|
|
#31
11-15-2005, 05:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chuck\'s ready to make a change
i still like the 'variance and bad beats' name a lot better.
like dids i have a natural reservation about the idea of it, but if it is something that's taken off on other poker forums it should certainly be considered more deeply. 
|
|
#32
11-15-2005, 05:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Chuck\'s ready to make a change
[ QUOTE ]
For what it's worth I prefer threaded mode as well, but I can adapt if I have to. [/ QUOTE ] To me it's not an either mode. I use threaded to view the forum pages, then I click on a thread, and usually elect to read it in flat.
|
|
#33
11-15-2005, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Chuck\'s ready to make a change
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] For what it's worth I prefer threaded mode as well, but I can adapt if I have to. [/ QUOTE ] To me it's not an either mode. I use threaded to view the forum pages, then I click on a thread, and usually elect to read it in flat. [/ QUOTE ] You use "expanded mode" to view forum pages.
|
|
#34
11-15-2005, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is what I want to submit to Chuck.. Any more additions?
"HUSH becomes:
-Mid-High Shorthanded (MHSH) -Small-Stakes Shorthanded (SSSH)" MHSH and SSSH should be specific to limit hold'em "The 3 current limit hold'em forums become: -Micro Limits(ML) -Small Stakes(SS) -Mid Stakes(MS) -High Stakes(HS)" "A rant and rave, designated no content, or whatever forum sounds like a fantastic idea. People want to post these things. Many people even want to read them. However, I just don't like a slew of NC posts pushing strategy off the front page. Look at the designated NC threads in Micro. Those threads have a ridiculous number of replies AND views. I would seriously be dancing in the streets if I had a way to move threads of this sort to some sort of designated area." (I like this notion of a trash can of sorts) I think it should be called the forum of low content: a place where posts are moved from strategy forums rather than deleted or locked. This will include bad beat posts. The name can always be changed if there is confusion. Also, the forum suggestion forum.
|
|
#35
11-15-2005, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Chuck\'s ready to make a change
I'd like to make changes slowly. Can we wait on this potential split?
|
|
#36
11-15-2005, 07:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: This is what I want to submit to Chuck.. Any more additions?
Awesome Mat, that looks great.
Are we forgoing a HU/3handed forum for the time being? That's fine by me, hopefully we can give it a shot after the next software upgrade if mid-high hush gets enough HU traffic. Surf
|
|
#37
11-15-2005, 07:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: This is what I want to submit to Chuck.. Any more additions?
Yes, I want to wait on that.
And by the way, It's you guys that are awesome. I just quoted . Thanks.
|
|
#38
11-15-2005, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Chuck\'s ready to make a change
[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to make changes slowly. Can we wait on this potential split? [/ QUOTE ] i think it would be best to make the changes much more slowly: just split HUSH and add a forum suggestion forum. look into the variance/bad beat forum more thoroughly before adding it. if it is added, don't call it 'rants and raves' or that sort of thing because of the overlap with OOT. if it's just going to be a 'trash can', it seems unlikely that people would be interested in poring through it in order to find something of interest. if it's just going to get moved and not seen, is it very different from a lock or a delete? keep mid/high as-is and discuss an internet/casino separation in lieu of breaking it up by limits any further. i feel i'm particularly qualified to weigh in on this as a longtime midhigh veteran. GoT and felicia, also veterans, seemed to strongly agree with me. the HUSH people have been going nuts about a split for ages. messing with midhigh is a controversial topic.
|
|
#39
11-15-2005, 07:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: This is what I want to submit to Chuck.. Any more additions?
Since there is talk of splitting other forums (which I think is a good idea btw), I had a thought about the WPT/other TV poker forum. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that ostensibly for strategy and analysis? I saw a Matasow hand on TV I would have liked to have discussed... but thought better of it. It would have degenerated into some discussion of how Matasow is a jerk, or made fun of his mental illness, or something equally assinine. I'm sure there are some good posters there, and I don't want to offend anyone, but it seems that forum is dominated by fanboy types who like to bitch about how Chris Moneymaker or Tiffany Williamson are total fish and nonsense like that. If you are going to have a "rants and raves" forum, why not one dedicated to gossipy discussion of poker and TV stuff?
|
|
#40
11-15-2005, 07:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: This is what I want to submit to Chuck.. Any more additions?
i think it would be pretty difficult to discuss how OTHERS played hands without it being gossipy:
'he played that hand like crap' 'i would have played that totally differently' 'so why aren't you a millionaire?' and so it evolves. NVG is probably the appropriate place for pure-gossip tv threads, but it's not my area and i'd rather leave such decisions up to the moderators of those forums.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
