I don't see the issue with allowing non-strategy related threads in this forum. While this particular section of 2p2 may be quite dead compared to other sections, we still are a community of friends and when it comes to social events I think most of us would like to meet one another (whether its for the first time or not) rather than the forumers from other sections of 2p2.

If the clutter occurs, then take action. Something like an *Official* rungood thread would be unnecessary, but there are plenty of non-strategy threads that not only serve a positive purpose in this forum but also belong in this forum because when we're looking out to get a house in vegas for a week or two, we would rather look for a fellow MSFR player that we happen to interact with every single day on 2p2 and FTP/Stars rather than some random guy from whatever section you believe a thread like that belongs in.

I guess my bottom line is that 2p2 is a really large forum and most of us don't have the time or just don't care to read more than a few sections of it. If what you want in this forum is to have a nice community within the community, I think some non-strategy threads from time to time are going to have to be created.

Subforum for ***OFFICIAL*** threads. Problem solved we can all get along now!



I like the way it is now/was before. No need to nazi up the forums.

Jumanji- I am not bitter at anything. I wanted a place on 2p2 where people can post strategy and not get trolled. I wanted a place where strategy threads can thrive and not be overshadowed/overrun by the same type threads that permeate every other forum (I'm talking *official* type threads). This forum is becoming such a place.

If anyone were to look at yours and mine posting history, I think they would have the exact opposite take on who is the bitter one.

Adam- I agree with you, and HAVE let some non strategy threads to be created in this forum. Where do we draw the line though? I drew one, was asked that we move it, moved it, and it still wasn't good enough. All this does is make me want to compromise less and less when anything I concede isn't good enough if you don't get everything you want.

It's a 2way street when compromising, and the idea in and of itself is the sacrificing of certain/some wants in order to find common ground. You guys refuse to want to sacrifice anything. Makes compromising hard. Remember, I don't want this forum overrun by *official* threads. There has to be a middle...

Where is the line drawn where I deem too much clutter by *official* threads? And once that line is drawn, how to I decide which ones get the ax and which don't? And once that is decided, how do I explain to the poster whose thread got axed why his wasn't good enough but the other dudes was? The compromise we struck with tournament threads WAS the line being drawn. It WAS the action taken to ensure clutter doesn't ensue. It WAS me avoiding a situation where I would have to lock a thread and make that poster unhappy.

Of course I would like to have a nice community within the community and that is why we have 2 tournament threads (with a 3rd on the horizon), 2 chat threads, a goals thread, a live v online thread, and every now and then a witty OT thread (brb rings a bell). Really, I haven't given enough? Really, there needs to be more or I am just stifling this community? Please don't forget about the growing community within this forum that doesn't participate in many of these threads. We have more than one "nice community" within our community and their needs should be met as well.

mateusek- I will look into a possibility for a subforum for all *official* threads if you'd like. If I recall though, I think I already did and was denied this.

no treally sure I understand the continuing discussion. jloc made a decision. some people had a problem with it. he listened and respected their argument and gave them back what they asked for while giving a reasonable explanation for his initial decision.

why isn't everyone happy?

I guess I just don't see why we have to compromise when we haven't really been creating threads like crazy. I just don't like to see that dankness takes the time to create a cool, creative thread that's kind of different from the norm here and has to preface it with "mods please don't delete this." The OT threads that aren't *Official* threads seem to be rare enough to not have to police anything, though it seems you disagree.

If it's just official threads that you're worried about, I think you're overreacting because a) the Tournament threads that have recently spawned have a deliberate purpose and aren't just spam and b) there aren't many more of them likely to span and if they do they'll likely have a deliberate purpose as well.

jcl seems to put a ton of effort into doing what he thinks is best for teh forums, and i think its out of line to personally attack him for it.

on the subject of cluttering the forum with random non-strat threads, i think jcl's made some good deletes before (time to look back at 2010 extremely redundant version of brb thread), but having one pca thread and one aussie millions thread seems pretty reasonable (if there were 2 threads for each, one for stars regs and one for ftp regs, that would be redundant).

if jcl's ultimate goal is to get a good amt of strat discussion from both online/live players, i think having a bunch of different interesting/useful threads active (even satirical ones like live v online) will get ppl to visit msfr more often, and will significantly increase their likelihood of poasting.

im probably repeating what other ppl have said, but thought i would throw in some support for jcl

pizzle- Appreciated.

Adam- Do you take issue with the fact that I locked the threads and created a discussion here, in the discussion thread, about how I felt about keeping a proper official-strategy ratio (and then reopening them for you after the discussion)? Or, do you take issue with the fact that I even have a ratio of official-strategy threads that I'd like to see happen?

If it's the former, well I'm not sure how I could have made the process any more democratic than I did. Could I have posted in this thread before I locked them? And would that have made a/the difference? Maybe. And I can concede that the way I went about it may have come off brash. I wasn't sure if anyone would notice my post in this thread so locking them was more of an attention grabber so we can come to some sort of agreement.

