June Issue

[ProfLupin]

Yes, but the 5 of spades was already showing, so I'm still confused even after the typo fix. Also, the 3 of hearts shows twice.

[droidboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but the 5 of spades was already showing, so I'm still confused even after the typo fix. Also, the 3 of hearts shows twice.

[/ QUOTE ]

He also seems to forget that there are many 15/30 pros who make more than $100/hr on the internet.

- Andrew

www.pokerstove.com

[PE101]

Hi Mason,

I've made this request before, but it never hurts to ask...

How about a PDF form of the issue so that we can download the whole thing at once. You could even throw in an ad or two.

I bet that less than 1% of your viewers would be unable to view a pdf doc. Others may prefer to read it as-is, but I like to print it a read it more than once. So I copy each article into a word doc, reduce the font size and print it.

That said, the magazine really is terrific. Keep up the great work!

[Throxx]

Seems to me an author of a multipart article, where the prior part was published more than 3 months ago, would do the reader a service by providing the previous material, say by the publisher reacquiring the rights at a nominal cost, so one has the whole context.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi MFM00:

I've stated this before, but let me make this clear again. We do this to protect our writers. After three months the magazine comes down and all rights are returned to them.

Look at it this way. Suppose you're a new author who's putting together articles for us. Barron Toth is a good example. Now after about twenty or so articles he may start to think,"Hey, I got something pretty good here. Maybe I can write some more and put them together in a book." But then he discovers that everything is still on the Internet, and when he approaches a publisher like myself I'll say "Well, your stuff is pretty good, but it's a tough sell since everything is on the net for free."

That's why we don't do it, and as far as I can tell, we're the only site in our field that has this policy. Also, when David and I were writing for another magazine we refused to let them have the right to keep our articles up forever. We told them that if that was their policy, we would not take part. (They did agree to our terms, and we left them at a later date for other reasons.)

Best wishes,
Mason

[Throxx]

I am aware of the publisher's policy. I purposely addressed it to the authors. It is clearly the authors' choice, as you point out, again.

Would the authors be better served, in the long run, by having all of a multipart article on line at the same time, or should the reader just "pick up in the middle"? Is this the best way for developing authors to communicate clearly and build an audience?

An author could cede rights until a reasonable period after the conclusion of a multipart article e.g three months, it need not be on the net in perpetuity.

As a publisher would you really tell an author, "If only parts 1 and 2 of your last article were not on the net today (but won't be 90 days from now), I could do do a book of the previous twenty five. Sorry."

[Pedigree]

LOL @ one of Dan Harrington's favorite movies being The Langoliers. I saw that movie on UPN in high school and it was [Bill Walton]horrible[/Bill Walton]. Great poker player, excellent writer, but obviously has no taste in movies.