Coach Reviews in Strategy Forums

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they could come with a disclaimer, added by the poster or edited in by the mod, that states this is the opinion of the reviewer and not 2p2.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this solves the problem. If the poster does not say something like this, then the moderator could do it. With this statement plus my other comments about keeping the review non-commercial, I think it can run.

Thanks everyone,

Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

As for the disclaimer I don't see how that's necesary. If someone makes a post where they suggest some particular betting line on a hand does that somehow confuse people into thinking it's the official suggested line from 2+2? How is this any different. I could see how that would be important in a stickied post or even a post made by one of us, but does the disclaimer really need to be applied to every post? How would a coach review be different from say the Kill Phil review thread in books/publications?

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with you 100%. All posts are the opinion of the poster unless otherwise stated. The only reason we use disclaimers on certain posts are because they are stickied and/or perhaps include the 2+2 name (like some of the forum tournies). If a disclaimer is included on any post, what does it mean when a disclaimer is NOT included? That the post IS endorsed by 2+2?

As for not including things like his hoursly rate, meh. I don't think it's a big deal and if somebody searched the archives they'd fine it.

The best way of dealing with both of these issues is to simply have people respond (including Mason) and address them. Point out perhaps where his advice is not necessarily correct, say that we he charges sounds great but in fact you really don't get much more than reviews of hands. This really isn't that big of a deal.