Splitting the MTT Forum

[valenzuela]

the only split that would make sense to me is like: online tournaments and huge buy-in live tournaments, oh wait....we have a WPT forum.

[ansky451]

[ QUOTE ]
the only split that would make sense to me is like: online tournaments and huge buy-in live tournaments, oh wait....we have a WPT forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


The WPT forum is not for strategy. It's for them to talk about what a baby phil hellmuth is, and how lucky moneymaker got. Oh and to ban Paul Phillips.

[woodguy]

I was originally opposed to a split, but after thinking about it, I am pro-split.

On one hand, when I was new, if posters like fnurt, cferjohn, sossman, MBE, Che, fnord too, etc weren't around to correct my mistakes and point me in the right direction, my growth would have been stunted.

Some of these posters and others (I'm not speaking for all of them, but I have spoken privately with some) do not post nearly as much now as they did before due to the signal/noise ratio, and this forum is worse because of it.

I'd like to pose a question to the good but now infrequent posters (fnord too, fnurt, MBE, cferejohn, Che, Soss, Strassa, and others)

"Would you post more in a split forum?"

On the other hand, I find most of the beginner type questions to be basic NLHE questions, and not really tourney related questions, which may be better served in their own forum.

I am a constant lurker on the PLNL forums, and I see how they have split into 3 seperate forums now, and it seems to be working there.

Another argument for splitting is to simply manage growth.

Imagine the NLPL or Limit forums if all the buyin levels were all grouped togther *shudder*

I guarantee that the sum of those divided forums is larger than what it would be if they were grouped into one large forum.

Lots of posters both in the limit & the NLPL post in mulitple forums, and posters "move up" in forums as they get better and understand the game more.

I constantly lurk the High Stake NLPL forum, but don't post there much unless I have a question, but I am glad that forum is there so I can see how players better than me think, so I can try to learn and incorporate it into my game.

I don't think a split would harm the forum, in fact, I think it would enhance it.

Seriously, if I'm considered one of the better posters, we better start attracting better talent, or else this forum is doomed to languish in mediocrity.

Regards,
Woodguy

[JeanieJ]

The NL PL forums were able to split because they have such a high volume of players. While this forum isn't small, personally I don't think it's busy enough to warrent a split. Splitting it might cause both forums to turn dead.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
While this forum isn't small, personally I don't think it's busy enough to warrent a split. Splitting it might cause both forums to turn dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's definately a concern.

Don't want to kill the patient with cure.

Regards,
Woodguy

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While this forum isn't small, personally I don't think it's busy enough to warrent a split. Splitting it might cause both forums to turn dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's definately a concern.

Don't want to kill the patient with cure.

Regards,
Woodguy

[/ QUOTE ]

that is also my chief concern with a split. I think a better split, imo, is to mid-tourney and sweat type threads and a content forum, akin to strategy and bbv.

[ononimo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a better split, imo, is to mid-tourney and sweat type threads and a content forum, akin to strategy and bbv.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed - even though i think "sweat", "***OFFICIAL $XX TOURNEY***", and "last longer" threads are generally good things and do a lot to foster a sense of camaraderie within the MTT forum, i do think they are the primary sources of low content clutter in this forum.

a better split would be Strategy vs. Sweat/OFFICIAL/last longer/brag threads.

[MrBrightside]

Hey, one thing I've noticed is, posts in the second or third page tend to not get replies/die pretty quickly. I changed my preferences to show 30 topics per page (myHome-> Display Preferences) and wish others would too. That kinda helps out with the volume.

People usually put the buy in right in the subject line anyway, so I don't see the need to split.

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to pose a question to the good but now infrequent posters (fnord too, fnurt, MBE, cferejohn, Che, Soss, Strassa, and others)

"Would you post more in a split forum?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, I have to say - probably not.

On one hand, there have been numerous times that I logged on hoping to bang out a quick post just for the mental exercise only to leave after scanning several threads without spotting anything interesting.

But, I would only post *a little* more if I could find decent threads more quickly because the main reasons that I don't post as much these days are:

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] I'm working a lot
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] I'm not playing well [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I'm not sure if splitting the forum would be beneficial or not, so I didn't vote in the poll.

Later,
Che

[KneeCo]

Forum split = bad for many of the reasons posted above and others, I have yet to see a compelling reason for having 2 forums.

Also, you would have to hire on about 6 or 7 people just to handle moving all the posts in the high buy-in forum that will begin with:
"This is from a 3$ tournament, but I thought it was interesting and wanted some feedback from some of the great 2+2 players..."
(and soon after the thread is moved, against all odds, the poster happened to play the exact same hand in a 50$ tournament and thus creates a new post!).

So I voted for nay, but I'm open to hearing arguments for the other side.