Controversy

Of course over the years there has also been a number of controversaries, and a few flame wars. For historical reasons we can mention a couple here:

1. Santa's Sledge Run was a fun game at one of the Surfers Xmas Parties. It was a good competition with a small cash prize for fun, and lots of members posted their best score. 4 minutes before the contest closed, this entry was posted:

Apparently winning the game. But ouchbadbeat noticed something strange:

"i feel i need to post this just because it's annoying me
if you look at the droplets of snow on everyone elses pic they fall on random places, yet thomas' screenshot is an exact replica of mine except for one digit

could this just be a coincidence? id have thought the game would use a random generator to create snowfall

edit: and there is a smudge behind the 4 where the 3 would have been "

The poster of the "winning" entry protested back:

"It makes me sick that I have been accused of this.

As most of you know I have a good hand in photoshop etc while creating websites and if I wante dto do this I would make it an unbeatable score not just 100 more which could be beaten.

But hey yeah am in desperate need for $3.50 so am going to cheat...

Come on be real, I can see where your coming from but I havent cheated."

An investigation followed by forum sleuths, and it turns out the image size was exactly the same too. And some image sleuths decontructed the image to prove....beyond a doubt....it was a forgery...da, da, daaaa

...
2. Flame wars, oh flame wars. The forum was extremely friendly and good fun for the vast majority of the time, but where theres a forum, there will always be a flame war at some point, and here is one of them, to give the "darker side" of forum history:
LV: "If you can neg rep a person have the decency to put your name behind it. If you cannot it just shows your need for approval...

I really dont care that you want to defend a c*ck sucker like Joseph but if you want to neg rep add your name to it.

Have some balls to defend what you believe to be right or wrong. Be a Man! Have some honour!"

NT: "I have no problem admitting it was me you f*cktard

I dunno what you have shoved up your ass lately, but your by far the biggest cockshiner on the fcking site

You bring absolutely nothing positive to the site, endlessly insult others, and are a constant stream of useless spam

Surfers would be a better place if you went back to not posting, or, better yet, got hit by a bus

You are absolutely horrible at poker, and anyone looking at strat would do pretty well doing the exact opposite of what you suggest

Better?"

LV: "Mick. Your arrogance of late has even caused those you call friends to question your attitude. Let me tell a couple of things.. You cannot even be bothered to your rails and then you wish to call out people.. But thats your prerogative.. But here is an option for you...

I dont give a damn about money but since you believe you are so superior at poker let me offer you challenge..

If you can beat my profits at 9 man (Yes, Mick your game) at the $16-27 level (I refuse to play any higher than that since though I am arrogant I am not entirely a moron as you seem to imply).. In the month of July 2010, I will take a wager of any amount you suggest (Yes boy, you name it)... To ensure that this is fair we shall both ship whatever amount you name to Venice and the winner will take it all since whether it is ROI or Profit should not matter in 9mans for a particular month.

If you have the balls to put the money where your mouth is lets do it. If not get your arrogance down a notch."

NT: "you wanna bet on most profit in $16-$27 9 mans in the month of July 2010?

sure, how bout $10k?"

LV: "Haha 10k eh? Let me tell you what.. If you can find the money to ship to Venice by June 18th, the bet is on. Only $16s or $27s or both? You name it."

NT: "It would look pretty bad on your part to make a challenge like the one you made and not follow through, but i would hardly be surprised. We can do 16's and 27's if you want."
LV: "I'll tell you what. The money is not an issue so lets not worry about that but the games are in a sense since I am not a very good pker player. So would you be willing to take the bet of $10k at the $16 level?"

NT: "$16's are fine."

