Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]


how about 1800gambler?

[/ QUOTE ]

Jay would be on my short list of people who would make a horrible mod.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

i would love to see paluka do it, but i doubt he reads enough or would want to.

i think daryn would be an excellent choice, but i expect that others might not share that opinion so i didn't even raise it in my last post. he and paluka were the first that came to mind.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I was looking into that. QTip came into the micros briefly playing 0.50/1, and then it seemed like he moved to 2/4 and SS within a month. I was sorry to see him go, and I'm surprised to see him still at 2/4. Anyway, we have Entity, Evan, and GoT all currently modding SS. What limits do they play? What about promoting QTip to be a mod of SS, and then bumping 2 of the three current SS mods to Mid Stakes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a great idea.

Entity + GoT in particular play mid stakes and up from what I've seen recently. I'm not sure what Evan plays b/c I haven't seen many hand posts but this seems like the best idea thus far b/c of the trepidations regarding Tstone/jason et al.

Surf

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

FWIW- I think Rob should stay as an SS mod. Mostly because he's one of the few posters who has moved beyond the small and micro stakes, but still takes him to make posts in those forums. I also think he's one of the forums better posts in terms of teaching.

I just think his skill set is probably applied better in people who have more to learn from him.

I think TStone and jason would both be better mods than QTip.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

Evan plays midstakes too. The hands I've seen from him recently have been 15/30-ish.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Evan plays midstakes too. The hands I've seen from him recently have been 15/30-ish.

[/ QUOTE ]

ah, thanks. I didn't want to nominate him and have someone say "uhh...surf? he plays 5/10." Or some-such. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Surf

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Ive been in philly and will be ehre till sunday.i just got bobbyi's PM about the split. I think its a great idea and dont know off the top another person to mod although i do know there's a bunch of good candidates.

get back later.

Barron

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

Where are those guys? They need to comment on whether they want to stay in small or move to mid.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Where are those guys? They need to comment on whether they want to stay in small or move to mid.

[/ QUOTE ]
I PM'd the lot of them and told them to get over here and provide some input.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

I'd prefer to stay as an SS mod, but I wouldn't mind modding Midstakes either.

GoT

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Where are those guys? They need to comment on whether they want to stay in small or move to mid.

[/ QUOTE ]
I PM'd the lot of them and told them to get over here and provide some input.

[/ QUOTE ]
I play what will now be considered mid limits (I think, 15/30 and 20/40 are in there, right?). I would prefer to be a mid limit mod because that's where I'll be playing and if I post hands that don't go in HUSH (which is where most of mine go) they will be in the mid limit forum. I wouldn't be opposed to staying an SS mod though, I'll probably still read that forum a bit. If the mid limit job is available I'd like to have it.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Josh would be a great mod in the newer high-limit HUSH forum. I'd love to mod the middle limits forum as well. I will be spending a lot more time there, in general, than I will at SS.

Rob

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

I was thinking bumping up Ent or one of those guys would be good, and maybe you would be good for SS Matt, and we could promote Voracious Reader or Jaxup as another ML mod. (I would stay in the kiddie pool. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

i received this in a pm from tstone yesterday: im irritated by the things im hearing about you on the mod forums and i dont appreciate whats going on.

i would have voted a solid no before that, but i'm further inclined to think that he shouldn't be a mod because i don't like the idea of things being run by a sewing circle. to whoever it was - if you have a problem with me, please raise it with me.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

If people are sharing what's being discussed in here, that's not good. It's really had to give frank assessments of people's abilities to mod or anything else if that's getting back to them.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Seriously. Relaying this to people outside of the forum is inappropriate and unprofessional. Let's keep our quibbling behind closed doors.

Also, I think I'm in favor of moving Entity and Evan to Mid stakes, leaving GoT where he is, and promoting QTip. Tstone has lost my support. I still don't really support jason_t.

VoraciousReader is another good one to consider for Micro. I sent her a PM to see if she's interested.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
i received this in a pm from tstone yesterday: im irritated by the things im hearing about you on the mod forums and i dont appreciate whats going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post in Mid-high about not adding the middle limits forum may have led a number of concerned posters to believe that you had somehow been the force preventing it from happening.

