I guess that's where we differ, if I wanted to know what a good starting hand in 2-7 was I'd likely (1) good what is a good triple draw starting hand (2) buy a book like susper systems 2 (3) watch death donkeys videos on deuces crakced which I've seen referenced multiple times as a great beginners 2-7 resource on here multiple times so I'm sure your aware of it,
(4) asked a friend that plays 2-7.................
........(5) expected another poster to guide me to these resources.

Sure we may differ in that way (although I have no idea what your #1 means). That really has nothing to do with my point though, which is how we should treat others who differ from ourselves. I believe in helping them, you (and some others here) apparently believe in mocking them.

I can probably show you 500+ posts where I've personally helped you, can you show me 1 single post where you have helped me? Like BBB said, I'm sorry the manner in which you receive all the free help and info in return for absolutely nothing isn't done so in your preferred tone.

For example, I've probably started 30-40 threads that I think are somewhat interesting limit holdem spots.
Some probably are and some probably aren't. Some had interesting discussions and some didn't, but there was no mocking or sarcasm, just an avenue for interesting discussion. In those 30-40 threads you posted a total of 0 times.

Whatever, you say they are helping me, I know they're not. I assume they aren't helping many others (but have admitted I could be wrong). I know your post in this thread didn't help anyone, nor was it intended to. I can't imagine your post in the 2-7 forum mocking me was intended to help anyone, and even the forum moderator said he didn't understand why you posted it. Even if it some of your sarcastic posts are meant to be helpful, I find them very rude and think they bring down the forums.

You completely ignored my post. Sure my post in this thread didn't help anyone; however my strategy posts help quite a few people including you.
(I'll apologize in advance if this comes across as mean as it's not actually intended to).

However this requires you to realize that some of your views/strategy on limit holdem is just wrong. If you realize soemthing you do is wrong because of one of my posts his is helpful to you. The fact thst you choose to dismiss some of them Becuse some of my other posts are written in a sarcastic tone doesn't mean they aren't helpful.

On the other hand, like I said in my last post, can you show me single post of yours that's helpful to me?

I didn't ignore anything; No, I cannot show you one of my posts that has helped you because I'm not in your head and don't know what you are helped by. Just like you cannot show me one of your posts that has helped me because you're not in my head. I guess you can keep saying or even believing some of your posts are helpful to me, but I don't see what it accomplishes. I have helped people in lots of my posts and been thanked by them. I doubt you really need or are looking for help from me.

OK, I have no dog in this hunt and should probably be smarter than to wade in here. But I do have some ideas of what behaviors make for an informative forum:

• One-line posts are generally -EV to the community. Exception: When pointing people to a fuller explanation of a concept. "What?" just doesn't add anything. You don't have to be as long-winded as me but please write that extra line to explain your reasoning, no matter how expert you are relative to the person asking the question. Many of us lurking will thank you.
• Beginners asking for clarification can be +EV, because other beginners may not have the nerve to ask the same question. But, these interactions should be quick and not clutter up the thread, at least until the beginner has processed beginner-level materials.
  
  So, if someone had said, "Rob, we raise because 762xx is a good hand and because we want to isolate a player who probably isn't good. Please check out the FAQ for basic TD resources," that would have been great. No need to berate.
  • That said, part of Rob's problem in that thread is an air of confidence, although it's very minor. "I'm not really loving hero's starting hand," sounds like someone who thinks they know what they're talking about. Confidence is fine, but when you're confident and very wrong, you need to be ready for a little flak.
  • Even I (just from watching Triple the Gold and barely having played TD know that 762xx is good and isolating is mandatory here.
• Personal disputes concerning a couple of posters really really detracts from this thread and should have been taken to PM or low-content threads a long time ago.
• I do think there's a lot of value, though, to discussing the art of asking and answering questions well. So I'd like to see some of this subthread (the posts that aren't ad hominem) moved to a separate thread, maybe linked in the FAQ. But not pinned! ARRRGH pinned threads (except the FAQ).
  

Finally, I leave you with this from Stack Overflow. We're not tech geeks, but we sort of are (poker know-how is our "technology") so it applies: http://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask

So for starters, don't take this the wrong way. You know I like you and want to see you succeed.

But I suspect you're simply not good enough to be helped by Jon Locke. His posts and posting style are meant for already-good players who have a hard time differentiating excellent from good (which he calls "good" and "bad," respectively). I agree with you in that I don't think it's particularly helpful for new or mediocre players, who are still sorting out good from bad (what JL would probably call "bad" and "wtfterribad," respectively).

