Yuku free message boards

Psand wrote:

---

As to the Compact this is the best refernce I have been able to get. Though it was the proposed Compact, I have found no reason to believe that is is significantly different from the current compact. You will note there is no mention of dealer tokes in it.


As to the other issue. I don't understand why this is so hard for you.

If there are 2 poker rooms which are union in this country, and both of them pool tips that has no relevance what so ever to the question of whether unionization of a poker room requires tip pooling.

there are many issues subject to negotiation in collective bargaining, and the fact that one or two unions negotiated contracts with tip pooling provisions does not mean that all unions have to do that.,

In logical terms if I set the premise that All poodles are dogs, yoiu can therefrom conclude that all dogs are poodles.

First, I never said unionization "requires" tip pooling. I said, in the real world, tip pooling was one of the selling points the union uses to get in the door, and that I didn't believe you'd see a union poker room where they didn't pool tips, and have provided examples of union poker rooms where they pool their tokes to support my position.

You've been insisting I am wrong ever since. I realize you're used to your word being accepted as law here, but, in any reasonable, civilized discussion or debate, when you tell someone they are wrong, the burden of proof falls upon you.

Instead of providing that proof (which we both know you cannot do), you have been taking ever-more illogical and outrageous positions, until you've painted yourself so far into a corner so ridiculous that you now insist, even if 100% of the union poker rooms in this country pool tokes, that does not prove my assertion that, in the real world, unions and tip pooling go hand-in-hand in poker rooms.

I've read enough of your posts to know you're an intelligent man, with significant experience in the poker industry, so I cannot use stupidity or naivette to rationalize that unbelievably foolish position. The only thing that is left is your oft-demonstrated determination to never admit it when you're wrong, and to remain the "alpha male" of this "pack".

You called bullsh*t on me. You are insisting I am wrong. If I am wrong, prove me wrong. Provide just one one example of a union poker room where tokes are not pooled and I will gladly admit you are right and I am wrong (after verification, of course). If you cannot provide that example, however, then man up and admit that I am right, that unionization and tip pooling do go hand in hand in this country. I never said they "couldn't" be union and not share tips, I said they "didn't". If there are no union poker rooms that don't pool tips, then my statement is absolutely proven to be 100% correct, and you 100% incorrect in your insistence that I was wrong.

I have never run across anyone so determined to absolutely dominate a forum. I'll be the first to say you usually know what you're talking about, but you're not the only one here who knows the games and industry and who has significant experience.

Now be a man. provide the examples, or stop this childish prevarication and dodging and admit I was right.

Psand wrote:

---

Your insistence that i need to p[rove that there is a union cardroom where dealers keep their own to be correct about my position makes no sense.

My position never was "there is a union cardroom where dealers keep there own."

You made the statement that "The whole point of unionizing is solidarity; of giving up individualism to have the power of the group. Dealers keeping their own tokes flies in the face of that philosophy."

And my position is simply that, that statement is incorrect. Dealers keeping their own tokes is not inconsistent with point of unionization which is collective bargaining.

You have already let be clear that you are against unionization and its clear that a great way for you to support that position is to claim that the unions will take your tokes away and make you pool. And its just not a fair position to take, Its the sort of thing managment says to keep workers from organizing.

As to unionization I am neither for or against unionization as a gneral rule. I believe there are place where it is appropriate and places where it isn't.

I see no need to address the rest of your post.

Beautiful. Now, my position is dictated by the fact that I am a management scab who takes it only to stop my fellow workers from organizing, and has nothing to do with the fact that I have actually been involved in the process of having a union organizer doing and saying anything in an attempt to get us to vote his union in.

Oh, and there's that pesky little fact that you have yet to provide a single example of a union cardroom in this country that does not pool tips.

Other than that, though ........