(Topic ID: 108377)

The Official Pinside Kevin Kulek Skit-B Predator Discussion


By Xerico

4 years ago



Topic Stats

  • 18,269 posts
  • 815 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 60 days ago by Cobra99
  • Topic is favorited by 193 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

There have been 1,540 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

Kulek.pdf (PDF preview)
6-pennywise-has-some-nickelback-funny-meme (resized).jpg
will-ferrell-fillwerrel-i-just-fell-down-the-stairs-holding-31512906 (resized).png
pinsiders (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
194b3475e0440b8112afc0ac4ad5bf0ed0e8ec3db63fb4b6748a4f2e06a9865b (resized).jpg
31A053C2-4495-4E3E-980F-E5ADEA02F1DE (resized).jpeg
IMG_2933 (resized).JPG
beetlejuice-shrunken head (resized).jpg
2716720260_bc8966f6b1 (resized).jpg
D460F55E-AD42-43C6-91EB-B8162A84A094.gif
Screenshot_20190103-214734_Facebook (resized).jpg
Screenshot_20181108-174321 (resized).png
Fife Appeal Sept 24 2018.pdf (PDF preview)
cat ooo 2.gif
7332539.attach (resized).jpg

Topic index (key posts)

86 key posts have been marked in this topic, showing the first 20 (Show topic index)

There are 18269 posts in this topic. You are on page 239 of 366.
#11901 2 years ago
Quoted from Enaud:

Don't be disillusioned that this will get you your money. It just means that he can't walk away from your claim due to his bankruptcy filing. I imagine you'll have to sue yet again to actually go after any money.

make sure you research it and know the facts for sure. However, this is a relatively small amount to pay in the process and things are moving forward. As I said, anyone paying attention to the discovery portion has a pretty good idea of what recoverable assets are out there.

The most important thing at this juncture is that a small retainer can likely ensure your credit is not dischargeable. Dont be disheartened or give up at this stage Enaud. The fun is just beginning

Keep in mind we all were suckers enough to cough up $250 to a liar... What is a couple hundred more to ensure at minimum he does not get off the hook. To me personally it is worth every penny.

#11902 2 years ago
Quoted from Enaud:

Don't be disillusioned that this will get you your money. It just means that he can't walk away from your claim due to his bankruptcy filing. I imagine you'll have to sue yet again to actually go after any money.

Yup... Certainly just the early steps in the journey... But the alternative is things get flushed and the guy gets away with it. Hopefully some will at least see it as paying for justice.

#11903 2 years ago

Any update on Experts of Dangerous? I love that show!

#11904 2 years ago
Quoted from Enaud:

Don't be disillusioned that this will get you your money. It just means that he can't walk away from your claim due to his bankruptcy filing. I imagine you'll have to sue yet again to actually go after any money.

That is the issue. While it is nice to think "this would make it stick" the legal road is a PITA. It would be nice to know the expected twists, turns and cost ahead of time down the road. But this road was designed by lawyers to keep their pockets lined. If you really knew the costs of time, energy and money more people would make the decision early to bail and that does not benefit the lawyers.

If the money is nothing and the time gives you satisfaction then go for it since he should pay his debt. If you need to move on there is nothing wrong with that either.

#11905 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

That is the issue. While it is nice to think "this would make it stick" the legal road is a PITA. It would be nice to know the expected twists, turns and cost ahead of time down the road. But this road was designed by lawyers to keep their pockets lined. If you really knew the costs of time, energy and money more people would make the decision early to bail and that does not benefit the lawyers.
If the money is nothing and the time gives you satisfaction then go for it since he should pay his debt. If you need to move on there is nothing wrong with that either.

From what I've seen so far, the lawyer representing the buyers has been doing his due diligence and then some.

#11906 2 years ago
Quoted from ForceFlow:

From what I've seen so far, the lawyer representing the buyers has been doing his due diligence and then some.

No argument. Keith seems to want this right. And maybe he gives ore details to his clients. But it always seems you never get a list or flow-chart showing where these things can or usually go. If you knew from day one it would mean paying a lawyer, years go by, continue this, he declares bankruptcy here, you need another fee there. I just would want to know what to expect. Otherwise along the way you either have to say "I'm in it this far might as well keep going" or "can't keep throwing good after bad I'm out" and wish you never went this far.

#11907 2 years ago
Quoted from ForceFlow:

From what I've seen so far, the lawyer representing the buyers has been doing his due diligence and then some.

I'm a bit torn. I agree the lawyer seems to be doing a good job, but as far as I know, he's the only one who's gotten any money. If I understand correctly, his fees for the work he is doing for the bankruptcy trustee will be paid first from Kevin's estate.

From a justice standpoint I guess it's better that someone other than Kevin gets whatever money is there and the lawyer is doing all the work.

