Features
Mark Guslits: Bringing affordable housing to Canada
By GERRY POSNER The Guslits name in Winnipeg is widely known. Just scratch a little and you will strike a Guslits descendent. One such Gusilts is none other then Mark Guslits, son of Max and Shirley (Shapera). Born in 1946, raised initially on Atlantic Avenue in Winnipeg’s north end and later on Montrose Street in River Heights, Mark is now old enough to recall when Montrose had newly planted trees, no lawns and milk delivered by horse and cart, but he’s still young enough to own a farm and work with his wife on it in Picton, Ontario. To get there, however, there were a few stops along the way.
Mark grew up in what might be called blessed times and had a group of good friends including: David Cherniack, Joel Greenberg, Morey Bubis, Cliff Corman, Richard Gurevich, Mark Schacter, Joey Hershfield and later, also Don Aronovitch and Brian Morris. He attended Montrose, Robert H. Smith, River Heights and Grant Park Schools before entering the Faculty of Architecture at the University of Manitoba in 1964. As he put it, he barely “looked up” until he graduated in 1970 with a Bachelor of Architecture degree. Included in those six years was time off for travel in Europe and North Africa and work in the UK in the architect’s department of Guinness Brewery. Upon graduation, Mark moved back to England where he had more work with Guinness followed by a few years with a large London based architectural firm where he had the chance to work on the England/France Chunnel as well as Terminal 3 at Heathrow and a a large redevelopment project in Dubai. There are few Winnipeggers (as in none) who can make that statement. But likely the most significant event to occur to Mark during his England days was that he met his soon to be wife, also a Winnipegger – Carolyn Lecker(of the luminous Lecker family). They just celebrated 51 years of marriage.
In 1972, after their marriage, Mark and Carolyn moved to Vancouver and, once there, Carolyn opened a dance studio and Mark joined an architecture firm by the name of Sankey and Associates. That lasted until 1976 when the couple made the decision to return to Winnipeg. Mark joined with a former classmate of his, Eric Barker, to establish a firm called Barker and Guslits. They focussed on low income housing for the Manitoba provincial government. That focus became an integral part of Mark’s career, only in a different location. In Winnipeg, Mark and Carolyn became parents of their daughter Danielle, and not long after her birth, the family moved to Toronto where Mark began work with Harbourfront Cor-poration. Also at Harbourfront was another former Winnipegger, architect and schoolmate: Howard Cohen. Still committed to affordable housing, Mark soon joined a company called Lantana Non-Profit Homes, where he helped dozens of non-profit groups form housing co-ops. Then, in 1986, Mark teamed up with Mitchell Cohen, formerly from Regina, and Mark became a partner in the Daniels Group. This company was soon to become the largest private sector developer of affordable housing in Canada. The company was thriving until Mike Harris became Premier of Ontario and immediately stopped all social housing in the Province of Ontario.
Mark moved to the City of Toronto in 1997 to become head of housing for the City of Toronto. With his team, he built thousands of new affordable housing units. It seemed like a natural step then in 2002 for Mark to join the newly formed Toronto Community Housing (TCHC) as the Chief Development Officer. Five years later, the first phase of the 70 acre redevelopment of an inner city community known as Regent Park was completed and Mark returned to his first love, architecture, when he joined the Toronto office of HOK, a large US-based firm where he led a group responsible for the development of the Athlete’s Village for the 2015 Toronto Pan AM Summer Games.
For a large part of his career, Mark also was a teacher, first at was then Ryerson Polytechnic, later at George Brown College, and for the last eight years, at the University of Toronto – always focused on the theme of affordable housing and equable cities. This clearly is an area where Canada still struggles, and Mark was right in the mix in an area which cries out for help to this day. Guslits also consulted internationally on affordable housing in the UK, Ireland and South Africa. And, all the while, Mark Guslits has done it while dealing with mobility challenges resulting from his bout with childhood polio in Winnipeg in 1953 and a serious car accident in 1965. He walks with a limp and uses a cane now, but he still manages to scare his family daily using his electric mountain bike and scooter on the busy Toronto streets and back roads of Prince Edward County.
Mark (now semi retired) and Carolyn still retain an apartment in Toronto, but they live for the most part in Prince Edward County, 3 hours east of Toronto, where Carolyn tends to 23 beautiful gardens, also where she conducts workshops and holds concerts and art shows. They now have two grandchildren, Molly, 12, ands Zoey, 8, who live not far away with Mark and Carolyn’s daughter Danielle and son-in-law Dave. Mark and Carolyn are quite the package in the county, I say, and if you don’t believe me, come and check them out for yourself in person or on the web at wwwblackwalnutgardens.ca
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
