HOH EXPOSED CONTINUED....

[Gabe DV]

I don't think it is inconsistent to say that while HOH is a excellent book in many regards, that the proliferation of errors is
1) Not what would be expected of a 2+2 product (and in fact Mason correctly has called to the carpet other books, such as the awful cloutier/mcevoy limit hold'em book, for exactly the same type of errors)
and

2) Needs to be addressed

It is great that many players are good enough to notice and overlook these errors, but many others are not. Mason himself has pointed out that a book that is largely correct, but with some misinformation, is dangerous. Now I do agree that none of the errors poined out, in of themselves, are fatal, but taken together it is a serious problem in the text. All the sarcasm in the world doesn't take away from that fact.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow you totally exposed HOH! Great job!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it was. Quite a nice smoking or pwning (what does this mean by the way) or whatever you want to call it.

Where's MM with our errata list? He's run for the hills!

[/ QUOTE ]

You need your sarcasm detector checked...or maybe I need mine checked..

[/ QUOTE ]

MM has been very critical of errors in other non 2+2 books for far far less. See his reviews in GTAOT if you don't believe me. So yes, it was exposed.

[PuckNPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
All the sarcasm in the world doesn't take away from that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither does all the over exaggeration take away from the fact that HOH is an excellent book in which any minor errors brought up were adressed in a reprinting. Spending a load of time posting online errata would take up time and would be used by one tenth of one percent of all the HOH readers. MM is a reasonable guy and adressed the issue in a reasonable fashion.

Nits.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All the sarcasm in the world doesn't take away from that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither does all the over exaggeration take away from the fact that HOH is an excellent book in which any minor errors brought up were adressed in a reprinting. Spending a load of time posting online errata would take up time and would be used by one tenth of one percent of all the HOH readers. MM is a reasonable guy and adressed the issue in a reasonable fashion.

Nits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit, he addressed dic. Another 2+2 lemming....

[Rob-L]

The logic of a 2+2 Groupie!

We're cheap because we only want to buy the book once?

That's just being smart.

We're complainers because we'd like accurate information in the books we purhcase?

Again, that is just being smart. How is that biting the hand that "feeds us"?

Seems like they expect us to accept their offerings for what they are and then pay to get a second (or third, or fourth) correct edition because they were too lazy or in too much of a hurry to do it right the first time. Who do they think they are? MICROSOFT?

Why not just provide errata on the web site? Oh yeah, you can't charge for that. Or at least, not the price a new (second) book would cost.

[larrondo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe it would be a service to us your customers, starting with HOH I, to post online errata sheets on this website for such corrections that we could print out.

[/ QUOTE ]
I second that motion. Please do this. It is the professional thing to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, you could argue that no other company has taken this step to correct errors, but 2+2 prides itself on going the extra mile. If the NY times can do it, so can you. Since you guys certainly have such a list, it would be really great for your readers if you would post it. I know I'd appreciate it.

Thanks.

[grimel]

Errata pages are neither new nor unusual. I have a 1st (and to my knowledge only) edition of a relatively famous book on the game of one pocket. I have an errata page for it from the printer. Makes for one ungodly expensive book on the used book market. IIRC, it was made available to anyone who asked for it.

FWIW, there are more than a few books out in the 4th or 5th printings that have the same errors found in the 1st printings.

[imported_PocketAces]

If 2+2 has already taken the time to correct the errors in the second printing, how would it be burdensome to print an errata sheet?

I suspect a substantial percentage of 2+2 readers access this website, but obviously have no way to prove that.

I guess it comes down to how much responsibility 2+2 feels to its readers and whether it thinks its important to set the record straight. It seems to me a popular forum like this would provide a relatively cost-free method for the company to communicate with its readers.

[VinceCall]

[ QUOTE ]
if this was my book i'd be disappointed in the grammar/semantic errors

[/ QUOTE ]

Pot
Kettle
Black

[Siegmund]

[ QUOTE ]

Pot
Kettle
Black

[/ QUOTE ]

The pot's colour is completely irrelevant to whether the kettle is or is not in fact black.