#11908 2 years ago

I'm sure some of the people are going to sign their debt over to a collector (for a nominal fee if not outright) once the bankruptcy proceedings are complete...

I would.

It's not about the "$$$ payback" for the people who are seeing this through, it's about the "revenge payback" and debt collectors will do a much better job of hounding Kulek from now until the end of time...

#11909 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

No argument. Keith seems to want this right. And maybe he gives ore details to his clients. But it always seems you never get a list or flow-chart showing where these things can or usually go. If you knew from day one it would mean paying a lawyer, years go by, continue this, he declares bankruptcy here, you need another fee there. I just would want to know what to expect. Otherwise along the way you either have to say "I'm in it this far might as well keep going" or "can't keep throwing good after bad I'm out" and wish you never went this far.

You are placing far too much predictability upon the justice system, which is adversarial by nature. Litigation, including this creditor-debtor case, is like a boxing match. Keith can tell you how many rounds it might take; however, he cannot tell you the score of each round in advance of the fight.

Certainly, it would be easier to place your bet if you knew more about the likely result in advance. But, it is unrealistic for anyone to expect an attorney to possess omniscience.

Lawyers who represent plaintiffs are akin to doctors who treat patients. Neither professional can guarantee the result. Moreover, neither professional can guarantee the parameters of the timetable. There are simply too many factors beyond the control of the professional to do so. In the case of the lawyer, the court itself dictates the schedule. A single motion's disposition or other event can have a dramatic effect on the case's calendar and its viability. All the while, there are defense lawyers (or other creditors) trying to achieve an opposite or contrary result. While it's not utter chaos, there are a lot of moving parts and a lot can go wrong, even in a strong case. Think of all of the events which can cause a pinball machine to malfunction. It's the same with litigation.

As far as your pedestrian comment that the justice system is designed to line the pockets of lawyers, I suggest that your comment does a disservice to many lawyers, including Keith. You're Taxman. Is the IRS Code designed to line the pockets of certified public accountants? Of course not. Such sweeping comments disregard the complexity of the specific situation at hand.

For example, Zane Smith, Esq. is representing a dozen or so Zidware customers in the Jpop litigation. Those clients paid Zane a nominal flat fee to join a lawsuit against Zidware/Jpop. Also, Zane is advancing all of the litigation costs. The fee arrangement is a contingency fee plan in which Zane's firm receives a percentage of any judgment or settlement.

Zane's clients are not paying Zane by the hour. Zane's motivation to settle or otherwise favorably resolve the Jpop case is aligned precisely with his clients. Zane wants the case to resolve sooner rather than later. Court and discovery delays are contrary to Zane Smith, Esquire's interest in the same way that his clients' interests are not served by such delays. In other words, the system is not designed by lawyers to line the pockets of lawyers, as you state.

Trying to right the wrongs of the Predator debacle and the Jpop mess are extremely frustrating. I think that everyone on this thread gets that fact. It's easy to be cynical, after all of this time, with customers still waiting for refunds. However, I suggest that your cynicism is misdirected at the one guy who is working hard to help the victims, the victim's counsel, Keith.

#11910 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

No argument. Keith seems to want this right. And maybe he gives ore details to his clients. But it always seems you never get a list or flow-chart showing where these things can or usually go. If you knew from day one it would mean paying a lawyer, years go by, continue this, he declares bankruptcy here, you need another fee there. I just would want to know what to expect. Otherwise along the way you either have to say "I'm in it this far might as well keep going" or "can't keep throwing good after bad I'm out" and wish you never went this far.

I couldn't agree more.

John P. Dayhuff
Battle Creek, MI.
269-979-3836

#11911 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

As far as your pedestrian comment that the justice system is designed to line the pockets of lawyers, I suggest that your comment does a disservice to many lawyers, including Keith. You're Taxman. Is the IRS Code designed to line the pockets of certified public accountants? Of course not. Such sweeping comments disregard the complexity of the specific situation at hand.

Lawyers wrote most of the laws we can't navigate without paying a lawyer. Congress writes the laws. While the percent of lawyers in congress has dropped dramatically to 40% now from 80% about 50 years ago it is still a huge percent and does not reflect the people they are supposed to be representing.

Your pedestrian assumption about my nickname Taxman thinking it is related to the IRS or taxes in anyway is a totally wrong assumption. But funny you should mention that since the job of the IRS is to implement the laws created by (wait for it) that same lawyer packed group in congress. People blame the IRS for making things so complex and convoluted when they should be pointing the finger at the same group who made civil and criminal laws as well as tax laws. Why are they so complex? Because in order to get elected and get favors (akin to lining pockets again) they write special little loopholes into the tax code to appease their constituents.

Quoted from ZNET:

Lawyers who represent plaintiffs are akin to doctors who treat patients. Neither professional can guarantee the result.

