Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 I find posts like this sad, in that people find my life so staggeringly unusual. There are plenty of people in this world who have what would be termed as a "better life" than I do, who've exceeded every positive I've ever posted about, exponentially. This makes me realize how little people try, to better their own lives. That's an interesting point. I don't think bettering your life is to understand it from a dimension of climbing company ranks. I think to denigrate someone as a "non-engineer" on this thread tells us a lot about how you are quite happy to look down on others. I don't think your life is unusual, in fact I think it's decidedly normal in terms of what many of the middle class do and how they view the world. I think the very fact that you classify it into "better" or "worse" according to that structure is the giveaway. Fortunately my own friends that are EVP's or COO's are quite happy to build other people up rather than knock them down with the force of their own success.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 That's an interesting point. I don't think bettering your life is to understand it from a dimension of climbing company ranks. I think to denigrate someone as a "non-engineer" on this thread tells us a lot about how you are quite happy to look down on others. I don't think your life is unusual, in fact I think it's decidedly normal in terms of what many of the middle class do and how they view the world. I think the very fact that you classify it into "better" or "worse" according to that structure is the giveaway. Fortunately my own friends that are EVP's or COO's are quite happy to build other people up rather than knock them down with the force of their own success.You're pretty funny coming into a discussion partway, solely with the need to denigrate. Pot, kettle, black and so full of it!
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 You're pretty funny coming into a discussion partway, solely with the need to denigrate. Pot, kettle, black and so full of it! Not denigrating, bring you down to earth my dear. Telling people to follow in your footsteps by bandying about a few acronyms for high level management and claiming that hard work and networking gets you everywhere (coupled with a middle class background don't forget) is a sure sign you're taking yourself a little too seriously. You even seem to think we live in a meritocracy!
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Not denigrating, bring you down to earth my dear. Telling people to follow in your footsteps by bandying about a few acronyms for high level management and claiming that hard work and networking gets you everywhere (coupled with a middle class background don't forget) is a sure sign you're taking yourself a little too seriously. You even seem to think we live in a meritocracy! You need to ask yourself why my accomplishments, threaten you. When people need to bring another person down, it's due to their own insecurities. People should be themselves but not only that, try to look at the world as an oyster, wide open and ready for the picking. If that kind of positive message disturbs you, I can't help your insecurities.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 You need to ask yourself why my accomplishments, threaten you. When people need to bring another person down, it's due to their own insecurities. ]People should be themselves but not only that, try to look at the world as an oyster, wide open and ready for the picking. If that kind of positive message disturbs you, I can't help your insecurities. No, lets be clear, this is about your own insecurites which is why you're happy to fit yourself into this little corporate structure, claim that you're the poster girl for climbing it and denigrate anyone that doesn't follow that example. I'm not threatened by anyone's success, I'm offended by anyone that applauds their own success in the way that you do. You don't appear to realise that life is full of many different people and not all of them are particularly turned on by the things that you are. Frankly you're boorish and up yourself. And don't forget that according to TBF's law of the jungle the wide eyed people that saw the world as an oyster for their own greed in the last decade have been paid extortionate amounts of money to wreck the economy while patting themselves on the back for it. I don't think that's what we should have all been aspiring to.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 No, lets be clear, this is about your own insecurites which is why you're happy to fit yourself into this little corporate structure, claim that you're the poster girl for climbing it and denigrate anyone that doesn't follow that example. I'm not threatened by anyone's success, I'm offended by anyone that applauds their own success in the way that you do. You don't appear to realise that life is full of many different people and not all of them are particularly turned on by the things that you are. Frankly you're boorish and up yourself. And don't forget that according to TBF's law of the jungle the wide eyed people that saw the world as an oyster for their own greed in the last decade have been paid extortionate amounts of money to wreck the economy while patting themselves on the back for it. I don't think that's what we should have all been aspiring to.You're entitled to your opinion of me, as my opinion of you is basically that you're very insecure and easily threatened by people who in your mind, you don't measure up against. So that's what bothers you. That I'm in the Finance/Investment sector of the industry. What I do, didn't "wreck" the economy, but yes, what I do and have done, is pretty damn lucrative, if I do say so myself. If you have cause against ethical handling of job and career, I also can't help that insecurity. I do challenge you to find a post of mine, that encourages people to get into my line of work. I do advise that people work hard and network in their twenties to build and save up for the future. This is no-brainer common sense. If that type of advice makes you feel insecure, once again, I can't help you.