Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]

Yeah okay Ive changed my mind, Im definitely in favor of a split. Look at the front page, its ridiculous. The interesting hands get buried way too fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a bad reason. This will continue to occur with split forums, but merely at a slower rate. In fact, in the lower stakes forum it will happen at a similar rate.

If hands moving to page 2+ is the reason discussion is supposedly "down" then we have greater collective problems than there not being a split. Again, I am opposed to the split for mostly selfish reasons, but I also have not seen any rationale besides "too lazy to click".

FWIW, I'm lazy too...

[curtains]

I dunno, I just think itd be interesting and would be nice if there is a chance certain posters will post more.

[Gobgogbog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yeah okay Ive changed my mind, Im definitely in favor of a split. Look at the front page, its ridiculous. The interesting hands get buried way too fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a bad reason. This will continue to occur with split forums, but merely at a slower rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm confused. Are you saying the interesting hands will get buried way too fast at a slower rat?

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yeah okay Ive changed my mind, Im definitely in favor of a split. Look at the front page, its ridiculous. The interesting hands get buried way too fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a bad reason. This will continue to occur with split forums, but merely at a slower rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm confused. Are you saying the interesting hands will get buried way too fast at a slower rat?

[/ QUOTE ]

All I am saying is that if people do not respond overwhelming to the interesting hands now, what about split forums will cure this? It was a merely a way of saying that "what appears on page 1" is not a great reason to split a forum in two. I don't think hands getting "buried" is the reason they are not getting replys.

Am I crazy to think this? I mean, I am really surprised at the vote tally and would be surprised if it really reflected the core of the forum.

[durron597]

Just got a PM from Mat, no matter what is decided there is no way a split will happen for at least 2 weeks due to an upcoming forum upgrade.

[curtains]

2 weeks is not that long a time...

[Blarg]

LOL the social posts seem relentlessly to come from the higher stakes players, some of whom make no other posts. There's no way they're staying in the low area. They're coming with the high stakes players because they're the ones that make them.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL the social posts seem relentlessly to come from the higher stakes players, some of whom make no other posts. There's no way they're staying in the low area. They're coming with the high stakes players because they're the ones that make them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unlike many of you nOObs, I've been on the Internet since the beginning.

I've seens forums like this come and go over the years, and inevitably forums migrate from primarily content-based to primarily social-based because, as a poster on another forum once said, "We said everything there was to say about XXX (the topic of the forum) a couple of years ago. Now we just hang out."

I think for a while I was a reasonably well-respected poster. Replying to posts was a way for me to clarify my thoughts, learn something new if I was wrong about something, and help serious players trying to improve.

But now I feel like I have most of the strategy down cold, and I've largely stopped responding to low-stakes strategy posts because I can only say "Bet out, fold to any significant heat" so many times before my head explodes. Although I'll occasionally grab a post that nobody else has responded to.

So the point of all this is that the social-based nature of the forum will continue and probably grow because SNGs are very well understood at this point and the group as a whole has pretty much said everything there is to say about them. Regardless of whether you split the forum or not.

[jb9]

[ QUOTE ]
But now I feel like I have most of the strategy down cold, and I've largely stopped responding to low-stakes strategy posts because I can only say "Bet out, fold to any significant heat" so many times before my head explodes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I voted yes so that people who feel like this (and some day I hope to feel like this) will have somewhere else to go, although I confess that the thought of another entry on that left hand navigation bar depresses me (what font size is that? 6 point?).

I think in order to keep the forum discussions actively about STTs, there needs to be a fairly regular influx of new, inexperienced players that will ask the same questions we all asked when we started. Some of these players will eventually become very good and may contribute significantly to everyone's understanding of the game or create some new software tool that benefits everyone.

But they need a place to come to ask if they should fold KK to a raise and a re-raise preflop at the 11s. True, they could use the search engine, but (1) it sucks, (2) by the time they figure out how to use it they will know the answer, and (3) sometimes people get tired of just reading stuff and want to get actively involved so they ask the best question they can think of. Sometimes asking that question is more important than the answer to the question -- it's what changes lurkers into contributors.

There are much worse crimes against a strategy forum than posting a simple question, so I don't think the answer to too much clutter is to discourage new players from posting their thoughts. If there are enough high stakes players to support another forum, then I see no reason not to give it a chance (except of course for what it will do to the font size of the navigation bar).

[ZeeJustin]

I'm done. The results clearly show that posters here want a split. I've made my arguments, and I refuse to waste my time arguing with people that would rather take cheap shots than actually respond to my arguments.