still interested in the one piece of information that I mentioned above and I'm willing to pay up to $20 for it. If anybody has a suggestion how this transaction can be worked such that everybody is comfortable, tell me where to send the check and its in the mail.

Ed

 

[Ed Tice]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

If you look at my post above, I don't want to hand over my credit card information when it involes 'recurring billing.' Also after the response I got from the BJ21 people, I am not sure I want to enter a business relationship at all. According to their web site, one can join and get a refund withing 10 days. So if I had really wanted to "rape the archives", I could have joined, downloaded the whole site and cancelled. Instead, I took an opportunity to obtain the information in a way which they would receive some compensation. I have also posted what information I wanted to obtain and I continue to be willing to pay for that information as long as the payment terms are ones I feel comfortable with. So I would like to know how anybody has benefited from attacking me. I still don't know what I want to know and nobody got any money. I must be missing something here since it seems that everybody is harmed. My offer stands that I'm willing to pay $20 for the particular information that interested me. But I'm not willing to hand over my credit card # for recurring billing. I'll gladly pay up to that amount by check or one-time credit-card processing.

Ed

 

[learning to count]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

Ed a quarter subscription is $12.50. This $7.50 cheaper than you are willing to pay ie. $20.00. Subscribe!

 

[learning to count]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

Ed I can think of a number of things to do than use spanish 21 as cover play.

 

[Al Rogers]

Mr Tice, you have mail

I'll gladly pay up to that amount by check or one-time credit-card processing.

Offer accepted. I sent you an email to that effect.

Al Rogers
BJ21.com

[email protected]

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: No BJ21 membership for me, everybody wins.

I don't like their billing method either. I'm sure it works for the die hard fans at BJ21 and that is why it is set up for them that way. All I see is you looking for SF21 info, which is available here, and at BJF if I am not mistaken. I believe the Mayor himself authored these articles.

Rob

 

[The Mayor]

Who wrote SF21 stuff...

The best SF21 is not in print, anywhere.

Orange County KO (OCKO) wrote the first article on SF-21, which won POM, and is in the GC archives at bj21.com.

LVBear wrote some subsequent materials on the game, and has commented on it at length, being perhaps the premier expert in the world on this game. However, in personal conversations I have had with LVBear, he has acknowledged that there are "errors" in some of the published information.

OCKO's article hurt SF-21 for a period of time, but then it came back. But now, SF-21 is dying for another reason. Casinos have realized they don't need to give anything back in exchange for reduced payoffs on BJ, hence 6/5 "Single Deck 21".

--Mayor

 

[learning to count]

Re: Who wrote SF21 stuff...

I'm sorry but Mr. Tice was referring to spanish fun 21 not super fun21. Super fun 21 can be a lucrative game of sorts. The strategy is very difficult. Hell I will sell you the info for $18.00 lus shipping of course. Thsi is getting as good as e-bay! Spanish 21 sucks as a game!

 

[Al Rogers]

Billing method?

Apologies to our friends at cc.com for continuing this thread, which has nothing to do with casino games.

Mr. McGarvey said:

I don't like their billing method either.

BJ21.com has several different billing methods, and are very customer-friendly when it comes to tailoring situations to meet specific needs.

We'd appreciate knowing which "billing method" don't you like and why. If there are changes that you think should be made, or new ideas, please tell us.

Thank you.

Al Rogers
BJ21.com

[email protected]

 

[learning to count]

Re: Billing method?

AL please exuse Rob he tends to be mischevious at times. Your billing techniques are the norm for any site be it e-bay or even purchasing the book aces and faces!

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: Billing method?

I meant your CC billing process where you have to cancel it to stop getting GC, instead of requiring you to renew etc. Most bills come, then you get to say yay or nay to them, and that is the way I prefer things. I see you can also send a check. You guys should hook up to NETeller. I'd fire you a payment for a GC just to see what all the fuss is about! smile I trust that you would cancel if someone called, that is not the question. In a busy world most players don't have time to stop playing to call and cancel and get billed for things they often don't get to use. Like the weekend newspaper....

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: Billing method?

"AL please exuse Rob he tends to be mischevious at times."

ME? Okay, I can live with that...

"Your billing techniques are the norm for any site be it e-bay or even purchasing the book aces and faces!"

WHA? I use PayPal, which never bills you every month for buying my book. I also take checks, MO's, and cash, just like AL does. I'm all sold out now, and am having the book updated at the printers. I will add NETeller to the payment methods for Aces and Faces, and Billion Dollar Blackjack.

 

[Al Rogers]

Misconception

I meant your CC billing process where you have to cancel it to stop getting GC, instead of requiring you to renew etc.

Automatic renewal is not <u>mandatory.</u> It is a customer convenience that is used and appreciated by about 99% of our customers.

You can order Green Chip for three months at a time without automatic renewal. All you have to do is write "No automatic renewal" in the Special Instructions of our order form. The membership will automatically expire at the end of the three months.

Al Rogers
bj21.com

[email protected]

 

[learning to count]

Re: Misconception

Sometimes a person has to push thier point into oblivian before ignorance can be revealed. But that is what good humored debate is about. Like I said before BJ21 has common simple billing procedures that even a canadien can understand!
>; )