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 You're entitled to your opinion of me, as my opinion of you is basically that you're very insecure and easily threatened by people who in your mind, you don't measure up against. So that's what bothers you. That I'm in the Finance/Investment sector of the industry. What I do, didn't "wreck" the economy, but yes, what I do and have done, is pretty damn lucrative, if I do say so myself. If you have cause against ethical handling of job and career, I also can't help that insecurity. I do challenge you to find a post of mine, that encourages people to get into my line of work. I do advise that people work hard and network in their twenties to build and save up for the future. This is no-brainer common sense. If that type of advice makes you feel insecure, once again, I can't help you. Actually I don't tend to measure myself against people, but if I did, I certainly wouldn't trade my "career" (calling) in cancer research for a managerial title or to network with people that create nothing yet take a cut off of what's been created. Note that the benefits of your job are to work hours you choose, give yourself a pretentious title and make some lucrative money. What a wonderful success. Lets see, how is this different from a professional poker player? At your age, you should be paving your way for your future. Seems like he's doing the same thing you did.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Actually I don't tend to measure myself against people, but if I did, I certainly wouldn't trade my "career" (calling) in cancer research for a managerial title or to network with people that create nothing yet take a cut off of what's been created. Note that the benefits of your job are to work hours you choose, give yourself a pretentious title and make some lucrative money. What a wonderful success. Lets see, how is this different from a professional poker player?The previously titles mentioned, weren't acquired from my self-employment but nice try. The career path I mentioned in this thread, ended with self-employment for the reason of setting up for a family. I might take it up again, if the perfect opportunity arises. If not, I'll remain self-employed, with real clients and real projects v. relying on gambling. If you want to know something more about me, I can do this because I don't really need to work anymore. Go ahead, make something up about that too. Seems like he's doing the same thing you did.Not exactly. He's relying on gambling, without a safety net of sufficient funds to carry him through for the rest of his life. Also, as previously expressed, I'm 34 years old so my view will differ about what kind of man is acceptable to me, in that security is more important to me, than a girl in her twenties. That's why I suggested the OP get opinions from twenty-something females who will be less risk-averse, since they're his target audience.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 The previously titles mentioned, weren't acquired from my self-employment but nice try. The career path I mentioned in this thread, ended with self-employment for the reason of setting up for a family. I might take it up again, if the perfect opportunity arises. If not, I'll remain self-employed, with real clients and real projects v. relying on gambling. If you want to know something more about me, I can do this because I don't really need to work anymore. Go ahead, make something up about that too. Not exactly. He's relying on gambling, without a safety net of sufficient funds to carry him through for the rest of his life. He's building up his funds, he's already said that he's taken a load off his bankroll and put it elsewhere. It's a business like everything else, and because it creates nothing and relies on a financial transfer mechanism for taking a cut of created wealth into his pocket, it is actually no different from what you do. He can network with other pro's, he can get people to stake him, and of course the weaker players are his "clients". They enjoy gambling against him, he takes their money because he's mathematically guaranteed to do so. As far as his wide eyed oyster world goes, he's actually taking your advice and carving out his own niche in this world. Also, as previously expressed, I'm 34 years old so my view will differ about what kind of man is acceptable to me, in that security is more important to me, than a girl in her twenties. That's why I suggested the OP get opinions from twenty-something females who will be less risk-averse, since they're his target audience. I'd say this man is entirely acceptable to you based on your criteria of what's important. In fact he's actually more stable because his job is recession proof and he doesn't have to worry about his employers or clients going under
