Recommendations For 2+2 Magazine

[Jman28]

Hi everyone,

I really enjoyed the first issue, and I'm looking foreward to the ones that will follow. I just had a couple thoughts.

The format isn't great to read. If the background was white or it could be put in a printer friendly format, I'd enjoy it more.

I think that people should nominate great posts they've read for the magazine. I've certainly read posts here that are magazine-worthy and I'm sure the author of them would be happy to have his/her post published. Maybe give them a chance to put their post in article form if you want to publish it.

Have a sample hand posted every month. Then have people send in their line of thinking for it and how they'd play it and publish the best three or four thought processes (in your opinion) in next months article. Maybe have a small prize for the ones who make it.

I guess that's all I got right now. Anyone have any thoughts?

-Jman28

[DOMIT]

Wonderful to see the online mag up and going [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

While I am enjoying the magazine, there were a couple thoughts I had on readability and navigation:

- Within an article, you only have links for "previous" and "next". A link to "Table of Contents" would be convenient if I didn't necessarily want to view the next article and/or have to step through them to get where I wanted.

- I understand that you're going to put ads within the articles, that's how you support what you're doing. However, is it possible to have ads that don't flash within the article? It makes it difficult to focus on the reading.

These may seem nit-picky, but Two+Two has done so much for me as a poker player, I want to see this magazine successful.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
A link to "Table of Contents" would be convenient if I didn't necessarily want to view the next article and/or have to step through them to get where I wanted.


[/ QUOTE ]
On the green sidebar (which appears to the left of all content on the website, including magazine articles), you can click the "magazine" link at the top to go to the table of contents.

[MicroBob]

Obviously all of the great posts are available in the archives...but they are mixed in with all of the lousy posts too and it's not like every single great-post that is a 'must-read' has a yellow-star on it or something.


Illunious did a good job seperating out which threads on 2+2 are of a superior quality though.


On BJ21.com (the 2+2 for blackjack card-counters) they would pay $100 (I think) to whoever had the top Post of the Month (or POTM).
It was selected by Stanford Wong.
At the end of the month he would say which 2 posts caught his attention and would accept other nominations as well.
In the thread there would many confirmations that such-and-such post was clearly the best. Usually there was a very strong consensus on which post was the best one.

But the decision was still pretty much up to Stanford.

They were typically judged on whether they said anything new and/or meaningful to further the understanding or dialogue regarding the math in advantage BJ playing.

Many of the POTM's went fairly deep into the math and probabilities, etc etc and would make my head spin. But if Stanford was impressed enough with it to make it POTM then I knew I would be wise to slow-down and try to absorb the stuff that I would normally not waste my time trying to rub enough brain-cells together to figure out.

In the archives at BJ21 is the list of ALL of the POTM's and they are really terrific.


I think something similar to this for the 2+2 magazine might be worth consideration.

Perhaps not only choosing one post from the previous month for inclusion in the magazine....but also maybe having DS, MM or NPA write their own comments on the article/post explaining why they think the information contained within it is so correct and/or important and possibly adding examples/ideas of their own that pick up where the original writer left off.


Just an idea that I think has possibilities.
but i also think the current format of accepting articles from the bevy of talented individuals here will still make it a worthwhile read.
Lots of good content to keep me content.

[MicroBob]

I just read Peter's article.

Not sure if Mason realized that he had already posted this about a month ago.
It's good stuff....and I always enjoy Bison's ideas....even a re-run.

Evidently, there is nothing stopping someone from submitting their previous posts for the magazine.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Bob:

We're averaging close to 5,000 posts a day. So it's not possible for anyone to read that much. Thus any articles submitted are judged by their merit only and not whether they were once a post or are derived from a post.

Best wishes,
Mason

[bisonbison]

Bob,

I actually e-mailed Mason before submitting asking if it would be kosher to rework old posts for articles. He said sure. So I did.

[MicroBob]

Sounds groovy to me.
Thans for clarifying.

[Demana]

It would be very helpful if there were links to the citations in each article.

For example, in Dr. Al's article, he refers to "ruthless meritocracy" by Barry Tanenbaum.

A link to Barry's original article where he explains the term would be a great aid in understanding Al's commentary.

Yes, we could go to CardPlayer.com ourselves and then do a search, but that drives traffic to that site instead of 2+2. Perhaps direct links could be made to be beneficial to both magazines?

Thanks!

[ODB72]

A printer friendly format would be a subtle but great upgrade to the magazine.