Pretty good advice. It somehow hasn't bothered him for many years, but this is def the correct attitude towards it.

I actually chatted with him the other day, he owns a company with 4k employees, I'm sure he has more money than any of us here.

i'm in. what about we play at least 3 orbits and then just the player in the BB can decide to sit out by typing "last orbit", after which one orbit will be played by everyone obv.

I understand what you're saying and I think that some people will figure it out and be just as pissed but many won't. I think it's even worse when the non-reg sits out temporarily and everyone sits out - I think in these instances we should be playing even longer like 15 minutes or maybe 5 orbits. I think change can only help the situation though and can't be any worse than the status quo.

I dunno, I emailed Poker Stars High Stakes, maybe they can come up with a better solution. But we need one and quickly.

Well the problem is that it sounds like the damage has been done. If he's already getting pissed off, he could easily quit but then lurk a while to see what happens, and he'll obviously see the game break not long after he quits. To make matters worse, he probably also will see an argument in chat about who screwed over who with regard to getting buttoned (maybe the plan will work flawlessly, but as stated earlier I highly doubt it.) He may not interpret the game breaking as him being the ATM, but he may think something fishy is going on and that he may be getting cheated. It looks like the horse may already be out of the barn here.

People in so far:

asso999
JesusLebtNOT
Heisenb3rg
TPirahna
Umumba
JLlama (At least SP games)
yanekk

I'll keep updating the list and hopefully if and when PokerStars gives the ok or makes another suggestion we can iron out the specifics. I'm agreeable to pretty much anything.

I don't play in these games but I think you're best chance of making something like this work is to get Stars to change the seating rules for the high limits games. Something like not allowing more than one person at a time to be sitting out at the game. If a second person sits out they automatically get kicked from the table and someone on the waiting list gets a shot.

This would mean that when the fish sits out all the regs have to face the decision of losing their seat or carrying on and hoping the fish comes back. Some people will decide to leave but if the waiting list is deep enough then you'll probably find enough people to keep the game going.

I wish sites would become aware of the destructive dynamics that occur between regs and change the rules to stop them. Seat-hopping is another example which could be eliminated by sites putting a rule in which prevents players from leaving a seat and taking a different seat at the table within the next 15 minutes. Seat-hopping is +EV for each reg who does it but neutral EV in the long-run if everyone does it and -EV in the long run if everyone does it and it scares some fish off.

well the first idea is horrible. unless you think if another reg is sitting out you should snap-lose your seat if you have to go take a piss.

tpirahna idea is alright and not exactly new, but will fail like every other of these. Who's gonna post the last button? Why do only superstars sign up for those lists? Say i'm a 1BB/100 loser in that non-8super-5handed lineup. Why should i just give 60 bucks to you people when i could just not? What if i'm willing to play anyhow and have to leave for real life reasons? Insta-Scumbag Thief Scammer. I mean, it's just very hard to beat the prisoner's dilemma in that spot. Especially after 8sup has proven for years that he's not caring a whole lot

good point SG, but if the majority of the regs in that game play a little extra, the amount of equity lost (by whoever, even if a weaker reg just doesn't "sign up" and takes a bit from everyone else) is well worth it if it preserves the game running at all.

The risk of him actually "retiring" is up for debate though.

by "superstars" i obv meant "superstars+jdalla"

well that was implied ldo

is this directed mostly at 8sup games?

tbh im far more worried about a bunch of other whales, from f.ex uzbeki, brazil, ukraine, russia who dont play a ton and seem to be way more bothered by all this than 8sup.
Majority of them are also way way worse players. I think most of you know who i am thinking of.

If all regs suddenly started to keep playing when 8sup sat out I bet it wouldnt change his view much at all. Pretty easy for him to then reason that all these guys must have had a "keep 8sup happy" meeting. Not sure if that makes him feel special in a good or a bad way

I rarely play above 50/100 but u can add me to the list for someone who is willing to keep playing some orbits when any big fish sits out at 30/60+. Definition of fish i guess is pretty clear for all who play 30/60+ 6max games.

I dunno how about adopting the leatherass solution?

The point is you get a situation where people who want to carry on are incentivised to do so without having to form a pact on an online forum first.

whats the leatherass solution?

Peeing in a bottle. It's +EV!

well yeah obv do that if u can. Also while i appear to be quite the party pooper here i agree that the problem exist and is real, i just dont think youre gonna find a solution that is SOO good for the common good that it will trump individual's goals to maximize short term EV