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 He's building up his funds, he's already said that he's taken a load off his bankroll and put it elsewhere. It's a business like everything else, and because it creates nothing and relies on a financial transfer mechanism for taking a cut of created wealth into his pocket, it is actually no different from what you do. He can network with other pro's, he can get people to stake him, and of course the weaker players are his "clients". They enjoy gambling against him, he takes their money because he's mathematically guaranteed to do so. As far as his wide eyed oyster world goes, he's actually taking your advice and carving out his own niche in this world.That's your opinion on the life of a professional gambler. My opinion is that he's not mathematically guaranteed to do so. If he's mathematically guaranteed to do anything, it's called beating the odds. Good luck with this life! I'd say this man is entirely acceptable to you based on your criteria of what's important. In fact he's actually more stable because his job is recession proof and he doesn't have to worry about his employers or clients going under Nope. He's not what I have or in the past, looked for. That's why you have many clients. You diversify, ensuring that the type of product and expertise you provide, remains lucrative, regardless of recession.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 That's your opinion on the life of a professional gambler. My opinion is that he's not mathematically guaranteed to do so. If he's mathematically guaranteed to do anything, it's called beating the odds. Good luck with this life! No he doesn't have to "beat the odds" they are in his favour, mathematically against the weaker players. Your opinion is uninformed - you know nothing about the life of a poker player, bankroll management, staking, choosing the correct game, the right limits - and the fact that they're usually getting their money in with a 5%+ edge againt the "gamblers" Nope. He's not what I have or in the past, looked for. I know. Even though he's doing what is essentially same thing as you, because it's not dressed up as COO, EVP or MVP or anything that would fit into your middle class box it's not acceptable That's why you have many clients. You diversify, ensuring that the type of product and expertise you provide, remains lucrative, regardless of recession. He has more clients than you, thousands of them.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 No he doesn't have to "beat the odds" they are in his favour, mathematically against the weaker players. Your opinion is uninformed - you know nothing about the life of a poker player, bankroll management, staking, choosing the correct game, the right limits - and the fact that they're usually getting their money in with a 5%+ edge againt the "gamblers" I know. Even though he's doing what is essentially same thing as you, because it's not dressed up as COO, EVP or MVP or anything that would fit into your middle class box it's not acceptable Weaker players is a subjective term. Show me a guarantee that he'll keep his edge and that there will always be weaker players for him to leverage against, so he's able to live a reasonable lifestyle based on his earnings. No doubt I stand the risk of losing my edge but then, I have financial security to fall back on. He has more clients than you, thousands of them.Whatever... Btw, don't you think it's kind of cowardly and petty, to hide behind a different screen name?
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Weaker players is a subjective term. Show me a guarantee that he'll keep his edge and that there will always be weaker players for him to leverage against, so he's able to live a reasonable lifestyle based on his earnings. The guarantee is the numerous pro poker player that have carved out successful careers from this. What's your guarantee? Can you guarantee that you'll keep your edge to sell the product and there will always be clients to sell to? Of course to keep his edge he has to study and work hard You can guarantee there will always be weak poker players in the same way you can guarantee there will always be scrabble players. As for the rest of it, a quick internet search will show you that your opinion is uninformed. not only that, he has the potential to make MUCH more money than you. You should be dropping your knickers No doubt I stand the risk of losing my edge but then, I have financial security to fall back on. And that financial security didn't come out of nowhere, just as the money he is putting aside will guarantee him the same security you have at your age Btw, don't you think it's kind of cowardly and petty, to hide behind a different screen name? I see, so when on the losing side of the argument you try to discredit me instead.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 The guarantee is the numerous pro poker player that have carved out successful careers from this. What's your guarantee? Can you guarantee that you'll keep your edge to sell the product and there will always be clients to sell to? Of course to keep his edge he has to study and work hard You can guarantee there will always be weak poker players in the same way you can guarantee there will always be scrabble players. As for the rest of it, a quick internet search will show you that your opinion is uninformed. not only that, he has the potential to make MUCH more money than you. You should be dropping your knickers And that financial security didn't come out of nowhere, just as the money he is putting aside will guarantee him the same security you have at your age Something tells me that we'll have to agree to disagree on this. No matter which way you're arguing this, professional gambling is high-risk, with nothing to fall back on. I'm not interested in e-penis measurements about who makes more money but I do know that I already have financial security due to assorted reasons, of which one wasn't to take a high-risk path on my career. I see, so when on the losing side of the argument you try to discredit me instead. No, just giving you the rest of my opinion. I don't need to discredit you. You're doing fine on your own.