Favorite Game

[Tedlark]

For those who may have misunderstood my post which included pugs, I never said I harbored any hostile or bad feelings toward them, I simply said I find them to be visually ugly. I had a St. Bernard and the AKC says they are: lovable, trainable, trustworthy, and true-blue loyal.

[New2vp]

Pugs are one of the more vulnerable breeds to inherent or hereditary health problems, such as joint dysplasia, diabetes, eye problems, heat sensitivity and the potentially deadly breathing issues associated with their Brachyphelacic condition.    Perhaps it is these congenital handicaps that make me drawn towards and sympathetic/empathetic to the breed.Thanks for taking what was light-hearted humor and attempting to turn this to seemingly serious social commentary.  That's really more of what this forum needs (yeah, right!) and allows us to shine a light on one of the rising problems in today's society instead of video poker discussion.  Ok, I'll continue since you seem interested in the breed.  Pugs and other flat-faced, small breeds have been rising in popularity for quite a while due to who knows what?  Perhaps to people seeing them in celebrity handbags, perhaps it is their ability to fit better in small city homes, or maybe it is statements such as yours.  With all the defects that you've cited, one would wonder why caring people would stand by and tolerate the cruelty that is imposed simply by the increasing numbers of pugs brought into the world to suffer due to the increased demand of the unknowing who typically make what they view as incredibly coherent statements such as, "Oh, they're so ugly, they're cute."Following is a quote from the British Veterinary Association (July 29, 2016):"As part of their
pre-purchase research, prospective dog owners should consider the health harms
perpetuated in dogs by purchasing brachycephalic breeds and choose a healthier
alternative breed, or crossbreed, instead, and local veterinary practices are ideally placed to give this advice. Brachycephalic dogs should not be seen as
cute or desirable, rather as dogs predisposed to a lifetime of poor health"Given this, one could really wonder whether statements that increase the demand for pugs and therefore the quantity supplied were actually more cruel once you consider unintended harmful consequences than statements that decreased that demand.Now, after this diversion, can we get back to favorite and not-so-favorite video games??

[Tedlark]

I apologize for going off topic with my comment in response to Eduardo's going off topic comment.

[NelyaZeee]

My favorite game is Triple Double. Unfortunately it's not available on all games . My least favorite is Royal Hunt.

[eg]

My favorite (and probably the worst in terms of winning odds) is Deuces Wild Bonus in Ultimate.

[DaBurglar]

[QUOTE=DaBurglar] Pugs are one of the more vulnerable breeds to inherent or hereditary health problems, such as joint dysplasia, diabetes, eye problems, heat sensitivity and the potentially deadly breathing issues associated with their Brachyphelacic condition.    Perhaps it is these congenital handicaps that make me drawn towards and sympathetic/empathetic to the breed.Thanks for taking what was light-hearted humor and attempting to turn this to seemingly serious social commentary.  That's really more of what this forum needs (yeah, right!) and allows us to shine a light on one of the rising problems in today's society instead of video poker discussion.  Ok, I'll continue since you seem interested in the breed.  Pugs and other flat-faced, small breeds have been rising in popularity for quite a while due to who knows what?  Perhaps to people seeing them in celebrity handbags, perhaps it is their ability to fit better in small city homes, or maybe it is statements such as yours.  With all the defects that you've cited, one would wonder why caring people would stand by and tolerate the cruelty that is imposed simply by the increasing numbers of pugs brought into the world to suffer due to the increased demand of the unknowing who typically make what they view as incredibly coherent statements such as, "Oh, they're so ugly, they're cute."Following is a quote from the British Veterinary Association (July 29, 2016):"As part of their
pre-purchase research, prospective dog owners should consider the health harms
perpetuated in dogs by purchasing brachycephalic breeds and choose a healthier
alternative breed, or crossbreed, instead, and local veterinary practices are ideally placed to give this advice. Brachycephalic dogs should not be seen as
cute or desirable, rather as dogs predisposed to a lifetime of poor health"Given this, one could really wonder whether statements that increase the demand for pugs and therefore the quantity supplied were actually more cruel once you consider unintended harmful consequences than statements that decreased that demand.Now, after this diversion, can we get back to favorite and not-so-favorite video games??
[/QUOTE]


I'm sure I'm not the only one out there now asking...just what the hell is your deal? Seriously, are you being intentionally silly and satirical, because if you are you need to work on delivery.   But if you really are criticizing and/or arguing as vehemently as some of your words seem to indicate, it's not right....