Funny you should bring in another profession riddled with litigation healthcare with medical malpractice costs for physicians. Legal costs for hospitals and drug companies...

Please don't tell me society has not become over litigious. Common sense laws to fix issues like frivolous lawsuits would be fairly simple. But this would cut down on the need for lawyers and the only people who can make this fix are - lawyers.

When people talk about the legal system being long, slow, broken, ... there is a reason and a group you can point the finger at and they invented the system they have to navigate.

#11912 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

Lawyers wrote most of the laws we can't navigate without paying a lawyer. Congress writes the laws. While the percent of lawyers in congress has dropped dramatically to 40% now from 80% about 50 years ago it is still a huge percent and does not reflect the people they are supposed to be representing.
Your pedestrian assumption about my nickname Taxman thinking it is related to the IRS or taxes in anyway is a totally wrong assumption. But funny you should mention that since the job of the IRS is to implement the laws created by (wait for it) that same lawyer packed group in congress. People blame the IRS for making things so complex and convoluted when they should be pointing the finger at the same group who made civil and criminal laws as well as tax laws. Why are they so complex? Because in order to get elected and get favors (akin to lining pockets again) they write special little loopholes into the tax code to appease their constituents.

Funny you should bring in another profession riddled with litigation healthcare with medical malpractice costs for physicians. Legal costs for hospitals and drug companies...
Please don't tell me society has not become over litigious. Common sense laws to fix issues like frivolous lawsuits would be fairly simple. But this would cut down on the need for lawyers and the only people who can make this fix are - lawyers.
When people talk about the legal system being long, slow, broken, ... there is a reason and a group you can point the finger at and they invented the system they have to navigate.

Your comments have some validity as to federal and bankruptcy law. But, they do not apply to state law. Accordingly, your statistics miss the point. My disagreement with you is primarily your unjustified scapegoating of Keith in his role as the lawyer seeking justice for the Predator victims.

First, the number of lawsuits have steadily dropped nationally in the last decade, based on population. It's a fact that in most states the cases which consume a disproportionate share of judicial resources are the major corporations suing each other, e.g. Pennzoil v. Texaco. The Predator debtor-creditor variety of cases are not clogging the court system. Keith's case is little more than the flea on the tail of the dog in terms of perspective. Thus, even though Keith's case is subject to the federal bankruptcy system, it's not the very few frivolous cases preventing it from progressing in a timely manner.

Indeed, Rule 9 is designed to thwart frivolous lawsuits in the federal courts. Lawyers who file such suits can be personally fined. A lawyer has a financial disincentive to file a frivolous suit. All states have Rule 9 counterparts to dissuade frivolous litigation. Like any imperfect system, the law does not eradicate 100% of the frivolous cases. The "too many frivolous lawsuits is destroying our country mantra" is the pablum of certain political interests, which you have swallowed, absent a factual analysis. Statistically, domestic relations cases are far more litigious than collection cases. If you want to reduce the docket, petition your congressional representative to enact different marriage, divorce and custody laws or else appoint and/or elect local judges to modify state common law to effectuate that result.

In New Jersey, much of our backlog is attributable to empty judicial seats as opposed to underlying procedure. The second reason for backlogs in NJ is the exploitation by insurance companies to the detriment of consumers. Insurance companies have an incentive to drag out litigation. Doing so forces plaintiffs to fold by attrition, in many instances. The laws of "bad faith" designed to prevent insurance carrier exploitation are weak nationwide. What is needed to streamline litigation are disincentives for insurance carriers to embark on obstructionism. Such laws would go a long way to help reduce the backlog.

As for the IRS Code analogy, you have proved my point. As you accurately state, Congress writes IRS loophole laws to benefit powerful constituents. Those constituents are corporations like the insurance lobby and pharmaceutical lobby. Congress is not writing those laws at the behest of the CPA lobby so that the accountants can line their pockets (even though some corporate accountants will doubtlessly profit by more complex tax laws). Likewise, Congress will change an environmental law, for example, to cater to the coal lobby. There is no monolithic and powerful group of environmental law lawyers lobbying Congress so that those lawyers can increase their billable hours.

It's so easy to default to false and reductive reasoning when discussing a universally maligned profession, like the legal profession. With all of its thorns, there is no other civil justice system anywhere in the world which equals the American system. Your posts are of the 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" sentiment, the often-quoted and typically misunderstood line from Shakespeare's "Henry VI." But, oversimplification and propaganda are often dispelled by fact-checking and understanding the details and nuances.