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Something tells me that we'll have to agree to disagree on this. No matter which way you're arguing this, professional gambling is high-risk, with nothing to fall back on. I'm not interested in e-penis measurements about who makes more money but I do know that I already have financial security due to assorted reasons, of which one wasn't to take a high-risk path on my career. Now what happened to the world being someone's oyster? Is it only their oyster if it's low risk according to your criteria? And again your definition of "risk" is something that you've pulled out of thin air in this scenario. Earning money from ooker is much more stable than being a lot of things right now. In fact a graduate getting themselves into a high amount of debt is a pretty risky strategy because there's a lack of jobs out there. I suppose it helps if you come from a financially well of background though right TBF? No, just giving you the rest of my opinion. I don't need to discredit you. You're doing fine on your own. Just saying it doesn't make it so. I think anyone with an ounce of knowledge of poker can see that you like to give your opinion on subjects you know nothing about.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Now what happened to the world being someone's oyster? Is it only their oyster if it's low risk according to your criteria? And again your definition of "risk" is something that you've pulled out of thin air in this scenario. Earning money from ooker is much more stable than being a lot of things right now. In fact a graduate getting themselves into a high amount of debt is a pretty risky strategy because there's a lack of jobs out there. I suppose it helps if you come from a financially well of background though right TBF? Oysters have pearls, not so with gambling. You throw around words like "guaranteed", when discussing gambling. Something tells me that you're not exactly experienced in life, in general. When you work hard for an employer, you're guaranteed an income to compensate you for work done, unless there are extenuating circumstances or it's a volunteer job. When you gamble for a living, you're not guaranteed income. If anything, there's risk to lose and lose it all. This isn't rocket science so I don't even know why we're debating this. It's pure ridiculous. Just saying it doesn't make it so. I think anyone with an ounce of knowledge of poker can see that you like to give your opinion on subjects you know nothing about.Ah yes, the man who uses the word "guarantee" when discussing gambling.
alphamale Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 You throw around words like "guaranteed", when discussing gambling. Something tells me that you're not exactly experienced in life, in general. indeed, its called "gambling" cause there are no guarantees except that over time you'll lose your shirt
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Oysters have pearls, not so with gambling. You throw around words like "guaranteed", when discussing gambling. Something tells me that you're not exactly experienced in life, in general. When you work hard for an employer, you're guaranteed an income to compensate you for work done, unless there are extenuating circumstances or it's a volunteer job. Or maybe you just don't understand poker! Suddenly it's my lack of life experience? Oh dear we really are clutching at straws now. As far as employers go, yes you are guaranteed an income, but that's not always a road to financial stability is it. Or would you care to explain why most people don't have a bean to their name and lots of debt? When you gamble for a living, you're not guaranteed income. If anything, there's risk to lose and lose it all. Well if you want to mitigate that get someone else to stake you - simple. You're not guaranteed to win a game of football either, but I do believe if you are skilled enough you probably will This isn't rocket science so I don't even know why we're debating this. It's pure ridiculous. Ah yes, the man who uses the word "guarantee" when discussing gambling. Yes it's so ridiculous studies have been carried out and several high profile academics are debating it, to decide whether it actually consttutes "gambling" under US law According to a certain Harvard law professor* it's a game of skill. But no TBF, it's ridiculous because you say so. (*That's Charles Nesson for the ZOMG this is gambling and I know what I'm talking about brigade)
