Slotboom/Sexton

In the current issue (#14) of Poker Digest Rolf Slotboom interviews Mike Sexton. Here is what they say about us on page 69.


RS: Do you regularly visit or even contribute to Internet discussion forums and newsgroups, such as TwoPlusTwo, rec.gambling.poker (RGP), Poker Pages, and European.poker.com? If so which do you think is best and why?


Also, on RGP you can post anything you like, but on TwoPlusTwo, a lot of posts are deleted because they are deemed offensive, inappropriate, etc. In my opinion, there is a lot less unfriendliness and personal attacking on TwoPlusTwo than on RGP, maybe because of this. On the other hand, quite a few people claim that most posters who are barred from TwoPlusTwo are barred simply because they disagree with the ones who are running the forum. Do you have any opinion on this?


MS: I do go to RGP. They are an open forum whereas TwoPlusTwo censors. I think TwoPlusTwo or any other site someone owns should be able to allow whatever they or don't want on their site. It might not lead to open discussions as appear on RGP, but they certainly have the right to run their site as they see fit.


My response: Our site has clear posting guidelines that anyone can read. Click on terms and conditions at the top of the left hand column. They mean that the only posts that we delete are blantant insults, and commercial ads that appear in the posts. Even though we get accused of it, we do not delete posts that have different points of view on strategy or other subjects than those held by the Two Plus Two authors. This is easily seen by anyone who chooses to read these forums. At anytime, there are literally hundreds of posts that take positions different from what David, Ray, or myself feel is correct, and there are thousands of posts like this in our archives.


I suspect that the reason this shot appeared is because I turned down Slotboom when he contacted me to appear in this series. I noticed that he quit posting immediately after he contacted me and received my response. It might also have something to do with the fact that he was often criticized for not being very knowledgeable when it came to limit poker -- remember his folding AK out of the small blind when there was an early position raise by a solid professional.


I also suspect that Mike Sexton is not as knowledgeable about our forums as he should be.


All comments are welcome.

"All comments are welcome."


I think you're too jumpy. 2+2 is monitored. This is a fact. It's not good or bad, it's just true. No need to defend it.


I believe that you want to do well for your contributors and fans, and in that light, I think that if you spent half as much energy writing about hands as you did writing about politics, you'd have a better place here, with even better vibes than it already has.


Tommy

"I suspect that the reason this shot appeared..."


Whoa!! Well since you asked for comments I'll just say that you are being way, way, way too sensitive. If anything, Slotboom gives an endorsement of Twoplustwo. I mean, some one like Diane From Green Bay is obviously out to get you but Slotboom has never said anything bad about you and has, IMO, generated some thoughtful discussion on this web site w/o insulting anyone. Honestly Mason, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes between yourself and some of the folks you have issues with but I think you're just asking for more grief and teeth gnashing when you make a post such as yours.

I agree. Personally, I could care less about how Mason, or anyone else here for that matter, handles their interpersonal relationships with others. If you want to be an ass - then be my guest.


I happen to enjoy this forum. My only complaint is the really crappy web based format which even on a fast internet connection can be a pain the butt to navigate and is really a pain when you are trying to reply to thread and can only see the ONE message that you currently are reading. This is a pain but something I can live through.


I don't want to speak for everyone here but I'm sure I'm too off the mark when I say that the majority of us could care less about what this post says - and care even less about it's context in relation to what we all think these forums are about - which, in a nutshell is becoming better poker players. To me, this post has no relevance - whatsoever - to this and it was a waste of my time here even reading it.


The only reason I'm responding now is that I'm tired of them. The whole Abdul/Mason thing that went down a month or so ago was a disgrace - to whom or what I'm not so sure - but it was a real downer to come here and have to wade through post after post of that crap.


Honestly, I'm glad that this forum is moderated. RGP is a nightmare. While there's no doubt that there is some good info to be found there - IMO, its hardly worth wading through the spam and other trash that is posted there daily.