Tstone IM'd me yesterday (most HUSH regulars have my IM name - it's "Surfbullet" in case any of you need to reach me) angry about your post, seeing it as an effort to stop the creation of the mid-limits forum that he and others had lobbied for.
I said that while you had expressed the belief that it was not necessary in our discussions here, that it was ultimately Mat + Chuck's call and they'd do what they thought was in the best interests of 2+2 as a whole, given the responses of all the mods + the regulars in the thread.

I'm not sure what motivated him to send such a PM and it was foolish IMO.

While Tstone himself has acknowledged that he would not be the best candidate for moderator, it seems unprofessional at best that you would further oppose someone for personal reasons, rather than the best interests of 2+2 and its specific strategy forums.

My understanding is that this board exists so we can freely discuss ideas in order to best influence the 2+2 community using the responsibilites granted to us. In that spirit I have kept an open mind and feel that personal agendas take a back seat.

As dids commented, we should be free to voice our opinions without reserve.

In this regard I may have erred - Tstone IM'd me today and asked me if it looked like he was going to be a mod, and I told him no. He asked why, and I said because the consensus was that he was a good strategy poster but lacked the temperament to make a good moderator. He agreed with me and I thought that was that.

I won't do this again in the future, I didn't realize at the time that I was saying more than I should.

Surf

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
Relaying this to people outside of the forum is inappropriate and unprofessionalLet's keep our quibbling behind closed doors.

[/ QUOTE ]
I very much agree with this. I tried to argue the same thing when Evan and [censored] were fighting over mod issues in the OOT. I sent TStone a PM just to say "hey, it looks like the mid-stakes forum is probably going to actually happen" just as a courtesy since he originally suggested it and I had assumed that that level of information sharing regarding the mod discussions was acceptable (I assumed that because no one complained about Surfbullet posting threads in HUSH to relay the status of the new forum there), but calling out a specific moderator by name like that is way out of line.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think I'm in favor of moving Entity and Evan to Mid stakes, leaving GoT where he is, and promoting QTip.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm okay with this.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
I had assumed that that level of information sharing regarding the mod discussions was acceptable (I assumed that because no one complained about Surfbullet posting threads in HUSH to relay the status of the new forum there), but calling out a specific moderator by name like that is way out of line.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree on both accounts.

The HUSH community has been waiting with baited breath for the split - or any news thereof. Does anyone think it was out of line for me to post that we were discussing it with the intention of formalizing a list in the next 24 hrs? After the list was finalized I posted it as well so that the regulars would know what to expect. I honestly felt this was not a big deal at all and it was almost my duty as moderator of the forum to let them know their voices had been heard and that things were moving forward.

Again, I will alter my behavior in the future if this was out of line.

Surf

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think I'm in favor of moving Entity and Evan to Mid stakes, leaving GoT where he is, and promoting QTip. Tstone has lost my support. I still don't really support jason_t.


[/ QUOTE ]

Other options for small stakes mods are Jake (the Snake) and W. Deranged.

I really think Jake (the Snake) should have been a mod all this time with all the work he does for the digest. Though perhaps he's already been offered and turned it down?

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

I want to hear a good argument against jason. I think you're really horribly misrepresenting/misunderstanding him if you can't look at the bulk of his posts and see that he's a great poster.

Two great arguments for jason:

1- he teaches, this is HUGE to me, it's one of the reasons why Rob is a great mod. That kind of background is invaluable.

2- he's one of the stronger believers in the value of 2p2 as a community and he works to promote that.

As far as I can tell, the argument against amounts to being upset over some bans that Dynasty made that I think were mostly viewed as overreactions.

WRT astro's beef with TStone, as I think it's similar to mine. It's not that he specifically did that, it's that he's exactly the type of person who does that. I don't think his PM made astro feel any differently than he did before.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
leaving GoT where he is

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd ask Bright about that, just to make sure. I think he's a better candidate for a mid forum.