Scholars know that Shakespeare's dialogue was intended to underscore the crucial positive role of lawyers in society as guardians of justice and the rule of law. That is why Dick the Butcher, the rebel leader's henchman, uttered that famous line. In order to engender anarchy, the first task is to kill all of those who stand in the way of the mob, meaning the guardians of the rule of law, i.e. the lawyers. Keith is one of those lawyers. If you want better updates, then contact him. Personally, I would rather know that Keith is spending his limited time working on the actual case rather than spending his time updating you so that your anxiety level is reduced.

I am not involved in the Predator case, having not preordered this title. I have no personal stake in Keith's case. I don't know Keith nor have I ever communicated with him. As a litigator myself, who has an understanding of the litigation environment and the frustration of Predator victims, I feel compelled to alight upon this soapbox and come to Keith's defense.

#11913 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

Your comments have some validity as to federal and bankruptcy law. But, they do not apply to state law. Accordingly, your statistics miss the point. My disagreement with you is primarily your unjustified scapegoating of Keith in his role as the lawyer seeking justice for the Predator victims.
... As a litigator myself, who has an understanding of the litigation environment and the frustration of Predator victims, I feel compelled to alight upon this soapbox and come to Keith's defense.

My point was never against Keith. I believe he actually wants justice and is doing everything in his power to get it. The fact that he got the court to agree to include him shows he is not just filling out paperwork, but working for the clients. You do not need to defend Keith.

My complaint is with the system he is navigating. It seems to have too many ways to drag things out. As you say using obstructionism. People who deserve justice get less because due to attrition.

-5
#11914 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

Your comments have some validity as to federal and bankruptcy law. But, they do not apply to state law. Accordingly, your statistics miss the point. My disagreement with you is primarily your unjustified scapegoating of Keith in his role as the lawyer seeking justice for the Predator victims.
First, the number of lawsuits have steadily dropped nationally in the last decade, based on population. It's a fact that in most states the cases which consume a disproportionate share of judicial resources are the major corporations suing each other, e.g. Pennzoil v. Texaco. The Predator debtor-creditor variety of cases are not clogging the court system. Keith's case is little more than the flea on the tail of the dog in terms of perspective. Thus, even though Keith's case is subject to the federal bankruptcy system, it's not the very few frivolous cases preventing it from progressing in a timely manner.
Indeed, Rule 9 is designed to thwart frivolous lawsuits in the federal courts. Lawyers who file such suits can be personally fined. A lawyer has a financial disincentive to file a frivolous suit. All states have Rule 9 counterparts to dissuade frivolous litigation. Like any imperfect system, the law does not eradicate 100% of the frivolous cases. The "too many frivolous lawsuits is destroying our country mantra" is the pablum of certain political interests, which you have swallowed, absent a factual analysis. Statistically, domestic relations cases are far more litigious than collection cases. If you want to reduce the docket, petition your congressional representative to enact different marriage, divorce and custody laws or else appoint and/or elect local judges to modify state common law to effectuate that result.
In New Jersey, much of our backlog is attributable to empty judicial seats as opposed to underlying procedure. The second reason for backlogs in NJ is the exploitation by insurance companies to the detriment of consumers. Insurance companies have an incentive to drag out litigation. Doing so forces plaintiffs to fold by attrition, in many instances. The laws of "bad faith" designed to prevent insurance carrier exploitation are weak nationwide. What is needed to streamline litigation are disincentives for insurance carriers to embark on obstructionism. Such laws would go a long way to help reduce the backlog.
As for the IRS Code analogy, you have proved my point. As you accurately state, Congress writes IRS loophole laws to benefit powerful constituents. Those constituents are corporations like the insurance lobby and pharmaceutical lobby. Congress is not writing those laws at the behest of the CPA lobby so that the accountants can line their pockets (even though some corporate accountants will doubtlessly profit by more complex tax laws). Likewise, Congress will change an environmental law, for example, to cater to the coal lobby. There is no monolithic and powerful group of environmental law lawyers lobbying Congress so that those lawyers can increase their billable hours.
It's so easy to default to false and reductive reasoning when discussing a universally maligned profession, like the legal profession. With all of its thorns, there is no other civil justice system anywhere in the world which equals the American system. Your posts are of the 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" sentiment, the often-quoted and typically misunderstood line from Shakespeare's "Henry VI." But, oversimplification and propaganda are often dispelled by fact-checking and understanding the details and nuances.
Scholars know that Shakespeare's dialogue was intended to underscore the crucial positive role of lawyers in society as guardians of justice and the rule of law. That is why Dick the Butcher, the rebel leader's henchman, uttered that famous line. In order to engender anarchy, the first task is to kill all of those who stand in the way of the mob, meaning the guardians of the rule of law, i.e. the lawyers. Keith is one of those lawyers. If you want better updates, then contact him. Personally, I would rather know that Keith is spending his limited time working on the actual case rather than spending his time updating you so that your anxiety level is reduced.
I am not involved in the Predator case, having not preordered this title. I have no personal stake in Keith's case. I don't know Keith nor have I ever communicated with him. As a litigator myself, who has an understanding of the litigation environment and the frustration of Predator victims, I feel compelled to alight upon this soapbox and come to Keith's defense.

