Jeez Louise

[Clarkmeister]

If people just went with the "I must respond to 5 threads before I post a new one" rule, both they and the forum would be better off.

[mmbt0ne]

As a SS reader and a mainly micro poster I just wanted to chime in and say that the signal to noise ratio in the micros forum is better than up here now, and that's sad. Of course, down there the questions may be simpler, and the advice may not be as good all of the time, but overall there seems to be a lot more meaningful discussion.

[DMBFan23]

sigh.

[Stack]

5/1 ratio is the way to go.

Just a suggestion to the more exprienced ones: Please please follow up with your own responses. When you give us starters an advice, please make sure you go back to that thread later; we might have not completely underestood you, then ask you about it, but you never show up again. (Don't get me wrong, your first response is highly appreciated)

A lot of the more experienced posters do that. They keep the conversation going, and I thank you.

[ErrantNight]

as hopeless as imagining a world without your avatar?

[DMBFan23]

12 more days...

[Argus]

I think everyone would benefit if instead of a 5:1 replies written to hands posted ratio, everyone tried to develop a 5:1 Peter_Rus or StellarWind posts read to replies written ratio.

[SippinSoma]

Back to the top.

[SippinSoma]

[ QUOTE ]
Back to the top.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Aces_up07]

[ QUOTE ]
To follow up to this. Last night I spent about 2 hours doing nothing but responding to Small Stakes posts and I was astounded at how many threads had like 0-2 posts and less than 25 views.

I responded to posts as far back as 3 pages behind, and some of those were only inactive for 3-4 hours! There were some very good discussions and threads that got buried simply because the forum gets littered with new hands so dang fast.

By the time I was done responding, the first thread I had responded to was already at the bottom of page 2! It's obvious from the views that people aren't even bothering to go that far back to read, which is a shame. These are poker hands, the discussion doesn't become invalid or "old" after a few years, let alone a few hours.

So, really, I encourage everyone here to try reading a full 3 pages back. Every thread. Respond to as many as you have questions on. Give advice. When you are done with that, and it took me well over 2 hours, then go back and post follow-ups in those threads you responded in if there are comments or questions to your posts. And *then*, post a hand or two if you still have a burning question. But many of you will learn far more from giving shitty advice to someone else and getting called on it, than you will from selectively posting hands that you know you played "sort of bad", but not "terrible".

Anyways, if everyone did this, I think they would not only learn better, it would make the forum a more condusive learning environment with less clutter. Worry more about how you can learn from what's already out there and how you can contribute to other people's threads rather than the "please everyone help me on *my* hand" concept. It's a give and take, and the more you give, the more you get out of it. If all you try and do is take, you are just cheating yourself and clutting the forum to boot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd looooooooooove to do this, but I don't understand how people have the time. Whenever I sign on it seems like I spend anywhere between 3-6 hours just reading, and that's without adding many replies or new posts of my own.