To sum up here - I would be just fine not seeing any crap like this anymore. I know this is a "news and views" group, but come on...

Mason,


I started reading and posting at this site several years ago back when there used to be just one forum. The reason why I come here is to learn the correct way to play poker to maximize my profits.


Furthermore, the first post that I have seen by Mike Sexton here is on the General Theory forum concerning a low ball hand in David's TPFAP that has not been addressed by anyone from the Two Plus Two staff. I think David should answer it, because I can't recall a situation where you or David has not responed to something about the books you publish.


Keep up the good work.


Good Luck


Mark

Mason,

I also want to extend my thanks to you, David and Ray for making this site possible. Some people think that RGP is a place where you have to wade through the crap to get the nuggets. I disagree, because I haven't ever found any useful poker content on that site (still visit it often for the sheer entertainment value).

I, again, have to agree that you're being too sensitive to critisism here. I understand that you're prone to be this way, given that it's your site and all the hard work that must go into it. However, I think that staying above the crap is the best way to go about it.

Personally, I think that Rolf could be a great contributor to this site, but that his absence really wouldn't kill us. Additionally, I'm sure that Mike Sexton has some solid information to share, but that he always seems to have an agenda or event to promote and that this detracts a lot from his writing.

In this particular case, it's no big deal. In the general case, staying above the fray and sticking to poker (or fishing) topics is probably the best idea.

-2d

marketing hint....


mason...advertise in cardplaer, other mags..the difference between 2+2 and rgp....


i am amazed how much better 2+2 is than other internet forums i participate in...keep up the gr8 work...gl

I agree with you on the slow ass site!!! I am connecting with a T-3 and the site still crawls!

well, if slotboom wants to bad mouth you or your forum then hes entitled to his opinion.


'a lot of posts are deleted because they are deemed offensive, inappropriate, etc.'


but obviously this is, at best, an honest mistake. (i cant remember if you are in card player, poker digest, or both). i think there should be a blurb somewhere (your column if youre in the same magazine) which explains that 'a lot' is, in this case, about x. (what, i would guess maybe 10,20 total; an average of 1 every couple of months or something; in any case, a very, very small number, definitely not 'a lot'.)


brad

Delete anything you want Mason. Except please leave the JOEYBITCH posts alone.

"They mean that the only posts that we delete are blantant insults, and commercial ads that appear in the posts."


Nobody said Abdul's "P or not P" post was insulting (even you later retracted your "insult" label), but you still deleted it. I believe you even used "penis" and "too many words" as excuses to delete some of Abduls posts.


And why was it that you banned his wife? Because you felt she was incapable of speaking for herself?


While you frequently delete "insults" from your detractors (and even ban some of them), you often fail to delete blatant insults from other posters (including yourself). A little consistency in enforcing your guidelines would be nice.


"Even though we get accused of it, we do not delete posts that have different points of view on strategy or other subjects than those held by the Two Plus Two authors."


Simple disagreement might not incur your wrath, but if someone regularly (and correctly) points out your errors, then the probability that you will ban them from this site is not insignificant.


"All comments are welcome."


...except those you so objectively deem to be insulting or advertising or risque or lengthy or...

that's are some creative poker humor. seriously.

"you often fail to delete blatant insults from other posters (including yourself). "


i'd be interested to see which posts you think are BLATANT insults. of course there are going ot be some candyasses that are insulted by every little thing. but blatant insults are a different matter. i think there is a fine line, and it's not always easy to draw it, or agree with the guy running the show. i think that overall this site is excellent, and continues to get better. this is different from saying it is perfect. but it is run by humans, so give 'em a little slack, huh?

Does anyone here really take Poker Digest seriously? I don't read it anymore. Low quality material IMO.

Here's a link to the article in question.


http://www.pokerdigest.com/archive/pdv5n14/aces.html


Mr. Slotbloom starts off okay with his questions, but about halfway through his questions take on the air of a mini-essays, turning out to be longer than Mr. Sexton's answers. The interview suddenly becomes about RS instead of MS.