Screenshot_20161022-134832 (resized).png

#11915 2 years ago
Quoted from Taxman:

My point was never against Keith. I believe he actually wants justice and is doing everything in his power to get it. The fact that he got the court to agree to include him shows he is not just filling out paperwork, but working for the clients. You do not need to defend Keith.
My complaint is with the system he is navigating. It seems to have too many ways to drag things out. As you say using obstructionism. People who deserve justice get less because due to attrition.

Agreed.

#11916 2 years ago

This is a thread which is tracking esoteric legal proceedings. Victims of Skit-B are trying to make sense of developments. I presume that input from experienced litigators would have value, even posts which are longer than most. If you wish to view only posts containing censored photos, devoid of topical information, I suggest that you divert your truncated attention span elsewhere. You do not speak for every victim of Skit-B on this thread. Some folks have a lot of money on the line and appreciate input from us boring lawyers.

-7
#11917 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

You do not speak for every victim of Skit-B on this thread.

Nor do you.

18
#11918 2 years ago

The come-back of last resort. Sheesh! It was your post which sought to speak for all of Pinside, not mine. Please contribute something worthwhile to the discussion of the litigation rather than merely post for a laugh at another's expense. Encourage valuable dialogue. There's a considerable sum of money at stake to our fellow Pinsiders.

#11919 2 years ago

For what it's worth, I appreciate your input ZNET.

I really just want this thing to go away, (not happening for awhile I presume). Still trying to get over the sting of trusting this fricking guy with my money.

16
#11920 2 years ago

blahblahblahblah....

ps. kevin is a douchebag

#11921 2 years ago
Quoted from MagicMako:

For what it's worth, I appreciate your input ZNET.
I really just want this thing to go away, (not happening for awhile I presume). Still trying to get over the sting of trusting this fricking guy with my money.

Thanks for your post, MagicMako. Although new to this thread, I don’t come to the preorder controversy without experience. I am the Jpop/Zidware preorder customer who filed the first lawsuit against Jpop and Zidware. I did so back in early May 2015 through the Chicago attorney I retained, Zane Smith, Esq. A few weeks later, my claim resolved when Pintasia stepped into the foray, allowing me to withdraw from my lawsuit. However, my name still remains as the lead plaintiff (of about a dozen plaintiffs) on the docket, under my original suit, despite my voluntary withdrawal.

Currently, I am between trials with a little free time. Consequently, on the Magic Girl—RAZA—AIW Facebook member group, I have dedicated some of that time very recently toward forging a resolution. Specifically, I have proposed to broker a mediation effort among the various parties with Jpop/Zidware disputes.

The Pinside Magic Girl thread is riddled with misinformation about the legal process. It occurred to me that I might be of some help to my fellow Pinsiders in clearing up misconceptions about the legal process on this Skit-B thread. The Predator preorder customers are currently in a much different (but arguably better position) than the Zidware preorder customers.

#11922 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

The Predator preorder customers are currently in a much different (but arguably better position) than the Zidware preorder customers.

Agreed. JPop was better at covering his tracks and hiding behind a company. Also better at fast-talking investors: I doubt Pintasia or AP would have fallen for Kevin.

My feeling is that JPop will probably escape the legal system, while Kevin won't.

#11923 2 years ago
Quoted from jlm33:

My feeling is that JPop will probably escape the legal system, while Kevin won't.

Can Kevin's prosecution be used as legal precedence to build a case around JPOP? This is new territory to the courts as far as I am concerned.

#11924 2 years ago
Quoted from Crash:

Can Kevin's prosecution be used as legal precedence to build a case around JPOP? This is new territory to the courts as far as I am concerned.

No, fraud is fraud.

#11925 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

the often-quoted and typically misunderstood line from Shakespeare's "Henry VI."

I have to say, you are an excellent writer, and obviously have a broad education, quoting Shakespeare for example. As a former journalist, I am very impressed with your command of words, perfect grammar and composition! Possibly, the best written posts I've ever seen on Pinside. I'm not taking sides, I'm just admiring your composition and formulation skills.

#11926 2 years ago
Quoted from Crash:

Can Kevin's prosecution be used as legal precedence to build a case around JPOP? This is new territory to the courts as far as I am concerned.

they are night and day from each other... the fact they sold people on the idea of buying a pinball product is probably the only common thread.

#11927 2 years ago
Quoted from Pintucky:

I have to say, you are an excellent writer, and obviously have a broad education, quoting Shakespeare for example. As a former journalist, I am very impressed with your command of words, perfect grammar and composition! Possibly, the best written posts I've ever seen on Pinside. I'm not taking sides, I'm just admiring your composition and formulation skills.

