A reinvention of the microposter: Session Studies - Page 4

#31 10-17-2005, 02:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]

1: Should 6 and full be seperate? no
2: Should there be one leader or several? Assuming we do 1 to 1 exchange, probably one leader is enough just to pair people up
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. 100-200
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. once every two weeks
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. yes i favor one to one exchange

[/ QUOTE ]

deception5 · #32 10-17-2005, 02:47 PM

I like the idea of 2 leaders - one for 6-max one for full. And that you get someone sending you the same kind of session you submit.

I don't think all of the sessions need to go through the leader. Perhaps you send an email to the leader saying you have a session ready and they tell you to send it to an email address which is the address of the person who will be reviewing.

numeri · #33 10-17-2005, 03:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think all of the sessions need to go through the leader. Perhaps you send an email to the leader saying you have a session ready and they tell you to send it to an email address which is the address of the person who will be reviewing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like this. Much less stuff to worry about. Also, we need deadlines. Something like "All interested 6-max sessions must be sent to me by 10am Monday, blah blah blah..."

And by me, I don't mean me, but someone who isn't me. The leader, that is. Who isn't me.

MrWookie47 · #34 10-17-2005, 03:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think all of the sessions need to go through the leader. Perhaps you send an email to the leader saying you have a session ready and they tell you to send it to an email address which is the address of the person who will be reviewing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like this. Much less stuff to worry about. Also, we need deadlines. Something like "All interested 6-max sessions must be sent to me by 10am Monday, blah blah blah..."

[/ QUOTE ]

These are both good ideas.

#35 10-17-2005, 03:32 PM

Great idea! I'm in.

lautzutao · #36 10-17-2005, 04:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think all of the sessions need to go through the leader. Perhaps you send an email to the leader saying you have a session ready and they tell you to send it to an email address which is the address of the person who will be reviewing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like this. Much less stuff to worry about. Also, we need deadlines. Something like "All interested 6-max sessions must be sent to me by 10am Monday, blah blah blah..."

[/ QUOTE ]

These are both good ideas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Making a deadline is great and all, but I don't think we'll realistically be able to enforce it. I'm worried about how "delicate" this system is going to be.

As with everything else in life, people are going to lose interest in this idea over time, and it will be difficult to sustain the level of enthusiasm over a period of time having individuals trading HH's. Some will get bored with it, or something will come up in life etc. and hands won't get reviewed, and then this great idea will come to an end. How are we going to deal with this?

This is such a great idea, but I have a feeling it's an idea that's doomed for failure [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

detruncate · #37 10-17-2005, 04:46 PM

It'd probably be simple enough for someone with web/database skills to automate the pairing up process. People could sign up once with their email address/IM sn/etc and then activate themselves before each exchange they want to participate in. Only active participants would bet chosen for pairings, which could be done randomly. It'd also be easy to separate 6-max and ring if people end up wanting to. We'd have to deal with unpaired people, but we could probably have a few standing backup reviewers who wouldn't mind stepping in when necessary.

It also doesn't address the question of how full sessions would be selected for posting in Micro if that's still something that's going to be part of this. I suppose we could just select a random session every go round or two and revive the Microposter idea if nothing else.

Leadership/Administration seems to be one area where these things fall apart, and I don't blame people for not wanting to do the work. This might be a solution. It might also be a good gift to the Micro board -- they'd be left with a standing mechanism that could help people connect and wouldn't depend on broad continuing interest. I always wonder how often those "PM me if you want to exchange hand histories" threads end up working, and a lot of people are probably too shy to fire off uninvited IMs and such.

But someone would have to put things together and it'd need to be hosted. Anyone interested in stepping in? I have no chops but may be able to convince a friend to do it if worst comes to worst. And I might be able to host it if the useless webspace bundled with my internet access will work -- size and bandwidth is probably sufficient unless this explodes, but I'm not sure what I have available wrt accommodating databeses and scripts and such.

This might just be overkill, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

MrWookie47 · #38 10-17-2005, 04:49 PM

I agree that this is doomed to failure, but so what? I don't think having a deadline or not is going to doom it any faster. It might make things run more smoothly. The leader just says, "Submit a session by X for it to be reviewed." Those that do get another session to review. Those that don't, don't. The process repeats until we run out of submitters or leaders.

nomadtla · #39 10-17-2005, 05:06 PM

here is the idea poll people please vote there but keep putting ideas up in this thread. POLL
I like the deadline idea, and will do all I can to keep people interested. I think the website is going a bit far, and if no leader tries to keep intrest the site will just end up a junk heap on the internet super-highway.
I think sending the sessions to the leader gets better response because if I just send someone an Email address and they know who it is, or just decide to be lazy then they never send their HH. If I have the HH then I know the person has invested time and intrest.