Nation\'s Modship
 

Admins,

Nation's ethics in relation to Poker have recently been brought up in a recent thread in the Internet Gambling forum. ( This one.)

Through his posts in the referenced thread, Nation has made quite clear his position on the issue of "One player to a hand" as it relates to online poker.

Nation apparently feels as if having multiple players to a hand online is perfectly ethical because it is not specifically stated as a violation of FTP (or other poker site) Terms of Service. I propose that having multiple players to a hand whether live or online is still violating the basic ethics of poker itself. Therefore, Nation should not be in a position to represent two plus two in any way-- in short, his position as moderator must come to an end.

Here are the pertinent quotes by nation:

[ QUOTE ]
Tiedup,

lee jones has specifically made posts in the past that say team play is allowed as per their t&c because it's unenforceable. i don't see how that makes me have bad morals.

should i stop coaching also as that's against the integrity of the game apparently? you could never coach live, but it's fine online and there are tons of people on 2p2 involved in coaching some way or the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
no. i'm following the site's t&c.

why do some sites allow PAhud and some don't? cardroom specific, yet you guys take advantage of the software when you can.

you can say that they take advantage of people by having each toher's opinion on hands; you ahve the advantage of knowledge about software like pahud.

[/ QUOTE ]



There are more posts from that thread to support this truth, but this should prove sufficient to establish "who believes what." This is also not the first time nation's ethics when it comes to poker have been questioned.

What nation feels is ethical/unethical in a non-poker sense is quite frankly none of my business. I am not claiming to have stellar ethics outside of poker myself. It is a well known fact around here that I was expelled from my University for cheating. I make no claims of being better than nation or anything like that.

That being said, nation's clearly unethical stance on poker should not and cannot serve as representative of two plus two in any capacity.

Please remove his modship.

Regards,
TIEdup14


I welcome and invite everyone with an opinion on this issue to please share your feelings in this thread. I would ask that we keep things civil, and above all remain respectful of whatever the admin decides to do (or not do) in this matter.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

Nation is fine

lol at people upset that a group can control themselves from tilting

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I don't see any reason why Nation's modship should be taken away.

This is a ridiculous thread, but I'm sure it will have 100000 responses like the other one.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

TIE,

wow man, i'm afraid you're just like, way off base and horribly wrong here.

citanul

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nation had first hand knowledge of the group and wanted to rest fears that they were bots. He's talked with them. He's seen them play. It's bad whenever players hear of bots. It was nice of him to share his first-hand knowledge, which he didn't have to do. He is now being dragged through mud for it.


[ QUOTE ]

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

simple strategy--you didn't read the guide to beating low buyin Party SNGs back in the day apparently

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nation had first hand knowledge of the group and wanted to rest fears that they were bots. He's talked with them. He's seen them play. It's bad whenever players hear of bots. It was nice of him to share his first-hand knowledge, which he didn't have to do. He is now being dragged through mud for it.


[ QUOTE ]

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

simple strategy--you didn't read the guide to beating low buyin Party SNGs back in the day apparently

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

[/ QUOTE ]
You dont see a difference between what is going on based on the information in the bot thread and what most 2p2 partake (I do also).

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

[/ QUOTE ]

Myturn2raise,

We can extrapolate this issue as far out as we want. Nation, for example, chose to extrapolate out as far as to say that using pokertracker is also unethical.

I dont particulary feel that this or your analogy is appropriate here.

This is pretty cut and dry:

1) 4 players sitting in a room having more than one person to a hand is unethical in poker.
2) nation openly supports the above statement as "ethical" (or at the very least not unethical)
3) nation should not be a mod representing 2p2 if he feels this way.


We can get into the ethics of coaching, pokerhud, and pokertracker any other day.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see any reason why Nation's modship should be taken away.

This is a ridiculous thread

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

TIE,

wow man, i'm afraid you're just like, way off base and horribly wrong here.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

Nation is fine

lol at people upset that a group can control themselves from tilting

[/ QUOTE ]


yup. completely agree.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

my understanding has been that 2p2 has always followed the ethics of the individual site T&Cs...looks like nation is doing the same.

If the continued approval of site T&Cs is the question at hand, I understand. However, Nation's modship shouldn't be questioned over this issue. He is in agreement with the rulemakers (the online sites) and the precedent of 2p2.