I didn't turn anything into anything...I responded to a post with something relevant to what was said before me.... threads are essentially online conversations, and conversations between people often go in different directions, segue into different topics, etc. Why is this something to be mocked and criticized?   Plus, I didn't even start or take THIS thread down Pug alley...Eduardo mentioned CATS in an attempt at passive humor, then your good friend decided to interject a totally out of the blue, banked-off-the-freeway-billboard potshot about the undesirable nature of PUGS (you can guess why he did that), and then YOU seemingly came to pugs' defense which I agreed with and promptly expounded and elaborated.

Your subsequent BS about the cruelty of perpetuating such a broken species is nothing but contrived horse dung....my fondness for pugs and support for the breed has nothing/nada/zip to do with your mini canine eugenics rant.... I have taken ( and will continue to take) EXISTING pugs and care for them as pets; I neither breed them nor fail to get them spayed or neutered. Therefore I'm not adding to the existing population of pugs, nor do I put in orders or demands from breeders or god-awful puppy Mills for new pugs. When considering a new dog, I first, always look to adopt from shelters....

[DaBurglar]

My favorite game is Triple Double. Unfortunately it's not available on all games . My least favorite is Royal Hunt.


Welcome to Da' Video Poker forum.... I agree with you Royal Hunt stinks as a video poker game!

[New2vp]

I'm sure I'm not the
only one out there now asking...just what the hell is your deal? Seriously, are
you being intentionally silly and satirical, because if you are you need to
work on delivery.   But if you really are criticizing and/or
arguing as vehemently as some of your words seem to indicate, it's not
right....

I didn't turn anything into anything...I responded to a post with something
relevant to what was said before me.... threads are essentially online conversations,
and conversations between people often go in different directions, segue into
different topics, etc. Why is this something to be mocked and
criticized?   Plus, I didn't even start or take THIS thread down
Pug alley...Eduardo mentioned CATS in an attempt at passive humor, then your
good friend decided to interject a totally out of the blue,
banked-off-the-freeway-billboard potshot about the undesirable nature of PUGS
(you can guess why he did that), and then YOU seemingly came to pugs' defense which
I agreed with and promptly expounded and elaborated.

Your subsequent BS about the cruelty of perpetuating such a broken species is
nothing but contrived horse dung....my fondness for pugs and support for the
breed has nothing/nada/zip to do with your mini canine eugenics rant.... I have
taken ( and will continue to take) EXISTING pugs and care for them as pets; I
neither breed them nor fail to get them spayed or neutered. Therefore I'm not
adding to the existing population of pugs, nor do I put in orders or demands
from breeders or god-awful puppy Mills for new pugs. When considering a new
dog, I first, always look to adopt from shelters.... Whoa, slow down
there and take a breath.  Before you accuse me of the Kennedy
assassination, you may want to get your bearings.  I realize that you are
clearly agitated. I will first let you know that, because of that, I won't take
offense to any of your profanity or epithets and forgive any accusations that
you are pointing in my direction.    We'll wait until later to
see if we can work on whether you understand the definitions and proper usage
of "vehemently" and "relevant" as you've included them
above or whether that confusion was simply due to you being blinded by rage.

"Rant," "contrived", and "Your ... BS about ...
cruelty" also are at best ill-conceived descriptions of what was
said.  I admit I expressed an opinion, but it was an opinion of a group of
professionals, the British Veterinary Association, not mine.  If you care
to continue to accuse me of insensitivity, I include this hyperlink to show you
that I was not the author.

https://www.bva.co.uk/News-campaigns-an ... l-welfare/

I've read elsewhere that sometimes practicing vets are hesitant to issue such
stern warnings due to reactions from pet owners.  Maybe you can see the
possibility of that occurring.

