Of the following, I'd rather play ...
Displaying poll results.16965 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8442 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 2546 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 9 comments
Re:Shall we play a game? (Score:3, Informative)
No love for DEFCON [introversion.co.uk]?
Grammar Narcissism (Score:3, Informative)
I'll let whomever wants to handle the swings of the table be the house
Whoever, for goodness sake! They are doing the wanting (ie whoever is the subject and thus stands in the nominative case), nor does the 'to' in the infinitive act as a preposition (in which case it would be dative and 'whom' would be most correct, though it is used in the accusative also).
"Whomever I permit to be the house" is OK, but "whoever I permit to be the house" is probably better: you are doing the permitting, and even though they are the recipients of the permission they actually stand in the accusative relative to the verb, 'permission' not being an actual indirect object here. This is the case when 'whom' is semi-right.
"Whomever it falls to to be the house": the first 'to' is the giveaway, it's dative, only 'whom' is correct old-school wise.
"Whoever wants to be the house:" 'Whom' here would be hypercorrection. It's always wrong, and sounds pretentious and uneducated all at the same time.
If you cannot grok this, simply avoid any use of 'whom' (whomever, whomsoever etc.), this vestigial (from the time English did have a case system half a millennium ago or more) form is falling out of usage anyway. In modern usage 'who' or 'whoever' are always correct.
Pet hate out of the way ... now to the content ...
In a casino, the house still gets a cut of poker games.
The rake is like a tax, you can live with it. Much like you broker's spread. OP's point is that any game in which the Casino is your counter-party is fixed against you. Having other players as your counter-parties and paying the Casino for the effort in hosting the game via a rake is more conducive to winning.
Running a good quality unraked poker game for any length of time is a labor of love.
You are not wrong there buddy!