I believe every lie you tell me

This could go in the general/general section but it relates to Poker Prodigy's "Rate this player" thread below.


I don't understand why anyone would say they don't believe a post or part of a post. I could understand not believing something. But after that, the choices are:


1) Reply to the post as if it were true.


2) Not reply.


3) Reply, and say "I don't believe you."


What is gained by #3?


Tommy

What is gained by #3?


An RGP admission pass?

nt

Liberals believe if you love the liars they will stop lying, and there is some truth to that. Conservatives believe that if you expose the liars they will stop lying, and there is some truth to that.


Exposing them is more fun.


- Louie

Great post!


"Liberals believe if you love the liars they will stop lying, ..."


Not quite. The purpose of the loving is not to get them to stop lying. To-each-his-own, remember?


"Conservatives believe that if you expose the liars they will stop lying,"


I don't think that's their reason either, but then, I can't speak with first hand experience of that mindset. My guess is that they do it simply because:


"Exposing them is more fun."


I don't doubt that it's fun. But it's tough on us bleeding hearts to watch it.


Tommy

If I told you that even I don't fold enough, would you believe me?


You shouldn't.

It happened...and he called just to pull the "double angle." Believe or don't believe it people. What do I care?

Tommy


You have some good points here.


on #1, responding as if it were true...


if it makes sense, there is no need to question it. no one here actually SEES any of these hands being played, so as far as we are all concerned, we are pretty much responding to EVERYTHING as if it were hypothetical. No problem there, even if you changed a couple details. Sometimes that makes for a better post, and the purpose is to stimulate debate, not to call someone on a minor technicality.


On #3, exposing falsehoods...


This should be done only when it is clear that there is something awry. For instance, if the action does not make sense, i.e. it is apparent that the poster made a mistake in recalling the hand, this is not necessarily a big deal. It can be pointed out in a nice way, and usually the poster corrects the error. I have mistated things now and then, and when someone corrects me, I usually just post a correction, and have no problem with it.


However, sometimes a post might get put up that is clearly total bull-pucky. For instance, this hand I played recently in the bellagio 30-60 game...


I raised UTG with AA and Mason reraised. Ray called the reraise cold and Sklansky four-bet from the button. We took the flop four handed. The flop was A A 6. I bet and Mason raised. Ray cold called again and Dave three-bet. I four-bet and Mason called. Ray folded 22 face up and Dave called. Three handed. The turn was the 6c. I bet and Mason raised, Dave reraised and I capped again, both called. River was the 9d. I bet and Mason raised, Dave reraised and I capped, both called. Mason had 66 and Dave had 99. I won a gigantic pot!


Clearly this is Bull-Pucky. The moron that wrote this crap deserves to be exposed, then chastized and cast out of the club. Oh, wait, that moron was me! Ignore this paragraph...


At any rate, even if you catch something that is clearly wrong in someone else's post, you can point it out in a nice way. I think you were more concerned with "exposing" someone in a negative and embarrassing way to them, and I fully understand that this is not a good way to promote debate on the forums.


Dave in Cali