The part of my post that did not come from that article was to put things in
terms of supply and demand due to what I thought you would understand since I
believe you have stated you are heavily educated in economics.  I guess I
failed helping you to achieve that understanding.

I admit to not reading all of your non-video poker related posts in the past or
committing them to memory. I was unaware of you having a history of adopting
pugs. Even so, I don't think I could have predicted the extent of the rancor in
your reaction.  I did see earlier in this thread your admonishment of
others relating to animals and how you regard yourself so highly for your
behavior in this regard.  I did think that was a little harsh on your part
as I imagine many readers here have soft spots for animals, disregarding for
the moment Eduardo's comment about cats or more accurately the people who like
them.  For the record, I saw Eduardo's comment as completely
comedic.  For all I know he may have a liking for the furry
critters.  And for all you know, many here may give of their time and
money to animal and other charities, some maybe even more than you.

I've seen enough in your posts to realize that you are seldom in doubt as to
believing you know the solution to society's problems.  And you are
quick to criticize the way this guy or that gal in the public eye, or even
posters here, have dealt with the issues of the day.  What I discounted is
that you don't really have much of an appetite for understanding both sides of
an issue fully once you've made up your mind.  The simple solutions you
offer (or that anyone else offers in posts such as these) usually if not always
have costs or negative effects that the answers do not address.  The side
effects of what are seen as plausible fixes are what I referred to in the
previous post as unintended (or perhaps unforeseen) consequences. 
Unfortunately, problems caused by unintended consequences occur whether or not
those offering the solution had good intentions.  Again, I imagine you are
familiar with this basic teaching in elementary economics.

Before I close, I will have to supplement your last post with an important
detail that in your indignation you seem to have omitted.

I find it difficult to understand how anyone in the general
populace would harbor hostile or bad feelings toward such a lovably flawed
creature....that cannot be good for a person's ..... karma, can it?
(emphasis added) Juxtapose that with the upshot of the post of mine
that you found so offensive.
... one could really wonder whether statements that increase the
demand for pugs and therefore the quantity supplied were actually more cruel
once you consider unintended harmful consequences than statements that
decreased that demand.I realize that the karma quote was a shot at
Ted.  I also realize that the supply-demand quote requires more thought to
understand, which is why I supplied the background before the statement. 
It is hard for me to see the 2nd quote as mean-spirited in light of the first
quote, but opinions vary.  And I realize that it is difficult to see
ourselves as others see us.

What I see here is that you are very upset.  What I see about your posting
patterns is that (1) you often poke fun or outright criticize, (2) someone
responds, (3) it escalates, and eventually (4) you get your feelings hurt and
claim to be the victim.  I don't know how much of this is discernible from
your vantage point.

What I suggested earlier to another poster who didn't like receiving what he
saw as shots would be to stop criticizing others for, say, a month, and see if
others stop saying things that hurt your feelings.

I think it is a great quality to be kind to animals.  It is also a great
quality to be kind to humans.  I hope we're over this rough patch. 
Of course, that doesn't mean that we'll agree on all solutions down the road,
including this one.
I'm sure I'm not the only one out there now asking...just
what the hell is your deal?Actually, I would imagine that most of the
others out there have lost interest (if they ever had any).  If they are reading, they are probably wondering why we don't both
stop.  I hope you get some sleep.

[DaBurglar]

Unreal...you pulled the same passive agressive crap in that other thread where you just bury (or attempt to) what the other person's saying in a pile of non-issues, opinions (yours) about what you think he's all about "inside, and your general "insight" about anything you care to drag into the mix. What's more, all the "insight" and advice you'd direct at me (and all the not-so subtle crticisms it entails) apply just as much to you based upon the very post(s) you just made....

You are all over the place, and wrong about most of it (as it pertains or concerns me personally)...your game is to provoke reactions and then criticize both the person reacting and the reaction itself.

