Advice to Forum

[wrkingtobegreat]

Every member should have to designate the forum (maybe the top 3) that they are most active in, that will appear when they make posts. Its is extremely confusing when you see someone with 12,000 posts posting in the poker sections whoe doesn't know much about poker and is relatively inexperienced compared to the other forums.

[_TKO_]

It's hard for me to keep track anymore. I probably have like 500 posts in small stakes limit, 1k between uNL and SSNL, 2k in OOT and others, 500 in Psych, 500 in Theory, and like 500 scattered around other places. I don't know if all this adds up.

Just realize that anyone with >5k posts probably has a large percentage of those in non-poker forums. When you see a poster you're unsure of, check his/her profile and look at the user's most recent posts. Should give you a general idea.

[Nsight7]

I think this is a ridiculous suggestion. Why should every member categorize themselves for your convenience. Fact of the matter is you should be able to discuss this stuff and figure it out for yourself. If you can't, then you probably shouldn't play poker in the first.

[ottsville]

[ QUOTE ]
Just realize that anyone with >5k posts probably has a large percentage of those in non-poker forums. When you see a poster you're unsure of, check his/her profile and look at the user's most recent posts. Should give you a general idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is going to depend on how long the poster has been a member. Someone who has been here for 3 months and has 500 posts, is probably hanging out in the zoo/oot and posting lots there.

Part of playing poker is learning to distinguish good info from bad. This also holds for finding info on the internet about anything.

[SheridanCat]

Unfortunately, post count is pretty irrelevant. There's no reason someone couldn't have 5,000 posts in strategy forums but still be a poker numbskull. Don't let the count influence how much credence you give a post.

[Small Fry]

Since when has post count ever equated to knowledge level. Making this assumption is very dangerous and short sighted.

[runout_mick]

[ QUOTE ]
Since when has post count ever equated to knowledge level. Making this assumption is very dangerous and short sighted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Truth.

As TKO pointed out, the best way to get a quick idea of a poster's relative experience is to check their last 200 posts in their profile. This isn't foolproof (The bulk of my first 1500 or so posts were in strategy forums, but I'm pretty sure my last 200 are primarily in junk forums) but it will give you an idea.

A lot of the high count posters (I didn't mention Cardcounter specifically) are trolls and should just be ignored.

[Mike Gallo]

Welcome aboard wrkingtobegreat,

Some posters have way less posts than others, yet their posts are golden.

After spending time on these forums you will come to discover whose posts to read whose to ignore and whose to take with a grain of salt.

Good luck, play well.

[Mustafa]

It's much better to judge posters by their avatars. At least you can tell who thinks they're smart or cool.

[ottsville]

[ QUOTE ]
It's much better to judge posters by their avatars. At least you can tell who thinks they're smart or cool.

[/ QUOTE ]

what does not having one say? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]