Chillrob,

I have a solution for you. If JonLocke really doesn't have one post that you have found useful, then just put him on ignore.

Enjoy your nice happy helpful forum with all the other experts who give advice freely.... Oh wait, the majority of posts in this forum are from people who probably struggle to beat or are losing at mid stakes lhe. But at least you will all be happy together and won't have to worry about your feelings being hurt giving each other weak/incorrect advice.

Remember sitting in Vegas with HOWMANY and DeathDonkey describing this player as horrible (but maybe winning reg) and how she'd play a hand -- it was exactly how I would have played it. People better than you calling things you normally do horrible is both normal and educational. It hurts the ego, but is so good for your pocketbook.

If all of us crushed mid and high stakes, there'd be no point in having a forum. That, or some people would demand getting $ to post. I think sometimes that the lack of tone in the internet makes it easy to misread some people's posting style as some sort of death-insult rather than gentle kidding. Add in that for those of us who aren't stone-cold experts it can be hard to know really certain guy who just posts with confidence and actual soul-owning high stakes baller.

fwiw, if you don't know DrOlson, he's the second one of those.

Yeah I know, just saying don't get all butthurt if JL is snarky or posts one liners sometimes. He posts plenty of content.

He's one of my favorite 3 posters, so I'm biased.

And sometimes the lack of tone in the Internet makes condescension easier to recognize.

Like you said, a lot of the great players *accurately* point out how bad the rest of us are. Let's not pretend they're necessarily friendly and nice just because they play well.

If I'm bad and DrOlson says so, is that unfriendly? Like maybe he saves me $500/night in lost EV in the blackhawk 30/60 by telling exactly how/why I'm bad in a few spots. I can take that as him not respecting me as a fellow mid or high stakes player, or, it could be a very kind gift. It depends on how much of my ego is involved. Having never made the leap through 10/20 online, there must be holes in my game. Having those pointed out doesn't make me sad. It could be that someone is condescending or it could be that you're making really clear mistakes. It depends. Having met a good portion of people from here and mid-stakes IRL, the nice guy to jerk ratio is really favorable. If you just assumed most people were nice, you'd be right a huge majority of the time.

Good-bad and friendly-unfriendly are orthogonal axes. There's friendly, good advice; unfriendly, good advice; friendly, bad advice; and unfriendly, bad advice.

I agree with you - most of the time, people are friendly. For MS advice, good matters more than friendly. (I think SS is different because SS-good is common and MS-good is uncommon.)

I've learned a lot from JLs posts, mainly about sarcasm, but like Rob I don't have much of an attention span to learn much else. I have found the less I post the less sarcasm I receive, so let me humbly offer that as a solution for Mr. 'Chill".

If this were a grammar forum and Jon told me he was struggling in a mid level writing class, I'd tell him that his grasp of the written English language is awful and he should read Strunk and White until his eyes bleed. Is that mean? Maybe. Does it make his course of action crystal clear? Absolutely.

You know, maybe a clean start with a screen name that's a better fit for your personality might clear that dark cloud? The one you think appears whenever someone responds to one of your posts with something other than complete agreement and encouragement?

Again may I humbly suggest "Hypersensitive Rich"?

Well, I think everyone has had their say.

Again to answer the OP, the Bellagio is the one and only choice. Let's take the low content back to its thread. Or it's thread if your so inclined.

Lol, just realized that I can't lock this.

Why not just suggest reading Strunk and White without the part about you're eyes bleeding?

Because he might only read it once if I leave that part out. He obviously needs more help than that.

I have read it, and only once. This leads me to conclude that OTR's post (if this were a grammar forum) is only helpful with the added advise (or what kthers would call insults).

I Rememebr a friend that was new to PLO posted a hand on here looking for advise, the first response was sit out prelfop. Rather than quit playing PLO he realized he needed to out a lot of time and effort into learning the game away form the table and was actually thankful for the response.

So your saying that people are more likely (vs less likely) to read posts with ... "personal commentary"?

(Its an honest question - I at least appreciate the psychology behind "outrage media" and provoking people to watching a show or clicking a link by making them mad. I don't think it applies to forum posts but could be convinced.)

No, he's saying people don't realize they are truly bad at soemthing until somebody says "hey, your really awful at this and unless you change you will contine to be awful at it."