And if you're going to "defend" another poster for what you perceive as "shots" against them, pick better more worthy causes....you "totally omitted" (or ignored) that this all started with a totally unprovoked, needless " shot" about pugs in the first place directed at ME. Which you initially tried to deflect or mitigate (although obviously not for my benefit)...

If a reasonable person goes back from the beginning and reads this thread, it's obvious YOU turned this into yet another turd fest by totally misinterpreting ( deliberate or not), misreading, or just making something out of nothing in regards to what I posted. I had no issue or beef with you until you decided I did....

[New2vp]

Unreal...you pulled the same passive agressive crap in that other thread where you just bury (or attempt to) what the other person's saying in a pile of non-issues, opinions (yours) about what you think he's all about "inside, and your general "insight" about anything you care to drag into the mix....
If a reasonable person goes back from the beginning and reads this thread, it's obvious YOU turned this into yet another turd fest by totally misinterpreting ( deliberate or not), misreading, or just making something out of nothing in regards to what I posted Ok, I see that you are not about to be placated.  Maybe you have too much invested or it's too soon or you just cannot see an issue from more than one side.  I'm not trying to bury anything.  Clearly, all the words are on display for anyone to re-read and form their own opinions, especially if that matters a lot to you, which it seems it does.  I have to stand by what I've already posted and what I'm posting here.  If these words are too painful, maybe we should let this one go and perhaps try again on some other subject.
What's more, all the "insight" and
advice you'd direct at me (and all the not-so subtle crticisms it
entails) apply just as much to you based upon the very post(s) you just
made....
Ok, I'll try and reread my advice one more time and see if I can help myself.  Maybe you can see that one key difference is that I'm not the one claiming to be victimized, but I'll still try, especially if that makes you feel better.You are all over the place, and wrong about most of it (as it
pertains or concerns me personally)...your game is to provoke reactions
and then criticize both the person reacting and the reaction itself.

And if you're going to "defend" another poster for what you perceive
as "shots" against them, pick better more worthy causes....you "totally
omitted" (or ignored) that this all started with a totally unprovoked,
needless " shot" about pugs in the first place directed at ME. Which you
initially tried to deflect or mitigate (although obviously not for my
benefit)...

I didn't discount that others took shots, though I must have miscalculated the depth of those shots and how hurtful this was to you.  You had already accused Ted, so that was already out there.  I did not think it was helpful to repeat that and dissect every word you said (but just in case that matters, I've gone back and tried to include every word from your last post in quote boxes here).  Eduardo, Ted, and I (and you, too) all made comments with yours being by far the longest and most serious (I guess I shouldn't leave edog's contribution out either since he commented about dogs).  I really thought that neither Eduardo's nor Ted's nor my initial comment were to be taken all that seriously.When I said to Ted, "I don't think you should be so hard on Pugs," I was not defending you, but I certainly wasn't attacking pugs.  I didn't think that would be so controversial.  Maybe I should have given more thought to learning more about Pulis, because I totally left them out, noting that they were not in the list of 100 smartest dogs.  My later post noted that the BVA thought it was best not to incentivize others to sentence more dogs to a life of terrible health problems, but that was not to say that those that liked pugs are intent on doing evil or need defending either.  Additionally, I think Ted can defend himself (without getting into whether or not some posters are more worthy than others).  I just pointed out that in your retelling of the story to emphasize your victimhood, you left out the part about your participation in taking shots.  And I thought bringing that up would help you understand your own portion of responsibility for this back and forth.You say that I'm "wrong about most of it."  Well, maybe you could focus on what you think I'm right about it and we will then be on our way to agreement and healing. I had no issue or beef with you until you decided I did....This closing is a little troublesome.  You had no issue with me until I decided you had an issue with me?Well, I won't get into that further.  I think this conversation has now devolved beyond its natural lifespan, but I'm sure you may not want to let sleeping dogs lie.  Sorry, I couldn't resist once that popped into my head.  Seriously, please respond and get things off your chest if you feel that will help.  I may not respond.  Maybe that will help you get over this.