Brevity is the soul of wit

Quoted from labnip:

blahblahblahblah....
ps. kevin is a douchebag

#11928 2 years ago

There once was a man from Nantucket….

-10
#11929 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

This is a thread which is tracking esoteric legal proceedings. Victims of Skit-B are trying to make sense of developments. I presume that input from experienced litigators would have value, even posts which are longer than most. If you wish to view only posts containing censored photos, devoid of topical information, I suggest that you divert your truncated attention span elsewhere. You do not speak for every victim of Skit-B on this thread. Some folks have a lot of money on the line and appreciate input from us boring lawyers.

Yeah, but you might just be an ambulance chaser with an expansive vocabulary trying to impress pinball collectors.

#11930 2 years ago
Quoted from vdojaq:

Yeah, but you might just be an ambulance chaser with an expansive vocabulary trying to impress pinball collectors.

minion-firefighter-1 (resized).jpg

18
#11931 2 years ago
Quoted from vdojaq:

Yeah, but you might just be an ambulance chaser with an expansive vocabulary trying to impress pinball collectors.

Remember, the first rule of Pinside is to be nice and your post is contrary to that tenet. In post #11921, I cited my ongoing efforts to help the Magic Girl, RAZA, AIW preorder customers with their dispute and my status as the only customer since 2015 who has thus far successfully resolved a preorder claim. Clearly, you find my participation in this thread threatening to you. How about you embark on some circumspection and figure out why an "expansive vocabulary" bothers you so much.

For the record, "ambulance chaser" is not a particularly creative term. Surely you can conjure up a more original insult, since that is how you choose to utilize your time posting. The majority of my clients are not typically found in an ambulance. Instead, they are the child victims of sexual abuse. I'm proud of my contribution to the law and to the clients I represent.

Words are my currency and I spend them to convey clarity of thought. I'm sure that you too excel at something. Stand-up comedy is not your forte, though. The ambulance chaser insult is cliche and demonstrates a lazy wit.

I am also proud of my contribution to the pinball community. The next time you visit the Museum of Pinball in Banning, CA, be sure to visit the Walter Day pinball and arcade superstar wing, where you can view my trading card and read about what I've done to help the hobby over these many decades. For now, you can view my Pinside profile photographs to view the trading card. If you send me your address, I'll mail you an autographed card signed "Ambulance chaser who has nothing better to do than to try to impress strangers on a pinball forum with his expansive vocabulary."

-7
#11932 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

Remember, the first rule of Pinside is to be nice and your post is contrary to that tenet. "

Then you being the lawyer you claim to be made the very easy mistake of glossing over the fact that my statement was you "might be". Fact is, I never called you anything. But I figured just the assimilation of "ambulance chaser" would raise a hair or two on your neck. It appears I was 100% spot on, your diatribe of a rebuttal proves as such.

Sir , I live in fear of no one, so the thought of feeling threatened by you is highly doubtful, actually quite comical. That comment actually paints you as possibly having an inferiority complex. You really do paint a wonderful picture of yourself on a pedestal. I congratulate you on the ability to pat yourself on the back.

The bottom line here is your help with explaining the law with the many questions or assumptions on here with JPop & Kevin is actually quite welcomed. However, we don't need a soap box performance of explanation to stroke your ego every single time. We get it, you have an expansive stable of highly intellectual words you just can't wait to exploit. The problem is it comes off unintentionally as you being quite pompous.

And sorry, I gave up putting trading cards in my bicycle spokes when I was 12.

#11933 2 years ago
Quoted from vdojaq:

Then you being the lawyer you claim to be made the very easy mistake of glossing over the fact that my statement was you "might be". Fact is, I never called you anything. But I figured just the assimilation of "ambulance chaser" would raise a hair or two on your neck. It appears I was 100% spot on, your diatribe of a rebuttal proves as such.
Sir , I live in fear of no one, so the thought of feeling threatened by you is highly doubtful, actually quite comical. That comment actually paints you as possibly having an inferiority complex. You really do paint a wonderful picture of yourself on a pedestal. I congratulate you on the ability to pat yourself on the back.
The bottom line here is your help with explaining the law with the many questions or assumptions on here with JPop & Kevin is actually quite welcomed. However, we don't need a soap box performance of explanation to stroke your ego every single time. We get it, you have an expansive stable of highly intellectual words you just can't wait to exploit. The problem is it comes off unintentionally as you being quite pompous.
And sorry, I gave up putting trading cards in my bicycle spokes when I was 12.

Why don't we begin again? All constructive input on this thread will be encouraged, even posts which respect good grammar and punctuation. In the future, I will resist the temptation to call you out on your misuse of the word "assimilation." In return, you will refrain from calling me pompous, simply because I write the way I speak.

