free Nate

[luckychewy]

if 2p2's problem w/ nates argument was that they thought they would lose business or something, i think that is very silly. almost as silly as banning him. for one, most of the people that responded to the thread were actually on mason's side. obviously this doesn't mean the majority of the people who read it are as well, and possibly they do lose a few potential buyers, i don't know.

nate's argument was presented in a very clear and concise manner and while he admitted his tone came off more harsh then he had planned it too, it seemed obvious to me that he was only trying to prove his point and be taken seriously. it seems mason thought he took the argument too far and i don't know if he gave him a warning or anything before banning him, but either way it is definitely way too much of a punishment to perma-ban a very good thinker/poster over this imo.

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
That's what it started out as, I didn't see any personal attacks on Mason,

[/ QUOTE ]

This all sounds pretty personal to me. Take in to consideration that Mason is proud of 2+2 and this is his baby and if you are going to talk bad about someone's baby, you better be wearing a cup because you will get kicked in the nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the cost/benefit evaluations he's done are biased by his stubbornness and his untrained ear for the language.


Therefore I'm led to conclude that Mason just doesn't care very much about grammar or style. He doesn't seem to consider it an aspect of good bookmaking. Which puts him in the position of a poker player who doesn't care about the math.


I think Mason vastly misjudges how much of these books' overwhelming (and enduring) popularity is due to the mechanics and how much is due to the material.


EDIT: By the way, however much money you've lost by delaying production this year, I think you've lost twice as much money or more by not paying more attention to grammar and style.


Mason --

I understand you. You care a lot about the quality of your books but not enough, judging by WTHG, about grammar and style. It's not that you don't care about quality; it's that (I think) you have misguided notions of what makes a book good.


I admit that I still hope that he might come to see that he is de-emphasizing a critical aspect of his book business, and that his (very impressive) success in the industry is due to the low quality of his competition and the fact that the strategic content of his books was by far the best.


But that's the point; the issue here is that 2+2's books remain poorly edited despite years of these sorts of criticisms.

This is the worst one IMHO
The point is that anyone with an ear for the language--certainly any competent editor--could rewrite that sentence better in about half a minute. And that's true of so much of WTHG.



[/ QUOTE ]

[Ontario_Tory]

[ QUOTE ]
He put up numerous posts in the thread he started, made his point, ignored our replies and explanations, clearly has some sort axe to grind, and in his own small way was trying to damage the company. So he's now on vacation.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason - having this type of attitude / (over)reaction does much more damage to your business than Nate's words ever would.

[tuq]

Just read the thread that was linked.

My best guess is that the references to unanswered e-mails and previous history have something to do with Mason's decision, whether it was warranted or not.

I say this because the posts themselves, in a vacuum, were hardly ban-worthy. I am a grammar nit and judge accordingly. And that's just in my posts on an internet forum, certainly not something I plan to sell to others for profit.

It happens that my father is the best-selling sports author of the past decade. This has everything to do with distribution and expedience and little to do with quality of writing. That said, I've read his books and there's nary a grievous error within them.

I mention this because time is of the essence for him and he has it down to a science by which he goes from concept to completion in under a month. And yet somewhere in there he finds someone to proofread the final print and make necessary suggestions.

If Nate's bone of contention is about simple sentence structure and grammar then I think his criticism is well placed. Then again, as stated at the top there seems to be some history here and maybe that is a big factor.

[jaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
He put up numerous posts in the thread he started, made his point, ignored our replies and explanations, clearly has some sort axe to grind, and in his own small way was trying to damage the company. So he's now on vacation.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

You and I clearly read different threads. I suspect my impartiality may have tainted my reading.

J

[mason55]

wow this is ridiculous going solely by the information in that thread. i realize nate is being critical of 2p2's work but he's doing it because he feels that it can be better and wants to help. if you don't want criticisms of your books then don't put up a books and publications forum. nowhere was nate anything but polite and clear in his critique.

i own some 2p2 books - they led me to the forums long ago. more than once, though, I have flipped through a 2p2 book in the bookstore, planning to buy it, only to put it down due to a lack of clarity and grammatical correctness in the writing. it makes them look unprofessional and makes me wonder how correct the poker information is if simple grammar and sentence structure can't be done right.

-Mason

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

Mason - having this type of attitude / (over)reaction does much more damage to your business than Nate's words ever would.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes, it certainly does in my mind.

If Nate went too far in your opinion then lock the thread and say you have decided the discussion is over.
Or notify Nate that he has made his point and you would like for him to stop posting in that thread otherwise you will consider banning him.

Something like that.
I'm guessing he would have been completely willing to let it drop if you had simply requested it.

Just banning him mostly out of the blue like that seems extremely inappropriate if you truly are interested in feedback and debate about 2+2 content and quality.

I don't think there was any warning ahead of time that Nate had that he was pushing the envelope so far that he was actually about to be banned (perhaps he was warned via PM or something, not sure).
And I don't think anyone reading that thread would have seriously thought that was going to happen.

The main point however is that if you "had enough" there were several other more appropriate remedies that would have been better than just banning him like that.
And many of those remedies would cause less of a current backlash on here.

[cabbagehead7]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it certainly does in my mind.


[/ QUOTE ]

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He put up numerous posts in the thread he started, made his point, ignored our replies and explanations, clearly has some sort axe to grind, and in his own small way was trying to damage the company. So he's now on vacation.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

You and I clearly read different threads. I suspect my impartiality may have tainted my reading.

J

[/ QUOTE ]


J - I agree.

I did not see that Nate has an axe to grind. Mostly he was responding to other counter-arguments or agreements in the conituning discussion in that thread.

Someone would respond to him and he would respond back to either elaborate on his point or whatever.
This is how threads on a discussion forum work.

Someone asked him to edit that intro passage from Stox's book and he did that. Big deal. He was just responding. And he originally pointed out that sentence just to show one example of a sentence that he thought could be improved and he sure looked like he had a valid point to me.

I also completely missed the part where he ignored any of 2+2's replies or explanations.
As best I could see he addressed every one of them and did so mostly politely. Over and over again he thanked Mason or Ray for their response and also must have said a zillion times how much he enjoys and recommends 2+2's books.

So he challenged Mason to heads-up editing-duel. Big deal. Hardly the most offensive thing that has ever been said on 2+2 and definitely not ban-worthy.

I very much hope Mason reconsiders his position about this situation.

[tuq]

MicroBob,

As always, [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].