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Or maybe you just don't understand poker! Suddenly it's my lack of life experience? Oh dear we really are clutching at straws now. As far as employers go, yes you are guaranteed an income, but that's not always a road to financial stability is it. Or would you care to explain why most people don't have a bean to their name and lots of debt? Well if you want to mitigate that get someone else to stake you - simple. You're not guaranteed to win a game of football either, but I do believe if you are skilled enough you probably willLife decisions AND fiscal responsibility, create financial security. This is FACT. Yes it's so ridiculous studies have been carried out and several high profile academics are debating it, to decide whether it actually consttutes "gambling" under US law According to a certain Harvard law professor it's a game of skill. But no TBF, it's ridiculous because you say so. It's pure ridiculous and I stand firmly behind that. I'm not trying to tell you how to live your life but I am giving my opinion to the OP, since he asked for it. Truth be told, I'm not terribly interested in your opinion but you do have the right to post it. For that matter, I'm now bored of this "debate" with someone who's not terribly in touch with reality and what it takes to get to where you need to go. Go ahead and keep enabling the OP to his lifestyle. When he blows his brains out with gambling away everything, I'm sure he'll thank you.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Life decisions AND fiscal responsibility, create financial security. This is FACT. It's pure ridiculous and I stand firmly behind that. I'm not trying to tell you how to live your life but I am giving my opinion to the OP, since he asked for it. Truth be told, I'm not terribly interested in your opinion but you do have the right to post it. Yes we all heard "YOUR" opinionated opinion, but I'll give you the opinion of Charles Neeson law professor at Harvard that "poker is not gambling" and perhaps you can chew on that. I'll even give you a link to a court appeal that claims it isn't http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=6&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.intellipoker.com%2Fwebshare%2Famicus_brief.pdf&ei=sRVuSsPFJNvOjAfJwPWmCw&usg=AFQjCNHyKvunBWZpC0rVpO7cCvBjlLoy2w&sig2=oOtv9sMwG7VO0mlM31vjyA So stamping your foot and just shouting "stupid stupid" just pretty much exposes what your attitude is towards something you know nothing about. For that matter, I'm now bored of this "debate" with someone who's not terribly in touch with reality and what it takes to get to where you need to go. Go ahead and keep enabling the OP to his lifestyle. When he blows his brains out with gambling away everything, I'm sure he'll thank you. Reality is accepting when you don't know about something you claim to. But that would be something to do with too much pride
tanbark813 Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 For that matter, I'm now bored of this "debate" with someone who's not terribly in touch with reality and what it takes to get to where you need to go. Go ahead and keep enabling the OP to his lifestyle. When he blows his brains out with gambling away everything, I'm sure he'll thank you. As has already been posted, it takes a lot of patience and skill to make any real money at poker. People who are susceptible to emotional outbursts or making dumb, high risk bets won't be able to make money for any amount of time, especially the kind of money it takes to live on. It's naive to assume: pro poker player == ultimately poor conventional office job == set for life There are poker players who go bust and those who make a living at it. The same goes for office workers. It shouldn't need to be pointed out that there are plenty of people with conventional sources of income who go broke due to poor decisions.
Trialbyfire Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 As has already been posted, it takes a lot of patience and skill to make any real money at poker. People who are susceptible to emotional outbursts or making dumb, high risk bets won't be able to make money for any amount of time, especially the kind of money it takes to live on. It's naive to assume: pro poker player == ultimately poor conventional office job == set for life There are poker players who go bust and those who make a living at it. The same goes for office workers. It shouldn't need to be pointed out that there are plenty of people with conventional sources of income who go broke due to poor decisions.You're taking this out of context. Go back to "Life decisions AND fiscal responsibilities". Also, go back to our original discussion about working hard and networking. It's also reliant on what career path you choose to take and how much drive you put behind it. Nothing stands alone beyond the non-secure income from gambling. As I said, this entire debate is ridiculous and now entirely boring. Gambling = risk. That is all.
tanbark813 Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Gambling = risk. That is all. That is not all. There is risk in everything. I can't believe someone would actually try to argue that some professions have no risk. And I never said there wasn't risk in gambling.
Citizen Drawn Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 It's also hilarious to hear how "good life decisions and fiscal responsibility" somehow guarantee wealth TBF doesn't appear to realise she's just been living through a decade long economic boom. People who are "fiscally responsible" are watching their savings being pillaged by low interest rates for bank bailouts right now. People who went and got degrees that guaranteed them jobs in a boom economy are now sitting on a lot of debt and frustrated by it all. I think sometimes one has to acknowledge luck comes into it rather than claiming there's a set path to untold riches.
missdependant Posted July 27, 2009 Posted July 27, 2009 Why do people have to act so cool just because they have a typical, boring office job? Investing in the stock market is a gamble, too.. and no one has anything bad to say about that!
Recommended Posts