Announcement: Minor Changes for how things are done around here.

Ste05

Hectorjelly wrote:

The Solsjaers banning was a good example, yes he was technically in the wrong, but he wasnt insulting anyone, and taking the thread slightly off topic isnt going to do anyone any harm. Is his banning going to have a positive or negative effect? Some of the more interesting threads and conversations develop when things go slightly off topic.

I wasn't planning on defending the Solksjaer banning, as I thought it was pretty clear in the thread why it was done.

I can't even remember how many threads have been derailed by that same topic of discussion by now, so I asked people to remain on topic as nothing can really develop from that post that hasn't already been said. I even pointed them to the thread (the BBV) where that exact discussion was going on and where people could say what they wanted.

What's the point of moderators at all if when one of us ask people to stay on topic that is immediately ignored, so again I gave a Formal Warning. When this was ignored again, I was left with no option.

The only reason I am defending those actions here and now is because so far both 5Starpool and now Lafortezza have had to defend my actions, and I don't want to put them in an awkward situation.

Ste05

Hectorjelly

I dont think you need to defend it Ste, by the rules you were clearly right and I suppose he was asking for it. It was probably a bad example to bring up.

My only point though was that Ive felt a few times that lockings have stopped an interesting discussion, ive rarely felt wow, I wish this thread was locked. Ive never been a mod, or ever want to be, and I appreciate the work you all do. Im just campaigning for some leniency!

bops

a bit of leniency wouldn't go astray with the likes of Smurph & Solksjear, the are quality & respected posters in my opinion and good for the community. everyone knows that the ones who should be banned are the noobs who obviously only post to fk things up - its a clear as day!!

i feel like i'm walking on eggshells now and therefore my posts (in quality & quantity) have been affected.

i completely understand why the above 2 were banned - i just don't like the fact that it has all come to this

i also believe that doing the high content spit won't help this one bit - if i was one of 'em i'd target this area - sure that's what they want - to piss ye guys off!!

anyways have a good weekend all, i'm off to win a poker tourney!!

5starpool

There is leniancy applied to good/regular posters at times, but you cannot basically spit in someones eye and get away with it.

a147pro

Can someone explain 'low content' for me please? I find that phrase and 'well respected posters' a little anti-democratic and anathema to what internet posting sites are all about.

I haven't perceived a problem with posts, though I only pop in and out. I have perceived an increase in people calling threads low content for the purpose of making themselves look 'above' such threads. I have also perceived an increase in Mod hyperactivity.

Perhaps a rule might be you're not allowed post in a thread you're not interested in, or consider it 'low content' might be appropriate?

just my 2 cent

califano

a147pro wrote:

have perceived an increase in people calling threads low content for the purpose of making themselves look 'above' such threads.

You perceive it the wrong way altogether. They are actually being humble by putting 'Low content' in the title. Its like warning people in advance to be careful not to sully their eyes with such an ordinary post they are about to witness if they choose to read. At least thats the way i interpret 'Low Content'.

Goodluck2me

5starpool wrote:

you cannot basically spit in someones eye and get away with it.

i really wanted to write a smart assed answer but ive the feeling this isnt the thread to do it...

Anyway yeah smahin job, although Dom id appreciate any progress on that mission we discussed in the fitz.

a147pro

rounders123 wrote:

You perceive it the wrong way altogether. They are actually being humble by putting 'Low content' in the title. Its like warning people in advance to be careful not to sully their eyes with such an ordinary post they are about to witness if they choose to read. At least thats the way i interpret 'Low Content'.

No I meant people calling other people's threads low content, not posters titling their own threads low content.

There was a concern expressed here recently that new visitors coming into the forum would be turned off by getting slagged about their lack of knowledge of the game. TBH I think they'd find it quite funny that people are prefacing their threads 'low content'. It all seems a little bit anal?

I never read the suggested high content sub-forum thread but realise now that it woulld be a good idea. There are obviously a group of core posters, who in fairness make the Poker forum what it is, who want to have a particular focus, without interruption from other crap. The sub-forum propoasal sounds better than 'low content' threads, though I suppose the rest of us would lose the benefit of seeing the better theory based posts then.

Anyway its probably not the end of the world I suppose

Ardent

The poker forum has been up it's own arse for some time now. These latest changes will only serve to promote lurking rather than contributing IMO.

Lafortezza

Ardent wrote:

The poker forum has been up it's own arse for some time now. These latest changes will only serve to promote lurking rather than contributing IMO.

Care to make some suggestions for improvement?

luckylucky

I really can't see what all the criticism of the mods is about here, jeez they're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't. As far as I can see it's not a crackdown on newbies, beginners, banter or even the odd drunken nonsensical comment etc.

It's just a crackdown on disruptive posters, some posters are clearly either deranged or as I said in my other post deliberately taking the complete p1ss. It's obvious who these people are, it's quite funny really... it reminds me of some lunatic on a bus, everyone is afraid to look at them or in this case address them in case of drawing them on you

Ardent

lafortezza wrote:

Care to make some suggestions for improvement?

Yeah, don't alienate people, particularly newcomers.

If you really want to label/file everything, why not:

1) create a "Hand Discussion/Theory" sub-forum
2) create an "Online Poker" sub-forum where folks can discuss online sites and fanboys can laud the online pros
3) move questions about Vegas etc to the "Poker & Tournaments" sub-forum
4) maybe create a sub-forum called "Newcomers" or whatever with stickies that explains the basics, rulings, bankroll management etc and contains archived classic posts from the main forum

Keep the main forum for stuff like "Recommend a book", "In the Well With.../Deconstructing...", etc.

If you're going to put so much proposed effort into vetting all threads and determining which are "bad threads", all of the above should be no problem for you.

Oh, and...
5) Create a sub-forum for Marq where he post "move up levels" and "why do we need a thread on this" to this heart's content.

insafehands

Ardent wrote:

Yeah, don't alienate people, particularly newcomers.

If you really want to label/file everything, why not:

1) create a "Hand Discussion/Theory" sub-forum
2) create an "Online Poker" sub-forum where folks can discuss online sites and fanboys can laud the online pros
3) move questions about Vegas etc to the "Poker & Tournaments" sub-forum
4) maybe create a sub-forum called "Newcomers" or whatever with stickies that explains the basics, rulings, bankroll management etc and contains archived classic posts from the main forum

Keep the main forum for stuff like "Recommend a book", "In the Well With.../Deconstructing...", etc.

If you're going to put so much proposed effort into vetting all threads and determining which are "bad threads", all of the above should be no problem for you.

Oh, and...
5) Create a sub-forum for Marq where he post "move up levels" and "why do we need a thread on this" to this heart's content.

I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Chucky the tree

Ardent wrote:

Yeah, don't alienate people, particularly newcomers.

If you really want to label/file everything, why not:

1) create a "Hand Discussion/Theory" sub-forum
2) create an "Online Poker" sub-forum where folks can discuss online sites and fanboys can laud the online pros
3) move questions about Vegas etc to the "Poker & Tournaments" sub-forum
4) maybe create a sub-forum called "Newcomers" or whatever with stickies that explains the basics, rulings, bankroll management etc and contains archived classic posts from the main forum

Keep the main forum for stuff like "Recommend a book", "In the Well With.../Deconstructing...", etc.

If you're going to put so much proposed effort into vetting all threads and determining which are "bad threads", all of the above should be no problem for you.

Oh, and...
5) Create a sub-forum for Marq where he post "move up levels" and "why do we need a thread on this" to this heart's content.

I think every new thread should have its own sub-forum.

insafehands

Chucky the tree wrote:

I think every new thread should have its own sub-forum.

