One Year Review as Editor

[robin lindsay]

I have two 2+2 articles under my belt now, and hope they are of some interest. Personally, I enjoy most of the magazine each month, and the stuff I don't find interesting I can see how someone else might. I also think the standard of writing is high. Bravo.

I have no interest in seeing fluff pieces and hope the focus remains on excellent analysis of poker and other gambling.

[LozColbert]

I think Dynasty has done a fantastic job.

[jfk]

It has been a very solid year.

The magazine has incubated several writers whose efforts have been turned into remarkable books (Moshman, Yao, Streib) and has had outstanding serial contributions from others who are natural candidates (Frank Jerome, Mark Gritter, Jeffage, Nate Meyvis, and I'm sure someone is getting accidentally overlooked) for producing their own titles.

The variety of strategy articles has been a major strength.

The only thing I'd change is to minimize or eliminate the "personality" type features (like the Tony G or Phil Laak pieces). The magazine doesn't have to be pure strategy, the Vegas history type contributions have been fitting, but steer away from the areas which Card Player and the other traditional magazines have oversaturated.

Really the only disappointment is that the magazine is so often overlooked as an incubator for discussion. Finding a way to stimulate discussion of the many fine articles would be a major improvement.

[ReptileHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Really the only disappointment is that the magazine is so often overlooked as an incubator for discussion. Finding a way to stimulate discussion of the many fine articles would be a major improvement.

[/ QUOTE ]

In addition to the discussion forum here, perhaps ifthe article author's started a "Discuss and review: Article XXXX" thread in the appropriate strategy forum, that would help. There's usually good discussions for books when that happens.

[robin lindsay]

[ QUOTE ]


In addition to the discussion forum here, perhaps if the article author's started a "Discuss and review: Article XXXX" thread in the appropriate strategy forum, that would help. There's usually good discussions for books when that happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps this could be done automatically, with a mini thread appearing under each article in the magazine.

[jfk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Really the only disappointment is that the magazine is so often overlooked as an incubator for discussion. Finding a way to stimulate discussion of the many fine articles would be a major improvement.

[/ QUOTE ]

In addition to the discussion forum here, perhaps ifthe article author's started a "Discuss and review: Article XXXX" thread in the appropriate strategy forum, that would help. There's usually good discussions for books when that happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be best if the discussion could happen here in the magazine forum rather than in the strat forums. Perhaps this could be done for a while with stickies (understanding that the mods have a general distaste for stickies).

The Magazine and the Magazine forum probably get a decent amount of lurker traffic. This traffic may or may not venture to the strat. forums as often as the read the magazine. The strat. forums can be implicitly unwelcoming to casual readers or lurkers as they're filled with a lot of insider type banter, jargon and low content replies.

The Magazine and Mag. forum have always struck me as being more information rich, more helpful and lower in fluff. The Mag. forum strikes me as a natural gateway to bring in other poker strategy oriented 2+2 members.

Should most of the magazine get discussed in strat forums it seems like some continuity is lost and the discussion can fall under the sway of some of the less attractive features of the 2+2 community.

[smallworld00]

I love the magazine.

[ReptileHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Should most of the magazine get discussed in strat forums it seems like some continuity is lost and the discussion can fall under the sway of some of the less attractive features of the 2+2 community.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps. I can certainly see where you're coming from. I take a more wholistic view, though. I see the magazine as an entry point into the broader 2+2 strategy discussions. One of the benefits of it to the overall site is to hook new readers and convert them into regular visitors and participants. That in turn grows the membership of the site, fosters more discussion of topics, and increases hits, thereby generating revenue.

That is, I don't view the Magazine in isolation, but rather as a key component in recruiting new site participants. It's a content-rich advertisement for the strategy discussion that can be found here.

[Mr.WeakTight]

As an author of 3 articles, I like the way I've been edited. All three articles were vastly improved after Dynasty got his paws on them.

As a reader, I like that the magazine covers the less popular games as well as the popular games. I would like to see, perhaps, one non-strategy (profile / news / interview)type article per issue.