It's nonsense like this that discourages participation. If we were hanging out at a pinball event, you would be laughing with me about this great hobby and all of the excitement in the room. You wouldn't even notice my manner of speech. What is it about the anonymous internet discussion groups which gives rise to the keyboard commando effect?

I'm a regular guy, just like the rest of us pinheads. It's not like I'm feigning a British accent to sound smart. "Once around the park, James, and then home." See. . .that was an awful British accent. Now, back to Monday Night Football.

#11934 2 years ago
Quoted from ZNET:

Why don't we begin again? All constructive input on this thread will be encouraged, even posts which respect good grammar and punctuation. In the future, I will resist the temptation to call you out on your misuse of the word "assimilation." In return, you will refrain from calling me pompous, simply because I write the way I speak.
It's nonsense like this that discourages participation. If we were hanging out at a pinball event, you would be laughing with me about this great hobby and all of the excitement in the room. You wouldn't even notice my manner of speech. What is it about the anonymous internet discussion groups which gives rise to the keyboard commando effect?
I'm a regular guy, just like the rest of us pinheads. It's not like I'm feigning a British accent to sound smart. "Once around the park, James, and then home." See. . .that was an awful British accent. Now, back to Monday Night Football.

Um it's Sunday night? Unless of course you mean a MNF pin!

#11935 2 years ago

ZNET and vdojaq . . . your jousting with words is tripping my mind! Both of you have been quite clever with your zingers. I love witty and adroit repartee. Thanks for the entertainment. LOVED IT! But just from a wordsmith view, only.

Again, not taking any sides. Just a bravo for penning such acrid, tart, and piquant banter and lacing it with humor, waggery, and wisecracking.

Mike in Kentucky (Were we'uns R alzo hi-ly edukumated . . . I was learned a lot of big ole words win in skool!)

-1
#11936 2 years ago

Don't you have something more important to be doing like fixing floors, gutters, and reporting on UK basketball games?

-12
#11937 2 years ago

I see some people suggesting people should throw in hundreds to save $250. I'd recommend to think about it from an economics standpoint. If the marginal benefit of X is greater than the marginal cost, do X. Don't spend thousands of dollars in an attempt to regain $250. Don't even spend $251 to try and rescue $250. That'd be missing the forest for the trees.

If some people stand to recover thousands (I honestly don't know the extent of some people's investments here) by all means go forth.

#11938 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I see some people suggesting people should throw in hundreds to save $250. I'd recommend to think about it from an economics standpoint. If the marginal benefit of X is greater than the marginal cost, do X. Don't spend thousands of dollars in an attempt to regain $250. Don't even spend $251 to try and rescue $250. That'd be missing the forest for the trees.
If some people stand to recover thousands (I honestly don't know the extent of some people's investments here) by all means go forth.

since you are new member commenting on a mutiple year fiasco... well that says plenty.

You can go search all the public documents to see who the creditors are and how much. At minimum people were suckers enough to toss in 250. The majority are owed 3000-4750. I think the economincs work out

Aside from just the $$$ there is plenty of good reason to continue to go after this and fight it till the end.

Even if I was only owed $250 I would happily toss 10x that amount to ensure Kulek forever has this hanging over his worthless life.

#11939 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I see some people suggesting people should throw in hundreds to save $250. I'd recommend to think about it from an economics standpoint. If the marginal benefit of X is greater than the marginal cost, do X. Don't spend thousands of dollars in an attempt to regain $250. Don't even spend $251 to try and rescue $250. That'd be missing the forest for the trees.
If some people stand to recover thousands (I honestly don't know the extent of some people's investments here) by all means go forth.

$250 is the deposit for Dialed In.

Most people lost thousands on individual JPop games, so a few hundred at a chance to reclaim something or at least prevent Kevin from ever doing this again is just a drop in the bucket.

There are quite a lot of folks who are very bitter about this and don't care how much it costs to go after Kevin.

28
#11940 2 years ago

I'm owed the full $4750 from Kevin. I'll lose a portion of that for payment to Keith as well as the new fees on top, but to me, its worth every damn penny.

On one hand, nothing. On the other, something.

Its been said before by myself, but you guys all buy expensive toys and can afford this without even trying. The apathy surrounding this is shocking to me but this is what liars and thieves hope and prey will happen as time passes. Never let up on them for one moment. Ever.

#11941 2 years ago

well siad Russo!

#11942 2 years ago
Quoted from Russo121:

The apathy surrounding this is shocking to me but this is what liars and thieves hope and prey will happen as time passes. Never let up on them for one moment. Ever.

Same goes for "that" presidential candidate. The people hold the ultimate power.