BAN HIM!

jimmii

And maybe an NVG style thread for everyone who wants to post about what is going on at FTP.

a147pro

Ardent wrote:

Yeah, don't alienate people, particularly newcomers.

If you really want to label/file everything, why not:

1) create a "Hand Discussion/Theory" sub-forum
2) create an "Online Poker" sub-forum where folks can discuss online sites and fanboys can laud the online pros
3) move questions about Vegas etc to the "Poker & Tournaments" sub-forum
4) maybe create a sub-forum called "Newcomers" or whatever with stickies that explains the basics, rulings, bankroll management etc and contains archived classic posts from the main forum

Keep the main forum for stuff like "Recommend a book", "In the Well With.../Deconstructing...", etc.

If you're going to put so much proposed effort into vetting all threads and determining which are "bad threads", all of the above should be no problem for you.

Oh, and...
5) Create a sub-forum for Marq where he post "move up levels" and "why do we need a thread on this" to this heart's content.

I think they are all sensible proposals TBH. My only concern is that you wouldn't be immediately aware of what was going on in the sub-forums. Could
the 'top three' threads in each sub-forum appear on the main screen?

Personally one of among the most enjoyable things on this forum are the funny one-liners (including move up levels) and the handbags that tend to come out from time to time. That's entertainment.

Hitman Actual

Ardent wrote:

Yeah, don't alienate people, particularly newcomers.

If you really want to label/file everything, why not:

1) create a "Hand Discussion/Theory" sub-forum
2) create an "Online Poker" sub-forum where folks can discuss online sites and fanboys can laud the online pros
3) move questions about Vegas etc to the "Poker & Tournaments" sub-forum
4) maybe create a sub-forum called "Newcomers" or whatever with stickies that explains the basics, rulings, bankroll management etc and contains archived classic posts from the main forum

Keep the main forum for stuff like "Recommend a book", "In the Well With.../Deconstructing...", etc.

If you're going to put so much proposed effort into vetting all threads and determining which are "bad threads", all of the above should be no problem for you.

Oh, and...
5) Create a sub-forum for Marq where he post "move up levels" and "why do we need a thread on this" to this heart's content.

The problem is that:

a) The poker forum isn't big enough for loads of sub-fora, and

b) Having sub-fora granted is a tough task in itself, if I understand the process correctly. We're having enough trouble getting one sub-forum as it is (the "High Content" one).

luckylucky has it about right, the new measures are just trying to improve the signal-to-noise ratio, and to clamp down on the obvious fcuking idiots who pop in and out on occasion, but don't add anything of value.

Also, there seems to be a mis-understanding of what any High Content sub-forum would be about, so anyone who's unclear should read back through the original threads.

phantom_lord

if there's apparently so many lurkers afraid/discouraged to post here(?), maybe we should get a newbie forum as well, throw up some simple guides and sticky's or w/e and they can post simple questions or hands that they wouldn't post normally.

califano

phantom_lord wrote:

if there's apparently so many lurkers afraid/discouraged to post here(?), maybe we should get a newbie forum as well, throw up some simple guides and sticky's or w/e and they can post simple questions or hands that they wouldn't post normally.

They remain lurkers by choice. This wont really help them come aboard. Most of them would be posting no problem if they didnt have to go to the bother of signing up and veryfying an email address. This bother is the real reason they stay lurkers imo.

phantom_lord

There were a few posts about lurkers not posting due to them perceiving the regs as elitists, I'm just throwing out the idea for that crowd, maybe a nice friendly beginners forum with some helpful stickies and stuff would alleviate that problem somewhat?

maybe have so that all <.5/1 hands or something go in there, and other simple hand questions too.


btw that whole accusation of the forum being a clique, newbie unfriendly/elitist etc, has been around for a long time, I remember big debates on it when I first started reading here.