If it's the latter, well it is the start of the new year and I wanted to make it clear that I didn't want this forum overrun by official/OT threads like MSNL. On this point I am adamant, and the reason is because I want MHFR to be a functioning strategy forum. MSNL no longer is. Sure there are some threads weaved between all of the OT/official threads but for the most part has turned into a chat forum for mid stakes players. And that is fine and I am more than ok with it.

But for MHFR to succeed in becoming a strategy based forum we must be able to strike a balance. Otherwise we devolve into MSNL. This is the same reasoning I had with getting rid of leveling...and trolling....and rudeness... A forum that is strategy based can not survive unless certain conditions are met.

Now, finding the right balance should be what this discussion is all about. Where do we draw a line and how do we handle things when that line is crossed is what needs to be asked. People put time into their threads and closing them can be annoying to them. So we need to find a way for this community to police itself in regards to maintaining a nice balance. If/when this balance is disrupted something has to be done.

vinivici- Much appreciated and you bring up excellent points. Some OT/official threads are absolutely a stimulant to the forum.. You are so correct that a good thread brings outside traffic which can only benefit the strategy threads. We just need to make sure that they are made at a pace that wont clutter the forum. I try my best to be fair but as you pointed out, I have closed threads that seem redundant and/or serve a few of the community.

As for the recent tournament threads, I agree that they serve many people in this community and others and thus I reopened them. But to ensure this balance, I wanted to find out how many tournament threads were being planned on created throughout the year and let it be known that each tournament can not garner its own thread. These two obviously are big in this community and the WSOP is the mofo WSOP and deservedly will get its own thread. We struck a deal that EPT threads can be put in the pokerstars thread and found out that many of the WPT and other big tournaments won't cater to enough people that will warrant a thread. I believe we have made a successful negotiation here, don't you?

And I love the occasional OT thread like "brb", "live vs online", "the santa thread", etc.. They all bring something to this forum whether that be humor, nostalgia, or just good will. As you said they are beneficial in more than one way and I hope we have more of them. They just need to be made at a reasonable pace.

First, I apologize if my posts have come off as an attack - that definitely was not my intention, though I will admit I may have been a bit bitter for having a few of my posts deleted when I thought they should not have been. Regardless, that's all in the past now and thus that's not worth talking about. (Not sure if vini's post was directed at me, but either way I want to make it clear that I am not attacking jloc at all.)

I have no issue with the way you handled these new threads, as it was quite fair and in the end it was all the same. I just feel that with a forum like this one, a lax approach to moderating is best. I'm not saying don't do anything at all - I hate all of the pointless leveling and trolling in strat threads as much as anyone, and I've never even had that happen in one of my own threads. I personally would not have locked the threads if I were in your shoes, but would have taken action if new (and more importantly, unnecessary) threads became rampant.

As for the strategy to *official* ratio, I think it's fair. I agree that too many *official* threads can clutter the forum, but there are plenty of *official* threads that are quite useful. I'm not sure if a quantitative ratio is the solution, but it's fair. I think you should just use your judgement to determine whether or not a given thread is useful (A WSOP thread is very useful whereas a "Run good" thread is completely useless). Either way, I think we've talked way too much about this topic as new threads such as these will probably be quite rare anyway.

I'm glad that you like the occasional OT thread because I like the life that those bring to the forum.

Imo, considering the lack of participation in the forum, I think anything that doesn't get absurd should be allowed, as long as it relates to the game of full ring, or relates to msfr regs.

I can see why someone would think an mtt thread doesn't make sense in the forum, but when I enter a major mtt, I'm not gonna want to chat about it with a bunch of mtt donks I don't know. I'm going to want to post in a forum where I know people and whose opinions I "respect". ;-) Assuming 2+2 is in the business of trying to improve volume and quality of posts, I don't see any other forum where I would want to post with others on major mtts.

For me, posting on 2+2 is 80% social. Even the little strat I post is "social", since I'm usually not posting if I don't know you or your sn. And I certainly don't open the forum looking for strat. The occasional strat thread I open and post in is purely a function of how many other threads of interest there is in the forum. So if the "social" aspects of the forum start getting cut back, there's a good chance people will lose interest in the forum completely.

Not trolling when I say this....DFly FOR MOD!!!

we want doublefly, we want doublefly we want doublefly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm a new relatively comer down here, but I'd like to say something.

Every time I opened a strat thread, I've learned something that actually improved my game. A lot.

I never found people being too rude. Of course, people didn't give complete answers "for free", and I had to keep the discussion going to get them. But I always got them.

People that helped me (Jason, DFly, GrandMelon, 00Brinan00, Sparky... sorry if I forget someone) are all regs that could easily only coach for $ and never post strats. Given the actual state of the poker economy, this is huge imo.

On the other side, I'm 99.9% sure these people wouldn't be around here if they couldn't find the 'social" aspects DFly was referring to.

The quality of a forum isn't in the OT/strat thread ratio. It has very little to due with high traffic.

It resides in the quality of the posters. So let's keep them around.

this is actually a really good idea. can this happen?

Why again does this forum need another mod?

With all due respect, who said another?