[npc]

[ QUOTE ]
What I care about is getting people to realize that the subject of poker allows people to portray an expertise they don't have.

[/ QUOTE ]

This a true statement, but it's also true of a large number of fields. Poker isn't exclusive in this regard. I know you know this as well. Poker isn't even rare in this regard.

[ QUOTE ]

Competent writers in other fields know that the charlatans will be quickly "outed" and in fact most of these mediocrites won't even attempt to enter the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. The world of sports reporting, IMHO, is primarily occupied by charlatans. Business writing is filled with idiots who appear to be experts but really know very little. Even a "harder" field such as information technology is filled with methods and advice that is demonstrably wrong. Very rarely are the people who say silly things in these fields called on it in situations that matter much more than this Jones example.

[ QUOTE ]
Not so in poker. It amazes me that all readers who are trying to win money are not avidly interested in knowing whose writngs are usually trustworthy and whose aren't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel the same sense of confusion as you, and I also feel the same way about the other fields that I mentioned. This is human nature. I applaud your efforts to educate the public. I have no argument with the substance of your response. I think you would do your cause and personal reputation some good if you were to write your response using a different tone. Maybe you don't care about this stuff, but the audience you're trying to reach does. The best educators take this into account.