Goodluck2me

but you are presuming however that all of the lurkers are beginners PL, some im pretty sure are very good players with worthwhile things to say they just dont want to put their heads on the line.

phantom_lord

goodluck2me wrote:

but you are presuming however that all of the lurkers are beginners PL, some im pretty sure are very good players with worthwhile things to say they just dont want to put their heads on the line.

i'm sure there is some good players who lurk here, but i think the majority of them are beginners, and i was just throwing out an idea for them. doubt much can be done to encourage other people to contribute, it's their choice.

Goodluck2me

phantom_lord wrote:

i'm sure there is some good players who lurk here, but i think the majority of them are beginners, and i was just throwing out an idea for them. doubt much can be done to encourage other people to contribute, it's their choice those scroungin bastards taking our advice and not giving any back, enter the cauldron, the valley of fear, for your day is nigh.

very poetic but maybe a little OTT? yeah i agree over 90% are beginners, but we want the extra 10% the fuzzs, roblacys etc to contribute more. i also agree its hard to find a way to encourage them

DeVore

"Well respected posters" tends to mean people who are clearly mature in their postings, unselfish with help/advice and have been around the block rather then players who are massive winners at the game. Basically they are listened to because of their nondickheadedness.
I think I just invented a word.

DeV.

RoundTower

DeVore wrote:

"Well respected posters" tends to mean people who are clearly mature in their postings, unselfish with help/advice and have been around the block rather then players who are massive winners at the game. Basically they are listened to because of their nondickheadedness.
I think I just invented a word.

DeV.

I'm none of those things but people still want to hear what I have to say, would I be allowed post in the well respected posters' area?

DeVore

Sorry, you mistake me. I have no intention of setting up a "well respected players only" area. Its not my style at all. I was just explaining that its possible to be well respected while not having money finishes in the WSOP and vice versa.


DeV.

Solksjaer

5starpool wrote:

There is leniancy applied to good/regular posters at times, but you cannot basically spit in someones eye and get away with it.

MODS was correct But.........

Firstly,

The ban that was administered was 100% correct in that. He said 'don't reply in this thread' and I did.
I said ok 'go ahead' and he banned me. It's hardly a 'SPIT IN SOMEONE EYE' (LOL) nor was it 'AN ARGUMENT' as suggested.
It was a simple I'm going to ban you and a simple go ahead.....
ALSO, the ban was not for POSTING OFF TOPIC or FOR RANTING . Once again it was 100% correct in it's logic...


Secodly
The thread was marked LOW CONTENT, so why pick on that one out of the many.


THIRDLY.
MY post that the MOD reacted to with big bad capitals was actually ON TOPIC so his post there was a bit shoolmastery but again no biggie.



And FINALLY,
I don't think the MOD has to defend himself if he issues a ban, this one was 100% merited and accepted, As LAF said it's not the end of the world, I for one can live with being banned from a poker site (no biggie) so it's not a problem. Also I do think the mods do a good job in general here so I'm not complaining , just putting forward, the ACTUAL LOGIC of what happened, rather than the clouded one that some MODs felt they needed to portray.
IMHO the WARNING post was completely out of order but the BANNING was not.

I think Eksors way of banning is the best, no real explanation just a fk off messing with my forum, you are banned.
That's probably the way to do it....warnings are for girls...



Love and peace to you all.


PS Dev is a luckbox :-) nice result though.

mewso

I think the mods need to move more threads into the Tournament/Events sub-forum. I also think alot of discussion on how to improve things should concentrate less on the need for a sub-forum and more on how to do things without a sub-forum as it's very difficult to get one. If we do great but for now I think the problem may be dealing with the way things are.

There have been several threads I thought should have been moved into the tourney sub-forum. Stuff about Irish players winning events, big names playing on Full Tilt etc. should have been moved without so much as a word imo.

Other than that things 'aint that bad. Mods I highly recommend retirement. Very relaxing.

mewso

Doc Farrell wrote:

please ask Derek the Clamper to spot capitalizing all his words, that does wear me out.

Yeah because we want a tally by the end of the day. Whoops off topic.