A reinvention of the microposter: Session Studies

Good idea. I'd like to be in. I doubt that I have anything to teach you guys, but I'll do my best.

I currently play full ring. I live in europe (in case time zone is an issue here).

I'd love the help.

[detruncate]

na na na na na na na na na leader

I thought about starting a cult for a while but figured it wouldn't work unless I could communicate by email. But then I'd miss out on all the chicks in white robes. And let's face it... chicks in white robes is a lot of the reason that cults get started. Or at least some of the reason. Money has to rank up there. And I'd be suprised if crazy is on the second page.

I'm in, but I don't think I'm up to being a leader. For fairly self evident reasons. (hint: everything I touch turns to something that rhymes with spit).

leeeeeeeeeeeeeader. leeeeeeeeeeeeeader. leeeeeeeeeeeeeader.

[numeri]

1: Should 6 and full be seperate?
Either would be fine.
2: Should there be one leader or several?
Depends on the size and if we split.
3: If several should the teams be totally seperate or trade HH between them?
What's the point of separate teams if we trade between? We could always do two teams for a while and then mix them up.
4: How many hands per session?
100 seems good.
5: What days, frequency, should we do this?
Day isn't important to me, but bi-weekly would be best.
6: Should it be 1 for 1?
Yes - only one person to communicate with for those 2 weeks.

[bjarne]

I'd like to join this, although I doubt the more experienced players will benefit from my advice, I'll probably end up writing more questions than suggestions about the HH I receive [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I'm not the organizing kind of person so I wouldn't be much good at the leader thing though.

[Guruman]

I'm in.


I think you should post a poll for all of the questions. [ QUOTE ]
1: Should 6 and full be seperate?
2: Should there be one leader or several?
3: If several should the teams be totally seperate or trade HH between them?
4: How many hands per session? Wouldn't need to be exact but a # to shoot for. I want a static # for us to keep it around so people don't get bogged down reviewing hours of play.
5: What days, frequency, should we do this? I think sending your HH to a leader by Monday morning (since most here put in hours on weekends). The leader would then send out all the sessions some time Monday or Monday night. Then you review the sessions and get back with their owner Tues or Wed. This makes me think a bi-weekly schedule would be best giving enough time for the reviewer/sender to discuss properly.
6: Should it be 1 for 1? That you are reviewing the same persons session who is reviewing yours. Or mix it up and tell each person who got their session, while they are reviewing someone elses session? I think 1 for 1 is less confussing so you only have to hunt down one person at a time.

[/ QUOTE ]

let the majority rule.

[Disconnected]

1: Should 6 and full be seperate?
I think if possible, a reviewer should indicate whether they are interested to review full, 6m, or either. Personally, I'd be up for either, but I think there are some folks that would be less inclined to participate if they might be asked to review one or the other (some only want to review 6m hands, others skip most/all 6m posts here).

2: Should there be one leader or several?
As few as possible ideally, but that s/b up to the people volunteering for leadership, since the bigger the group(s), the more is asked of the leader(s).

3: If several should the teams be totally seperate or trade HH between them?
Trade.

4: How many hands per session?
100-200.

5: What days, frequency, should we do this?
Weekly. If you'd like more time or are in an interesting discussion, just don't send in a session for the next week. If the groups are big enough, there should still be a decent pool each week, or you could have a couple conversations going on.

6: Should it be 1 for 1?
Could work either way, but I think it would be a little more interesting to not have it 1 for 1. We're all easy to track down (PM or IM), and there should really be 2 distinct conversations anyway, even if it's 1 for 1.

Another question that wasn't on the original list is what about the people who just want to sign up as reviewers? Do they have to send in a session too? If they're just an extra roving reviewer, that seems like it would be fine.

[Preytar]

This is a fantastic idea. Count me in for reviewing/submitting.

[Koss]

I'm in. My only question is how often will we be submitting sessions. Twice a week? Less? More?

I'd also be willing to try leading a group, but if it takes too much time I'd have to pass the torch.

[A_K]

I'm in, though due to job and family I'm a little time constrained -- maybe 1 session/wk or 1 every other week.

I'm mostly interested in reviewing full ring sessions -- I've not played much six max yet.