Keeping that in mind I don't know if he was deliberately taking a swipe at you or not. Seems to me he's just an unskilled interviewer who ran out of things to talk about. The whole three pages are boring.


I mean, really! Do you regularly visit or even contribute to Internet discussion forums and newsgroups How mundane. Fortunately MS's answers are better than the questions asked.


Best of luck, Billy (LTL)

I have not read the entire thread yet, I have only read Mr. Malmuth's post. The reason I have not posted on TwoPlusTwo is a simple one. I have been in Vienna for the past four months, and I don't have regular Internet access over there like in Amsterdam (I have to visit Internet cafes, like regular tourists). I don't see any negativity either in my questions, in fact I have sent this EXACT same question over to you (which, for whatever reason, you chose not to answer). Later in the series, there will be a few contributors who DO speak very highly of TwoPlusTwo, so I don't see how on earth you could come to the conclusion you did (about this being a "shot"). Having said all this, you are entitled to your opinion, and of course you are still welcome to contribute to the series- in fact, I would be honored if you did.

Mr. Slotbloom, you've said you weren't taking a shot and that's fine. My personal impression, based on almost nothing, is that you are quite a sincere person.


Perhaps the misinterpretration of your motives came from the fact that rather than limiting your question to the first two sentences, it appeared you were editorialising by adding two further very lengthy...opinions?....rumours?....what? sentences.


The first paragraph, fine. The next 100 or so words were seemingly leading the subject into an area you had an opinion on.


Many journalists would have edited out their second paragraph questions entirely to make it appear MS was answering on his own volition so I somewhat admire your honesty in including it.


FWIW, the answer Mr. Sexton gave to that question was a complete dud. Not his fault, not yours. It was just a waste of the reader's time. It should have been edited out completely and replaced with something more interesting.


You going to stick around? Though I wasn't here then, it seems you caught some heat. Best of luck to you. Billy (LTL)

Here's the second paragraph of your question to Mike. I have major problems with it, especially the part that I put in bold:


Also, on RGP you can post anything you like, but on TwoPlusTwo, a lot of posts are deleted because they are deemed offensive, inappropriate, etc. In my opinion, there is a lot less unfriendliness and personal attacking on TwoPlusTwo than on RGP, maybe because of this. On the other hand, quite a few people claim that most posters who are barred from Two Plus Two are barred simply because they disagree with the ones who are running the forum. Do you have any opinion on this?


You are implying that it is common for us to delete posts that disagree with our positions on how to play poker, etc., and that everyone knows this. This is as far from the truth as you can get. (If this was the case, many of your posts which gave advice/opinions that were different from ours would have been gone.) As I stated before, we do delete insults and blantant ads.


I also want to make another point. We do not run this site as we feel like because it is our site. We have clear posting guidelines, and they govern how this site is implemented. The guidelines we use were not developed by me. They are modeled after another successful site and are used with the permission of that site.


You need to be real careful whenever you imply that there is wholesale censorship on a site based on the owners whim. And, you need to correct this error as soon as possible in a future issue of Poker Digest.


If this site was run as you implied in your article, it would not, in my opinion, have become a place of such high quality information exchange and vigorous debate. Furthermore, the vigorous debate is the vehicle that creates the high quality information that is shared by so many posters, and which has helped many people improve their games.


Rolf, when I was a lot younger, probably around your age, I spent six years working for the United States Census Bureau and learned a great deal about how to ask questions. Your question, because of its conditioning effects, would be thrown out of any questionaire. You are leading the respondent into the answer. Many people would conclude, upon hearing your question, that there must be widespread censorship on the Two Plus Two web site, and thus answer that it is a terrible site, or they would give an answer like Mike did where he stated that it is their site and they can run it any way they want. Neither answer is the case.