Rob

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll throw out three more names for you guys to kick around. bicyclekick and James282 could be great for Higher limits. For a suggestions forum, there is one guy I respect a lot that I think has continually demonstrated sound reasoning -- the kind a mod should have -- and that is Microbob.

I'm not sure if any other these guys are interested though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, i would be cool with BK or James282 as higher-limits mods, assuming they would even want to do it .

Surf

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

james has stated to me and publicly he doesn't want the job but that was for the current mid/high setting. he may be more interested in the new high limit setting.

bk i haven't asked but when i get back ill ask if its not sorted out.

i think they'd both be good, as with steve guifre if he'd want it or paluka or mnay others i can't immediately think of.

Barron

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would back Tstone. I don't like Jason_t for the same reason we voted down DMBFan. I think a lot of his posts come off as immature, childish, and whiny. I'm with durron in that attitude is of chief importance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really think you are basically 100% wrong on jason_t. He's one of the strongest SS posters that always thinks things through well and usually has a ton to share.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would back Tstone. I don't like Jason_t for the same reason we voted down DMBFan. I think a lot of his posts come off as immature, childish, and whiny. I'm with durron in that attitude is of chief importance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really think you are basically 100% wrong on jason_t. He's one of the strongest SS posters that always thinks things through well and usually has a ton to share.

[/ QUOTE ]

this was my general impression, I just assumed there was something I didn't know about from forums that I don't frequent.

Surf

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would back Tstone. I don't like Jason_t for the same reason we voted down DMBFan. I think a lot of his posts come off as immature, childish, and whiny. I'm with durron in that attitude is of chief importance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really think you are basically 100% wrong on jason_t. He's one of the strongest SS posters that always thinks things through well and usually has a ton to share.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will back jason_t if and only if dynasty does.

Edit: I say this because it is more important to me to prevent Moderator infighting than whatever my opinion of jason_t is (it is in fact quite high).

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]

I will back jason_t if and only if dynasty does.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to hear your motives about this. Again, personal issues shouldn't be a factor if the person in question is going to be to the benefit of the forum IMO.

Surf

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your post in Mid-high about not adding the middle limits forum may have led a number of concerned posters to believe that you had somehow been the force preventing it from happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

which post? i don't know what NUMBERS of people we're talking about here either, or why they would think that i have a right of veto when i'm just another moderator.

[ QUOTE ]
While Tstone himself has acknowledged that he would not be the best candidate for moderator, it seems unprofessional at best that you would further oppose someone for personal reasons, rather than the best interests of 2+2 and its specific strategy forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

the sewing circle comment wasn't a personal thing - i was stating that nepotism/homogeneity shouldn't be the ultimate deciding factor in the nomination of candidates. looking at a PM from tstone detailing moderator gripes/private discussion and logging on the next day to see his name thrown into that hat, i don't think i can be faulted for questioning the objective validity of his nomination or wondering who would want a guy that so freely and spitefully gossips.

i like the fact that i barely know a lot of the other mods here because it's more likely that i'll have to re-evaluate and produce reasons for my positions instead of it just coming down to a bunch of friends agreeing. i've expressed concerns about clique moderation of specific forums in this very thread. same reasoning. your suggestion that i'm operating outside of the interests of 2+2 is totally out of line, especially when you're talking about the downgrading of somebody who was already a slam dunk "no" in my book. what a difference that makes.

on the nomination front, jason has stood out to me as a balanced and reasonable guy for some time.

i remember jeff w making quality mid posts (specifically hand history converted ones with actual purpose and reads). anybody have thoughts on him?

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

I don't think this is a good way to go.

To be blunt, I don't think Dynasty has the backing of a ot of the mods, so if we're going that route, I just don't see it ending pretty. I mean, we're all agreed on Josh, and I'm sure he and Dynasty have similar issues.

Dynasty has nothing to do with SS, and the audience there will welcome and respect jason as a mod.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is a good way to go.

To be blunt, I don't think Dynasty has the backing of a ot of the mods, so if we're going that route, I just don't see it ending pretty. I mean, we're all agreed on Josh, and I'm sure he and Dynasty have similar issues.

