Posts Tagged ‘gambling’

Can You Really Get to Graton Resort & Casino in 43 Minutes? I Think Not, I Cry Foul – Also, Bad Reviews on Yelp

Tuesday, January 21st, 2014

This big sign is at the corner of Fell and Divisadero. It promises a quick 43 minute trip up to Rohnert Park from the “Bay.”

See?

Click to expand

And yet, Google Maps has the journey at one hour.

Even if you choose the Golden Gate Bridge as your starting point, the trip will take more than 43 minutes.

(Perhaps the Graton people think you own a Suzuki Hayabusa or Honda CBR1100XX Super Blackbird or something.)

To add injury to insult, the place sucks, apparently.

“Every bit as bad as the previous reviews, maybe even worse.  Place already stinks of smoke, no comps, mediocre food and watered down drinks way overpriced to go with crappy service, ridiculous “dress code”, rude and patronizing “security”, tightest slots / worst blackjack odds anywhere in N. Cal.  I wouldn’t go back to this place if you paid me.

Oh, Graton Resort & Casino, will you ever win?

Forget About the Google Bus, ‘Cause the “Soogle Bus” is Almost as Good! But Don’t Read the Racist Yelp Reviews

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

Here it is, as promised, the Soogle Bus:

Click to expand

But uh oh, here’s what you’ll find these days on the Yelp:

“I’ve never even been on one of their buses, but I observed one of their drivers this evening on Hawthorne Street driving aggressively, honking the horn continuously at the car in front of him and overall behaving like a jerk.

“Although the shuttle and driver were booked for 8 hours, the shuttle driver refused to drive at points of the evening! At the end of the night, the driver tried to ask for more money than was agreed upon based on an old quote the company had given. I had to pull out my laptop to show him the email that his boss had sent me to prove that I did not need to pay him more.”

“Horrible.  This is NOT a real travel/ tour service. They constantly ask for more money and CASH. They are disrespectful and RUDE. They throw litter around, and stand around and smoke. They speak almost no English.”

And that doesn’t include the reviews what were taken down or the ones currently on the “filtered” page.

Poor Soogle!

Finally, Corruption in Chinatown that Rose Pak has Nothing to Do With – 1885 Map: “White Prostitution, Chinese Prostitution”

Friday, December 16th, 2011

It’s Farwell’s Map of Chinatown in San Francisco (1885) by way of The BIGMAPBLOG.

Here’s Grant Avenue and Pacific, which then, as now, is just to the west of Columbus, which you can see in the lower right corner:

Click to expand

Here’s your legend:

        CREAM: “General Chinese Occupancy” 
        SALMON: “Chinese Gambling Houses” 
        GREEN: “Chinese Prostitution” 
        YELLOW: “Chinese Opium Resorts” 
        RED: “Chinese Joss Houses” 
        BLUE: “White Prostitution” 

People were very direct back in the day, non? 

Oh, hey, speaking of 1880′s San Francisco, here’s what happens when you let “downtown” take over San Francisco municipal government, when you try to help legacy businesses fight back against “unfair” competition:

In the 1880s, Chinese immigrants to California faced many legal and economic hurdles, including discriminatory provisions in the California Constitution. As a result, they were excluded, either by law or by bias, from many professions. Many turned to the laundry business and in San Francisco about 89% of the laundry workers were of Chinese descent.

In 1880, the city of San Francisco passed an ordinance that persons could not operate a laundry in a wooden building without a permit from the Board of Supervisors. The ordinance conferred upon the Board of Supervisors the discretion to grant or withhold the permits. At the time, about 95% of the city’s 320 laundries were operated in wooden buildings. Approximately two-thirds of those laundries were owned by Chinese persons. Although most of the city’s wooden building laundry owners applied for a permit, none were granted to any Chinese owner, while only one out of approximately eighty non-Chinese applicants was denied a permit.

Yick Wo (益和, Pinyin: Yì Hé, Americanization: Lee Yick), who had lived in California and had operated a laundry in the same wooden building for many years and held a valid license to operate his laundry issued by the Board of Fire-Wardens, continued to operate his laundry and was convicted and fined $10.00 for violating the ordinance. He sued for a writ of habeas corpus after he was imprisoned in default for having refused to pay the fine.

The state argued that the ordinance was strictly one out of concern for safety, as laundries of the day often needed very hot stoves to boil water for laundry, and indeed laundry fires were not unknown and often resulted in the destruction of adjoining buildings as well. However, the petitioner pointed out that prior to the new ordinance, the inspection and approval of laundries in wooden buildings had been left up to fire wardens. Yick Wo’s laundry had never failed an inspection for fire safety. Moreover, the application of the prior law focused only on laundries in crowded areas of the city, while the new law was being enforced on isolated wooden buildings as well. The law also ignored other wooden buildings where fires were common—even cooking stoves posed the same risk as those used for laundries.

The Court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Matthews, found that the administration of the statute in question was discriminatory and that there was therefore no need to even consider whether the ordinance itself was lawful. Even though the Chinese laundry owners were usually not American citizens, the court ruled they were still entitled to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Matthews also noted that the court had previously ruled that it was acceptable to hold administrators of the law liable when they abused their authority. He denounced the law as a blatant attempt to exclude Chinese from the laundry trade in San Francisco, and the court struck down the law, ordering dismissal of all charges against other laundry owners who had been jailed.

Yick Wo totally pwned corrupt San Francisco government back in the day. (Shortly after, we went in a different direction. “Separate but equal” came along and kind of messed things up, but anyway.)

Thanks for the map, Big Map Blog!

Attorney General Jerry Browns Allows You to Ban Yourself from CA Card Rooms

Friday, August 13th, 2010

Now, normally, this would be yet another edition of Jerry Brown Throws Down and I’d already be telling you just exactly what he can’t abide. But I don’t know, he’s not really throwing down on this one. 

Anyway, get all the deets of California’s official anti-gambling Self Exclusion Program below. It used to be run old school, but now the joint is going online – that’s the news of the day.

El Protector de los Jugadores, Jerry Brown:

via Thomas Hawk 

Brown Introduces State-of-the-Art Technology to Help California Gambling Addicts Help Themselves

SACRAMENTO – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today unveiled an innovative, web-based computer program for all of California’s licensed cardrooms that is intended to help addicted gamblers break “their spiral of debt and addiction” by allowing them to voluntarily exclude themselves from gambling establishments.

“This system serves as a safety net for gambling addicts fighting to end their spiral of debt and addiction,” Brown said. “These are people who have chosen to help themselves, and we’ll assist them in keeping their pledges not to gamble.”

An estimated one million Californians suffer from problem or pathological gambling, and more than 1,000 of them have signed up for the Attorney General’s Self Exclusion Program, which allows problem gamblers to voluntarily exclude themselves from licensed cardrooms. So far, the program applies only to card rooms and not to the California lottery, tribal casinos or horse racing, but if the cardroom program is successful, it can be expanded.

To join the Self Exclusion Program, a problem gambler fills out a form, has it notarized, attaches a photograph and chooses to be excluded for one year, five years or his or her lifetime. The Self Exclusion form can be found at http://ag.ca.gov/gambling/exclusion_self.php

Of the 1,009 gamblers voluntarily on the list, 285 are for one-year terms, 196 are on for five- years, and 528 signed up for lifetime terms. Options are offered because some patrons are trying to learn to gamble responsibly while others are pathological or compulsive gamblers.

All the deets, after the jump.

(more…)