General talk about escrow
LV: "I certainly see where your getting at but I dont think escrowing with someone your betting against makes sense. Your right that I dont have 10k on my stars or indeed all my poker accounts put together at the minute. But getting that amount on before the challenge takes place is not a problem. I dont mean to brag or sound arrogant but I have on occasion paid nightclub bills which far exceed our bet, but in order to make it even fairer and alleviate your concens why dont you name 5 people you trust and I shall do the same. Then we shall ship $1k to each of these 10 people before the challenge starts. Will that work?"
NT: "You can make all the claims you want about having paid $20k+ nightclub bills, but that doesnt make them true, nor does it make me more likely to trust you."
NT: "I have a reputation, and lots of money invested. You have neither. Without insulting you anymore than i already did, i will say right now that if you want to bet, you WILL escrow. I will not. Take it or leave it, id just as soon you leave it now, since i dont believe you have any intention of going through with it anyway, and then its only wasting my time.

Stars will not escrow this type of bet."

LV: "I understand that this challenge was made by me in a moment of arrogance. However I feel that once something is said it needs to be honoured. Hence I find myself in a situation though not optimal I am forced to proceed with.

However there seems to be an issue with the whole escrowing of funds. I dont feel comfortable escrowing an amount such as 10k with a single person. While I let NT pick the sum I suppose the amount makes the issue more complicated. After having thought about it here is the new offer:

The winner takes $1k which I am willing to escrow with whoever NT nominates. The bet will take place in the month of July, 2010. The winner will be determined based on who has more profit at the $16 9 man level for that month. So let me know if its still on."

Random thread railers:
"bahahahhhahahhaahahhahhahah lmfaooooooo!"
"in with a bang.....out with a whimper."
"pride sure can be expensive"
"common 10k aint no big deal, ur a highrolla with nightclub bills 20k+"
"rofl i mean i personally have no issue with you but i have to rofl"
"the balls:brains ratio started out very high, but LV is gradually trying to restore equilibrium"

Some controversary lead to bans. Thankfully there were not many over there years, but here are the biggest ones and the reasons:

3. Highest posting banned members

1. Veidtmeister (15895) - Frequent flame wars. Where Veidtmeister was, a flame war was often not far behind. Following a polite and articulate apology (whilst banned) and some support from Greenroomers, it is within the realms of possibility he may be given another chance.
2. Lordv27 (13956) - Rolled/Theft
3. BigHozer (11561) - Rolled/Theft
4. dude904 (8820) - Frequent flame wars (incl. abusive language) + giving the freeroll password to someone who had been banned for rolling on a stake. He had a few supporters amongst Greenroomers, but a controversial character most often for language/flame wars.
5. RVCrusher (7710) - General Shitstorm involving trying to tap-up lots of Surfers to go to a new forum he had created with someone banned for rolling. Thankfully Surfers were loyal to our community. RV was given another chance at a later point, but that didn't work out. Here is the ban post:
"I think that's enough of that nonsense.

"I don't know quite what I imagined when I let you back in. Perhaps I expected you to slip back in quietly, causing a minimum of fuss, and laying low for a while. Easying your way back in gently and perhaps rather sheepishly because of past transgressions.

Well that obviously hasn't really happened. Far from it in fact. All that has followed your return has really made me question whether I was just too soft letting you back. Perhaps I was overly swayed by the polite apologies via email.

In the land of forums there is something that should be obvious to the vast majority of people, you don't try steal/tap-up/leech members from that forum to start another. Some poor sod has spent thousands and thousands of dollars and blood sweat and tears to build a nice community which is a passion to them and many others, and along comes someone else who doesn't want to spend a penny but simply piggy-back off the other forum. It just isn't right, and 99.9% of people should understand that straight off the bat.

Not only did you do that, but when I told you to stop it, you as good as told me to fck off, and then just continued doing it. Frankly I must be mad to let that slide. Granted, months later you started a string of apologies (to speak also in your defence) that eventually led to your return, but still.

And this argument in this thread is just annoying. You've been somewhat restrained for sure, but it is still annoying for you to try to imply the whole thing/attempt was something kind of heroic. This talk of "balls" - hardly how most people would perceive/describe it. And to talk of being more loyal than acknowledged rocks of the community - again tiltworthy given what happened.

Ultimately when push comes to shove it was a mistake on my part to let you back. A mistake that I shall have to redress. I wish you well with your poker, and hope you find some community which suits you. Deep down I am sure you're a good guy with decent intentions, but ultimately your approach to people online and situations online probably needs a little more refinement and forethought."