Dynasty has nothing to do with SS, and the audience there will welcome and respect jason as a mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever, I'm not really involved in the limit forums either, so there goes the value of my opinion. But the fact that you (in particular) say that you don't think that Dynasty has the backing of the mods doesn't sound good to me, as he is your co-moderator on WPT. But that isn't even the issue - the issue to me is that *any* moderator stands out as "not getting along" with the rest. The Evan/[censored] fight was bad, but the last thing I want to see is a fight (public or rumored, both are bad) between Dynasty and the limit forums, especially since I like all of you (and jason_t).

I dunno, I'm probably making something out of nothing, but that's how I feel.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Wow. This thread really exploded.

I'll weigh in here. Jason seems to be a very intelligent guy and a great strategy poster, but I'm not sure about him being a good mod.

So, I suppose that puts me in the middle. Basically I think jason wouldn't be a bad choice. However, he may not be the best option either.

Re: To all the names mentioned in this thread
 

I explained that badly and a little heated. Jason's a pretty close friend, so I was probably out of line in saying that the way i did.

I think Dynasty has been a great WPT mod. Frankly I wish he was more harsh. Beyond that he's done a good job in a thankless forum.

When he's run into issues it was with banning Josh/jason and other people who are A- friends B- all respected posters on this site. I didn't agree with those decisions, but I understand them. The banning of Josh seemed especially goofy, but that's already been dicussed and is over and done with. When Mat offered me the job, I pm-ed Dynasty and we briefly talked about this. I let him know I was friends with jason and didn't agree with some of what he'd done. I hope we're cool.

I just think if you say "jason can't come if Dynasty isn't cool with it, you will run into the same problem with other posters who have disagreed with Dynasty over the same issues". The fact that everybody has accepted Josh without question, when he's probably got a worse history with Dynasty just seems like it should be a non issue.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
leaving GoT where he is

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd ask Bright about that, just to make sure. I think he's a better candidate for a mid forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what this post means. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Can you explain?
EDIT: Is Bright GoT's name? Then this would make sense. I thought you were referring to the poster Bright which left me confused.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

I would suggest MicroBob for any and all forums he would moderate. He utilizes common sense very well and does a great job of communicating his thoughts.

CubsWin would also be a very good moderator, although I don't know which forum he is frequenting lately.

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4u
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Well, if we're going to do the quote-and-reply thing...

[ QUOTE ]
which post? i don't know what NUMBERS of people we're talking about here either, or why they would think that i have a right of veto when i'm just another moderator.

[/ QUOTE ]

All told there were probably a handful of posters whose questions basically were "Why is astroglide against a mid-stakes forum?" You are just one mod, but you are heavily respected on this forum and have made your presence well known in the few short days you have been a mod. Until you started a debate in mid-high there had been no opposition to it, since the high-stakes posters would by and large be unnaffected, if we had another name for it we could have just left mid-high alone and added a 4th forum "10/20-20/40" in between SS and MH and they wouldn't have noticed, since most of who will use the mid stakes forum weren't posting in MH anyway.(yay run-on sentence)

[ QUOTE ]
i was stating that nepotism/homogeneity shouldn't be the ultimate deciding factor in the nomination of candidates.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd. We're not going to choose someone because they are someone's buddy. Shooting candidates down because you don't want cliques isn't in the best interests of 2+2 and its strategy forums. This is you making assumptions + overreacting to a juvenile PM. Whether tstone is good friends with someone here is not the point if he's the best person for the job. I don't know him any better than any other HUSH regular - and it turns out he's not the best person for the job, that's fine. Noone's nominating their buddy or college roomate or something like that... any nomination I have put forth (and others I assume have done the same) is because I think they would do a good job.

[ QUOTE ]

i like the fact that i barely know a lot of the other mods here because it's more likely that i'll have to re-evaluate and produce reasons for my positions instead of it just coming down to a bunch of friends agreeing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. I barely know anyone here, and even if I did I'd make all my decisions in the best interest of HUSH/2+2.