Hopefully you will contribute here again and find it benficial to your game. But in addition, this error needs to be corrected as soon as possible. Also, if you have asked this same question in the same manner to others in your series, you need to remove this biased material.


Finally, I do recognize that these type of errors can be made by mistake, and that it may not have been your intent to slam our site in a national magazine as you did. But others, especially those relatively new to poker, won't know this and the damage is done anyway.


Best wishes,

Mason

Mason said, "I also suspect that Mike Sexton is not as knowledgeable about our forums as he should be."


As I posted on RGP, I wouldn't argue with that at all. I haven't spent a lot of time on TwoPlusTwo and perhaps I should spend more time here. I like good discussions about poker (probably more than most) - especially when players have different opinions on how a hand should be played.


As for what I said in the article, though, I don't really see much difference in what I said about "they should be able to run their site as they see fit" and what you describe as posting guidelines. To me, they seem about the same thing.


Mike Sexton

Mike:


I probably should have said:


"I also suspect that Mike Sexton is not as knowledgeable about our forums as I would like him to be."


I think that better makes my point. With that being said, if you read my response to Rolf above, you will see that we do not run this site as we see fit or by whim. We use well established posting guidelines and we stick to them. I believe that these guidelines, and the way they govern our site, have been a major contributor to the tremendous success of www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com), and are one of the major forces behind the high quality of information exchange and vigorous debate that appears on all of these forums.


Thanks for contributing.


Best wishes,

Mason

"You are implying that it is common for us to delete posts that disagree with our positions on how to play poker, etc., and that everyone knows this."


He didn't imply this at all.


He said that "some people claim" . . .

That statement is absolutely true. Some people do claim that you delete those posts that disagree with you. They are wrong, but they do say it.

Dear Mr. Malmuth,

You are stating (quote): "You are implying that it is common for us to delete posts that disagree with our positions to play poker, etc., and that everybody knows this." This is not true. I am not implying anything; how can I imply that "everyone knows this" if the question starts with "quite a few people claim..". I can understand that it isn't good for you and / or your forum if people openly criticize TwoPlusTwo. I can understand even more that this isn't good if there's unfounded criticism. However, I am not out there to criticize TwoPlusTwo- or RGP, for that matter. I think that they both serve a function, and even though I post more often on your forum than on RGP, this doesn't necessarily mean I find TwoPlusTwo better, or RGP worse- things are not that black and white. The reason for including the question the way I did was simply to hear from some of the best poker players, authors, and casino executives their views on poker newsgroups and forums- nothing more, nothing less. I don't see what's the issue here. I mean, on RGP there is a lot more personal attacking than on TwoPlusTwo (fact), and RGP is more open than TwoPlusTwo because there is no censorship (fact). Also, your barring requirements have been discussed extensively on this forum lately in relation to specific barring cases (fact), for instance QuadNines, Mark Glover, Diane from Green Bay, Abdul Jalib. I don't see how by referring to these facts I would "lead my respondents into the answers". If I did, I must have had pretty smart respondents, because they all gave totally different answers, varying from "TwoPlusTwo rules, RGP sucks" to the exact opposite. Some were concerned with open debate, some spoke highly of TwoPlusTwo's quality of poker debate, others were completely indifferent. In this series, I also have a question regarding pot-limit Omaha. In the question, I state something like "whereas PLO is in fact a highly skillful game, a lot of people seem to think it is all luck. What are your views?". One of my respondents answered something like: "PLO highly skillful? Putting all your money in on the flop, everybody all-in and then wait to see who wins. You call this skillful?" Of course I don't want someone I think very highly of say things like this about my favorite game, but I'm still going to print it- after all, I invited him for the series because I wanted his opinion, now if this is his opinion, well so be it. But if I follow your reasoning, then by asking about the skillfulness of the game I would be leading my respondents into a specific answer, as if they cannot think for themselves. You can ask: "Who is more beautiful- Trudy or Judy?". Or you can ask: "Trudy is tall, has a great body, long blonde hairs and has been voted Miss Minnesota 2002. Judy is not as tall as Trudy and may not be as sexy, but she is very intelligent and is attractive in a more sophisticated way. Who do you think is more beautiful?" I think both lines of questioning are OK, and I think the readers of the magazine will feel the same (in fact, I would argue that the second line of questioning might help adding a bit more depth into the conversation than the "basic" first, and would make the interview more interesting for anyone who reads it). I don't think there will be even a single reader who, after reading the question you refer to, concludes that on TwoPlusTwo "there is a wholesale censorship on the site based on the owners whim". This is not how I see it, it is not the way Mr. Sexton sees it, and I think it would be impossible to conclude from the interview that any of us might have this view- so please, don't think this is what the readers would make of it.

