Nearing Completion of Evaluation of RS system (not)

Sorry but you are as far from impartial as it gets. You have continued to ignore fact after fact that casts a negative light on Singer. When you get answers to questions that you don't like you just ask the questions again. I find it absolutely hilarious that both you and Singer were big fans of Franks a few months ago when you thought you were going to get a favorable review of Singer's system. Now, both of you are denigrating Frank every chance you get. What a pair.

So, if you "have a good idea about what's really going on" why don't you just explain?

The truth is you've never had a clue about the math and therefore, you will NEVER have any idea about what's going on. You are just trying to save face as you took a position on Singer that was completely idiotic and you don't want to admit it.

I suggest that everybody chill out. The "evaluation" is not completed. Let's leave it at that for now.

You know, if someone went to medical school, and kept up with studies after school, even if they did not graduate, but looked at a mole and my neck and told me to go see a doctor, guess what, I'd go see a doctor.

Rob has shown Frank zero respect since he didn't do this evaluation the way he wanted Frank to do it. Remember, if Frank offers to do an evaluation in his own time, without getting paid, it's basically his choice how he does the evaluation and what he writes in his report. You or Singer don't like it? Tough luck! Frank owes you ZERO....

Singer was on top of his high horse when Frank came into this thing and said that he was going to do the evaluation. He was "the only one out there" (or at least one of the few) that was capable to do the evaluation. Those were Singer's words. Now read some of Singer's posts on your own desolate part of the www and read how he talks about Frank now this evaluation isn't going in the direction he wants/expects......

I guess this post also explains why you have been rude to Frank over here during the last days. He probably told you the painful truth. I don't know you but you could very well be a gambling addict. Newsflash, people who visit Vegas multiple times a year to gamble probably are addicts to some degree (including myself).

Rob, being suicidal? With the number of enemies he's made during the last 10 years it wouldn't surprise me. He can't stop repeating that all the bad mouthing he gets doesn't affect him but still he constantly feels the urge to read everything and repeat with a vengance. Does that sound like somebody who doesn't care?????

So, basically you are saying that you know what's going on because Singer told you what's going on? Talking about not being biased.............Maybe you should make a refreshing change in your routine: don't always immediately believe what Singer tells you because you want it to be true. I also think it is simply hilarious that you have the guts to tell RT there's no arguing with him because his mind is already made up. You've never had the balls to say something similar to Singer after his 10.000th rant about the same topic. He's never shown any flexibility towards people that don't share his opinions. But then all of a sudden, you call it freedom of speech and talk about how you don't like censorship.......RT's replies to you have been direct, no nonsense and spot on. You might not like what he's saying but that doesn't mean he's wrong.....

Now, don't feel the need to respond because I know you won't (which is totally fine). You'll read it and that's enough.

Oy. A forum of yentas.

In a recent post by Money he quoted me as having said that Rob was suicidal and that he had a gambling problem. This isn't close to my original statements. Even though I had wanted to recuse myself from this thread I fell it best I clarify these points since they are so personal and damaging if true. They are not.

As a off-handed comment I told Rob he reminded me of a guy I knew about 15 years ago that had a baccarat system, that ended up killing himself. The similarities between Rob and my acquaintance were speech patterns and mannerisms. I did not mean to imply to Rob or anyone else that Rob was suicidal because he reminded me of a guy I knew that was. He just reminded me of this guy. It would be like saying, "hey you remind me of Marilyn Monroe". Doesn't mean I expect you to have an affair with a Kennedy and wind up naked and dead in your rented LA home. For the record I do not think Rob is suicidal, nor did I ever intend to mean this. I said it in a private email to Rob and certainly never would have said anything like that in forum even if I thought it was true, WHICH I DO NOT.

The comment about Money having a gambling problem was not mine either. I had passed on to money that someone I knew thought he might have a gambling problem, based on some posts he had made that were read and taken out of context. We had a phone call about it and the issue was resolved with me satisfied that I had passed on what I was asked to pass on. I have no opinion on whether or not money has a gambling problem. I am not a licensed therapists and leave such things up to the professionals.

I hope this clears things up.

Sincerely,

Frank Kneeland

Frank,

I am so confused.

Recently, MoneyLA claims you told him that he is "an addicted gambler" and that he is in "need immediate psychiatric help" and that you also warned him that "Rob that he may be suicidal."

Yet, you state something quite different in your last message.

MoneyLA is a well known celebrity, a reporter who has interviewd 4 Presidents, and an experienced television reporter and newscaster.

You, on the other hand, are an author and former professional gambler.

So my quandry, as you can imagine is who is being most truthful. Whom should I believe is reporting the facts accurately? You, with your fancy expensive words, or the news journalist?

Well, I am not going to list the numerous reasons as to whom I choose to believe. I could spend time and include many things said by either/both of you.

But I have a small problem with that approach. I do not recall anything you've written that I found less than credible.

Sadly, with others, that is not always the case.

So, because I choose to believe your side of this issue, and what was said, Mr. Frank Kneeland, you win.

Sorry MoneyLA, but IMHO, (and I am only speaking for myself here. Others may reply with their opinions which may or may not be similar) your reputation precedes you. Your credibility is sorely lacking.

Now, Money, I am not saying that you lied in your written message. You may have written what you "remember", or chose to remember from the communications. You hear and remember only what you choose to.

But, once again, (IMHO) your version of events seems to be sorely lacking in veracity.

Credibility is a hell of a thing to have. Or lose.

Frank, I already suspected that Money didn't hear what you were saying. That has been the major irritation about Money. He hears what he wants to hear.

But, instead of withdrawing from this forum/thread, it is a good exercise in human nature.

+1. Very well said Sir.

Please folks.

I just wanted to clarify that I had not said anything negative about either Rob or Money and now people are using it as an opportunity to say negative things. Can we all just get a little holiday cheer on and be nice to one another, at least until New Years. When I post for the purpose of smoothing over conflict, and I see it turn into yet more conflict it makes my heart sink...especially this time of year when I have to face a Christmas without family.

You all know what was said now and how it came to be misquoted. Let's just move on.

This issue is at the heart of the ever closing circle that en-wraps the boundary between that which we would see and that which is. To go beyond one must journey within by looking without though eyes unencumbered. ~FK