[ QUOTE ]
your suggestion that i'm operating outside of the interests of 2+2 is totally out of line

[/ QUOTE ]

I said that you are letting personal interests/opinions interfere. That's true. I never said you were operating "Outside the interests of 2+2," only that they were not your sole motivating factor. You may feel that stomping out cliques is in the best interests of 2+2. Didn't you just become a mod because a friend referred you? I'm not sure so I may be mistaken here.

It's also entirely possible that you feel that your opinions/ideas are what's best for 2+2, and in that case we'll have to ask you to keep an open mind in regards to other ideas instead of shutting them down.

[ QUOTE ]

i remember jeff w making quality mid posts (specifically hand history converted ones with actual purpose and reads). anybody have thoughts on him?

[/ QUOTE ]

To the best of my recollection, all of jeffw's posts have been high-quality and informative, and I think he'd be a good candidate. Again, I don't visit any other non-limit forums so i'll leave it up to others to verify this.

Surf

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
leaving GoT where he is

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd ask Bright about that, just to make sure. I think he's a better candidate for a mid forum.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

In case you missed it, he already piped up in this thread saying he'd prefer to stay in SS, but that he'd be willing to do Mid if necessary.

WRT jason_t, well, I guess I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong. He certainly seems to have garnered an outpouring of support here. Maybe I'm letting his fighting with Dynasty overly cloud my memory. If we are going to bump him up to the top of the list to be the second SS mod, I would definitely like some assurances from both he and Dynasty that their personal issues are past, or at least that they can pretend that they are past well enough that no one can tell. I think that infighting is very detrimental to all that we try to do.

I got a PM back from QTip. He seemed a little hesitant about it. He said he isn't on as much, and was concerned about the responsibilities. He was willing to consider, though.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
Until you started a debate in mid-high there had been no opposition to it, since the high-stakes posters would by and large be unnaffected, if we had another name for it we could have just left mid-high alone and added a 4th forum "10/20-20/40" in between SS and MH and they wouldn't have noticed, since most of who will use the mid stakes forum weren't posting in MH anyway.(yay run-on sentence)

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree at all that the thread on MH shouldn't have been started. If astro hadn't started it, I was going to. I responded to Mat Sklanksy to say I would start a poll there (I agree in hindsight that it was better as a thread with no poll). When I went to MH to start the thread, I saw that astro had already put his thread up so I just replied to that with a lengthier explanation of the situation.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i was stating that nepotism/homogeneity shouldn't be the ultimate deciding factor in the nomination of candidates.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd. We're not going to choose someone because they are someone's buddy. Shooting candidates down because you don't want cliques isn't in the best interests of 2+2 and its strategy forums. This is you making assumptions + overreacting to a juvenile PM.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this. TStone is the one who initially suggested the mid- forum in his "open letter". He has been doing what he can to champion it and drum up support and without him we wouldn't be creating it now. He is a very good strategy poster and has stated in the threads about it that he intends to post a lot in the new mid forum if it is created. It seems natural that his name would be mentioned as a possibility for moderator for the new forum. Assuming that this was due to some personal connections and opposing his nomination on those grounds seems ridiculous. If he isn't the best candidate for other reasons (and this seems to be the sentiment of some current moderators) then that is a completely different story, of course. I don't have any personal connection to anyone on these forums and the only people I've ever even met are the small handful of Seattle area b&m players, specefically bernie, slavic and bobdiddle and I'm certainly not pushing for them to be the new moderators.

[ QUOTE ]
To the best of my recollection, all of jeffw's posts have been high-quality and informative, and I think he'd be a good candidate

[/ QUOTE ]
Jeff W consistently makes good posts and seems like one of the most mature and rational members of the forum. I think he would make a great moderator.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

Totally co-sign Jeff as a mod.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
Totally co-sign Jeff as a mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. All his detractors seem to be short sighted morons as well.

Re: New Thread For Discussion of New Mods
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Totally co-sign Jeff as a mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. All his detractors seem to be short sighted morons as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

What forum are we making him a mod of?