#11943 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I see some people suggesting people should throw in hundreds to save $250. I'd recommend to think about it from an economics standpoint. If the marginal benefit of X is greater than the marginal cost, do X. Don't spend thousands of dollars in an attempt to regain $250. Don't even spend $251 to try and rescue $250. That'd be missing the forest for the trees.
If some people stand to recover thousands (I honestly don't know the extent of some people's investments here) by all means go forth.

smells like kevin's wife...

-8
#11944 2 years ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

since you are new member commenting

Because it's impossible to lurk. No way I could possibly know the history on one of pinball's many failed investments.

I don't see what everyone's problem is. I recommended not spending hundreds to try and rescue 250. I THEN recommended going in further if you're invested for thousands. As you said. You literally said the same thing I did, but insulted me, and I get -3 and you get plus 5. What a world.

Quoted from labnip:

smells like kevin's wife...

This is the FIFTH time this week I have had my identity insisted. In JUST the last week I have been Jack Guarnieri, some other Jack who runs a podcast, JPop, and now Kevin's Wife. I think you guys need new material. This is BEYOND stale.

Hint: Someone offering advice that doesn't fit 100% with your world view might actually NOT be your enemy. There are about 7.125 BILLION people on Earth

12
#11945 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

Because it's impossible to lurk.
I don't see what everyone's problem is. I recommended not spending hundreds to try and rescue 250. I THEN recommended going in further if you're invested for thousands. As you said. You literally said the same thing I did, but insulted me, and I get -3 and you get plus 5. What a world.

Screen Shot 2016-10-24 at 12.50.12 PM (resized).png

so, by lurking, you've observed how new accounts (with no avatar, no location, no anything) suddenly hop into this thread & post against the victims (in some way). and then you've observed how people respond to that.
...and from those observations, you've chosen to do exactly the same. and now you expect a different outcome?
think about it...

-7
#11946 2 years ago

I NEVER posted against any victim. I said it's not economically responsible to spend thousands of dollars to re-earn $250. I then said it IS responsible to spend a couple hundred to reclaim a thousand.

Stop twisting my words.

I literally said "if Investment < Return, then Invest". This is like Algebra 1. And you're raising pitchforks against basic math.

#11947 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I NEVER posted against any victim. I said it's not economically responsible to spend thousands of dollars to re-earn $250. I then said it IS responsible to spend a couple hundred to reclaim a thousand.
Stop twisting my words.
I literally said "if Investment < Return, then Invest". This is like Algebra 1. And you're raising pitchforks against basic math.

sounds like a supporter of Kevin to me

#11948 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I literally said "if Investment < Return, then Invest". This is like Algebra 1. And you're raising pitchforks against basic math.

Your over-simplified math explanation doesn't factor in anything other than the actual dollar value. Your equation is wrong.

-14
#11949 2 years ago

labnip, you've got the worst tunnel vision I've seen here yet. You can't even read a comment before turning around and attacking.

You clearly just want blood.

Here ya go. I have new advice based on a revised understanding of your needs. Please, I advise everyone, as an MBA with a half-finished PhD in economics. Go spend your entire life savings to attempt to regain your deposits. Regardless of the severity of the deposit, be it $250 or $100,000. Drop everything, spare no expense. I assure you it's worth your time, effort, loss of revenue, and shortened life expectancy.

I'm sorry, is that more what you wanted? Way to absolutely turn a neutral party against yourself.

#11950 2 years ago
Quoted from dotEXE:

I see some people suggesting people should throw in hundreds to save $250.

Did Kevin steal your money?

Quoted from dotEXE:

I'd recommend to think about it from an economics standpoint.

Did Kevin steal your money?

Quoted from dotEXE:

If the marginal benefit of X is greater than the marginal cost, do X.

Did Kevin steal your money?

Quoted from dotEXE:

Don't spend thousands of dollars in an attempt to regain $250.

Did Kevin tell you to make this statement/command to the victims he stole money from?

Quoted from dotEXE:

Don't even spend $251 to try and rescue $250.

Did Kevin tell you to make this statement/command to the victims he stole money from?

Quoted from dotEXE:

That'd be missing the forest for the trees.

Does insulting victims come natural for you?

Quoted from dotEXE:

If some people stand to recover thousands (I honestly don't know the extent of some people's investments here) by all means go forth.

I guess you decided not to read this thread and instead just tell victims what they should do & insult them.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
$ 279.95
$ 279.95
$ 279.95
$ 399.95
$ 279.95
$ 29.99
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Lighted Pinball Mods
From: $ 9.99
Eproms
Matt's Basement Arcade
$ 35.00
Cabinet - Decals
Bright Lights Pinball
$ 69.99
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 2.00
Playfield - Decals
Doc's Pinball Shop
$ 6,995.00
Pinball Machine
Flip N Out Pinball
There are 18269 posts in this topic. You are on page 239 of 366.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside