ZEOR RAKE UPDATE

[Just The Facts]

[ QUOTE ]
There's another site that just went live and has been discussed a lot this week, that being fulltiltpoker.com. There have been some interesting discussions about the pros who play there, the lack of a deposit bonus as yet, and other topics along these lines. Despite your belief that this board is full of nothing but Party/Empire affiliates who can't bear the thought of another site succeeding and taking money out of their pocket, there hasn't been any rash of posts ragging on fulltilt and making fun of it, at least not that I've seen.

The difference, as I see it, is that the people who like fulltiltpoker and want it to succeed haven't been behaving like combative twats on this message board.

Personally, I wouldn't even know how to become an affiliate, so you can aim your ad hominem attacks elsewhere. I'm just pointing out what should be self-evident, that acting like an ass while talking up a site is not the best way to win friends, or support for that site.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is an excellent post for many reasons. Most importantly, it illustrates the difference between the launch of two new sites. Full Tilt has the most impressive lineup of celebrity endorsers that internet poker has ever seen, yet the threads have been normal in their frequency and content.

Zero Rake has Zero players and a dubious ownership trail, yet elicited a hundreds threads and hundreds of responses from posters that have never been seen again. For Zero Rake to claim that spamming the forums was not part of the marketing plan is a major lie. The interest in Full Tilt should have created exponentially more posts and responses, but instead it got fractional amounts.

Several posters have claimed they would have played Zero Rake if the spam machine had not insulted them with the frequency of new threads. In that sense, the people who were discharged to promote this site are actually the ones to blame for the opening failures and likely long-term failure. Whether it is a crooked site or not (ala Pro Poker) is yet to be determined. What is alreay decided is that this was the worst marketing launch idea in the history of Internet Poker.

Lastly, the comments regarding the owners of Zero rake not caring because 2+2 is visited only by 2% of the real money players is laughable. The actual percent is much lower. Also, believe it or not, the spam placed here paled in comparison to the spam at rec.poker. Acting like this is the only place the site was spammed to the ground is another insult to our intelligence.

[fnurt]

It's not the topic of your posts, it's the nasty and confrontational tone you repeatedly take. A point you've been reinforcing in this thread for quite some time btw.

[Syntax]

Wrong. There has been at least 100x more "spam" for Full Tilt on RGP then zerorake.

There really is nothing exciting about Full Tilt. You could play against Hellmuth, Devilfish, Duke, Esfandiari for years now. I've seen Ivey, Flack etc on Stars. The software is close to Jetset Poker's. The rake is capped the same as anyone else's in the top 4. At least with UB they have Aruba, and Party has the PP Million. What does Full Tilt have right now?

I think that Full Tilt will be succesful but I don't see any reason why you think it would garner so much hype on this board. Recreational fanboys will be ecstatic about this launch, that probably explains RGP...

[Just The Facts]

[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. There has been at least 100x more "spam" for Full Tilt on RGP then zerorake.

There really is nothing exciting about Full Tilt. You could play against Hellmuth, Devilfish, Duke, Esfandiari for years now. I've seen Ivey, Flack etc on Stars. The software is close to Jetset Poker's. The rake is capped the same as anyone else's in the top 4. At least with UB they have Aruba, and Party has the PP Million. What does Full Tilt have right now?

I think that Full Tilt will be succesful but I don't see any reason why you think it would garner so much hype on this board. Recreational fanboys will be ecstatic about this launch, that probably explains RGP...

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for making my point for me. Zero Rake did not garner any hype on this board either. All it garnered was a bunch of shills and/or investors creating an illusion of hype that never existed beyond the second thread. Yes, it was interesting until thread number 3, after that it was a joke thanks to the shills.

Full Tilt did not get the same discussion here because they did not assign people to slam the boards. We do agree that Full Tilt will not be anything special, but will probably be profitable.

[Syntax]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for making my point for me. Zero Rake did not garner any hype on this board either

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you gone retarted? The rake free concept caused big waves on this board. No one really cared much about "zerorake" it was a huge debate on rakes. Even Ray Zee made the rare comment. There has been no SPAM for Zerorake on this board. Its a new concept that caused a huge discussion on a poker forum. Jeez, half the time zerorake was mentioned, it was called rake free.

Honestly, it is the most simplistic, one dimensional thought proccess to think, "all these posts about zerorake, well they must be from zerorake". My dog can analyze a situation better then that.

[Just The Facts]

[ QUOTE ]
There has been no SPAM for Zerorake on this board.

[/ QUOTE ]


Thank you for giving me the grin of the decade. I have bookmarked this post for eternal posterity.

[Syntax]

Point to one post that is pure spam. Thats a challenge.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Point to one post that is pure spam. Thats a challenge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've agreed with pretty much everything you've said in this thread so far syntax. Fulltilt has garnered the "placid" threads it has because its just another boring site. Zerorake was something different and thast what caused all the excitement, but your still going to lose that challenge, there was lots of spam (which was due I believe to the excitment of a rake free site).

[Syntax]

Perhaps we should agree on what "spam" is.

From Webopedia:
[ QUOTE ]
Electronic junk mail or junk newsgroup postings. Some people define spam even more generally as any unsolicited e-mail. However, if a long-lost brother finds your e-mail address and sends you a message, this could hardly be called spam, even though it's unsolicited. Real spam is generally e-mail advertising for some product sent to a mailing list or newsgroup.

[/ QUOTE ]
** I think forum or discussion board could be easily substitued for "email" in the definition.

This is an example of spam. I had to take it from RGP because spam here is generally wiped out quickly.

[ QUOTE ]
anyone interested in a great bonus on paciifc poker if you deposit $20 you
will recieve $50.00. There are no raked hands req'd on this bonus.

to recieve the bonus goto www.888.com/*** then type in the code ******

downlaod the softare open a new account and after u make your first deposit
you will be credited the bonus right away.

any questions goto www.****************

or email me ******@****.***

thanx


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a forum for the discussion of ideas. There has been a lot of talk, but I don't think there has been a single person promote the site that is compenstated for it. If some overzealous fan says to play there because they really like it, it is not SPAM. If some jackass troll screws around and creates a new profile to say "zerorake" just to agitate people, it is not SPAM.

I have not seen one instance where zerorake (a paid advertisor on this site) had spammed this board.

I could have missed it, so prove me wrong.

[Alobar]

true, by that definition you are correct.

But I think you can also define spam as a whole serious of meaningless posts on the same subject. It would be like if I started 50 threads talking about how great lance armstrong is. Everyone would say "Quit spamming the boards with all this lance armstrong crap!!!!". So by that definition there was definately zerorake spam.