I am simply trying to do my job as well as I can, and if people like it I'm glad and if they don't, well then I'll try to do an even better job next time. For you to start an entire thread about all these implications I supposedly have made, taking into account you could have given me your exact views on this when I posed these same questions to you, strikes me as a bit odd. Now, please let's get this over with. Maybe I was a bit wrong, or maybe you overreacted a little- there's no harm done, so let's just get back to poker again.

Regards,

Rolf.

you stated that a lot of posts are deleted and this is simply not true.


brad


p.s. diane from green bay was never asked to stop posting here and quad nines and mark glover are the same person.

For you to start an entire thread about all these implications I supposedly have made........strikes me as a bit odd


As opposed to your "thread" in a magazine read by many more people than have ever heard of this place?


Again, why not just ask your subjects their opinions on such sites as RGP or 2+2 and leave them to answer as they see fit?


A analogy would be me interviewing a poker personality and saying/asking: "Quite a few people claim Rolf Slotboom doesn't know what he's talking about with regards to poker. What's your feeling on this?"


A much more fair question to appear in print is: "What's your opinion of Rolf Slotboom's poker theory abilities"?


Best of luck to you. Billy (LTL)

Next time Slotboom interviews someone perhaps he should consult you so that you could write a script for him. After all, who wants an interviewer coming up with his own questions?

Define "a lot".


Somepeople think that one is too many but others feel that every thread with Ray Springfield in it should be deleted.


Mason does a great job of moderating these forums. But, just because some people choose to call "deletion" "censorship" it doesn't mean that Mason is doing anything improper.


Mason deletes posts. This cannot be disputed. Whether he deletes "a lot" of posts is a matter of perspective. However, the place would be more fun with Abdul here. It might not be more fun for Mason but it sure would make the poker content here more enjoyable to read. In this matter I believe that Mason is being shortsighted and spiteful. But, as has been said before, he can do as he wishes and I appreciate the efforts he makes to control the content. Sometimes censorship is not a four letter word.

Next time Slotboom interviews someone perhaps he should consult you so that you could write a script for him


I'd be more than happy to do so Mr. SammyB but let it be known - I charge a lot.


Best of luck to you. Billy(LTL)

Rolf, is RGP any better than 2+2? NO!!!


RGP sucks. As for the rest of your post, I do think Mason's ego sometime gets in the way.


Yes, I do think pot-limit and no limit are different and still require highly skilled play to

win.


I will be in Europe next month, but I don't intend

to play any poker there.

In this matter I believe that Mason is being shortsighted and spiteful.


I've heard and read this many times. What do you think we are suppose to do? The person in question put up numerous insults on these forums, and we had asked/warned him to stop on many occasions. Eventually, we have no choice but to take stronger action. Would you have handled it any differently?

