Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

#1 07-21-2005, 09:46 PM

The Armchair · #2 07-21-2005, 09:54 PM

I think a user should need to have 100 posts before he can start a topic.

666 · #3 07-21-2005, 09:59 PM

I hate you canucks.

#4 07-21-2005, 10:04 PM

Harrington's 3rd and 4th were sooo lucky (sarcasm)
It will just require new adaptation. The best poker players will now just have to weed through fish first instead of playing mostly pros from the beginning. Just another challenge that the best will overcome.

jman220 · #5 07-21-2005, 10:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think a user should need to have 100 posts before he can start a topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whats ironic is that this user does indeed oave over 200 posts, all of them completely useless. (See King Striker).

The Armchair · #6 07-21-2005, 10:09 PM

I'm not a Canuck.

The Armchair · #7 07-21-2005, 10:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a user should need to have 100 posts before he can start a topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whats ironic is that this user does indeed oave over 200 posts, all of them completely useless. (See King Striker).

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, almost all of his posts are in threads he started. And having the account banned means you start from scratch.

nervous · #8 07-21-2005, 10:22 PM

Good poker players wouldn't risk their house/bank money that they couldn't afford to lose.

I think you are referring to an addictive gambler.

wulfheir · #9 07-21-2005, 10:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I hate you canucks.

[/ QUOTE ]
he doesn't represent all of us.

Danenania · #10 07-21-2005, 11:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think a user should need to have 100 posts before he can start a topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

This actually seems like a decent idea to me. Are there any drawbacks?