Rolf,


I don't think you directly implied anything bad, but given the paragraph as a whole I can see why Mason describes your question as having a "conditioning effect," and why this is undesirable from an objective standpoint. To see why this is so, imagine that this question were indeed part of a survey. The lead-up statements do tend to put the reader in a certain frame of mind. Now imagine another survey where you ware asking the same question of Mike Sexton but without all those lead-up statements--you might instead then merely ask then what his opinions of RGP and TwoPlusTwo are, and if he has any preference of one over the other, and if so, why. You might even add a specific question regarding his opinion about some posts being deleted on TwoPlusTwo. However, by asking questions in the second manner you would not be giving the questions a certain tone or background flavor--almost a prejudice--which could easily influence some readers.


Also, you did refer to "a lot" of posts being deleted. Is it really "a lot," or is it a very small percentage--like way under one percent?


I frequently see "quick polls" on the CNN or MSNBC websites. Often the multiple choice question asked are not, in my opinion, truly conducive to generating uninfluenced responses, whether by the limited choices or by their specific wording. I don't think the creators of these "quick polls" are likely to be doing this on purpose; rather it may be the effects of the limitations of a "quick poll" and a less than meticulous approach to preparing the questions. Likewise, I don't think you did anything terrible and certainly don't think you did anything damaging on purpose, but I also do think that Mason has a valid point.

It is also possible that Mason is perhaps a bit hypersensitive to things like this, and maybe he sometimes worries more than need be about how much detrimental effect such things might have. In fact, this could conceivably exacerbate some misunderstandings or frictions with a few people over time. On the other hand, it may also be that some people who don't happen to own their own forums/publishing companies don't always stop to think just what impact their words might have before they post.

Sticks and stones.


I have plenty of customers that personally do not like me. They don't like my attitude, they don't like my sense of humor, they don't like the way I run my business. But I do have the highest quality business of this type in my area so they still choose to shop here in spite of me.


I would never ban them from my business. Not that the customer is always right, far from it, but if taking a shot at me makes them feel better while theyre spending a nice chunk of change I'm going to ignore it.


The insults from Abdul do not seem to have affected your publishing business or the popularity of the Forum.


You don't like him, he doesn't like you, well, you can't get along with everybody. Plus his insults were of a personal nature, not a slur against your abilities as a player or writer.


I think the Forums are stronger with him than without him. And if its important to you to have the absolute best Forums possible than I would invite him back and ignore his barbs. That's what I would do. Don't for a minute think I feel the same way about carson or badger. You and I have discussed this before. They don;t bring nearly the quality or entertainment to the Forum that Abdul does. We are truly better off without those two guys.

"Plus his insults were of a personal nature, not a slur against your abilities as a player or writer"


They included all of these things. They also included how we run our business in a dishohest manner and deliberately put out products of inferior quality.


"And if its important to you to have the absolute best Forums possible than I would invite him back and ignore his barbs."


We have told him that if he sticks to poker content only, he can be reinstated.

"They also included how we run our business in a dishonest manner and deliberately put out products of inferior quality."


Well, Mason, that's like someone saying that you're not a very good poker player. If someone does say that is he insulting you or simply showing his ignorance?

Sammy, obviously we could post make and forth to each other for a long time on this subject. But I will take one more stab.


People tell me I'm not a good poker player all the time. Lately, I'm beginning to agree with them. But that's very different from someone calling me a cheat. That's where I draw the line and there's a big difference here.


Best wishes,

Mason

Excellent argument. I see your point much more clearly now and I would, indeed, take the same action in your place. I apologize for the "spiteful and shortsighted" comment. Thanks for taking the time.


Sammy B.

"you will see that we do not run this site as we see fit or by whim. We use well established posting guidelines and we stick to them"


i think that means that you run the site by the guidelines that you see fit. which is what Mike said, no?


i don't disagree with how you run your site, but it IS ultimately run by you, therefore 'as you see fit'.

Baggins:


As you can see I'm following this thread.


What we did a while back was to establish clear (and fair) posting guidelines which are based on what another successful site uses. Then once established, we try to stick to them. That's different from running things on a whim where what might be okay one day is not the next. That's the point I'm trying to make where as the Slotboom article implies something very different.