Personally I find the fact that so many people feel the need to get inebriated shows that the world is pretty crappy when seen through sober eyes.

And thus peace was attempted to be created through the mere absence of conflict.

So my expectation seems to be on point.

Nah. I'm an introvert. I don't enjoy randomly walking out into public and starting random conversations with people I don't know.

Funny story, but I don't get the good triumphing over evil part.

I would think it would be something like a hand where 53o flopped the nuts but AA went runner runner for the win.

Callipygian was BB. Hence, good triumphed.

That makes sense. It's right next to the ocean.

Is Stars, etc blocked?

That's kind of the whole point.

The guy who 3-bets 53o OOP and calls for cards is the good guy in this story, not the evil guy. He's losing money, obviously, but he's more than happy to, and in the long run everyone wins - he has a blast, you make money, and the house stays in business.

But you're tempted to classify him as evil rather than good. And even more to the point, to classify him as evil because the person who had the best hand preflop didn't win the hand.

He's the guy that everyone says they want at their table but as soon as he gets there everyone just complains.

The only one that complains is the player he beats. The rest are rooting for him.

When I associate "good guy" with poker, I think of someone playing well.

I certainly don't think of anyone as "evil" because they play poorly. But I have also never said I want anyone who 3-bets 53o at my table. I prefer opponents who are passive, not maniacs.

Of course in your hand, at least someone else also played poorly since no one bet the flop or turn, letting him get there for free. I would just consider that hand to be the triumph of dumb luck, not good or evil.

For the record, I have never 3-bet 53o. However, I once 3-bet a hand dominated by 53o.

I'll leave it open to debate who's Good and who's Evil in this story.

The guy to my right is playing Angry Birds and giving off a very specific tell. When he has a good hand, like maybe top 20%, he stops playing immediately. When he has a hand he'll consider playing, like 20-70%, he'll finish a level but not start a new level. When he has a truly awful hand, he just keeps playing.

He's in the HJ and he starts a new level, so I figure he's going to fold. But it comes to him and he looks up and looks right and left and then raises. I've got Ye Olde 43 double suited but I figure that's top 85% and sling in 9 chips.

Yadda yadda yadda I fastroll, he looks at my hand incredulously and flips over 84o, then storms off because people taking my money and being super mad about it seems to be a theme in my life.

This thread is a sea of evil with pockets of good.

Without an evil VPN, he'd have to have gone out of country for a couple weeks to set up docs and prove bogus residency outside the US first. Then he could've played outside the country on this trip. My guess is that the Abu Dhabi LHE scene is about as vibrant as their wet t-shirt contest scene. Travelling to all those countries is the nuts though.

New thread title imo.

So people having a nice time doing something that they enjoy shows that the world is a crappy? Doesn't add up to me.

Yet you have almost 28k posts here on 2+2? I don't consider that to be introverted behavior.

You might want to reconsider your concept of introversion. INTJ is a profile that strongly correlates with deep strategic/analytical reasoning.

And a 1 dimensional analysis of personality based on false dichotomies. When you hear about a company that "uses" Myers-Briggs for anything more than a drinking game, you know a lot about them and it isn't good.
It is possible to be someone who enjoys spirited conversations with lots of people via a keyboard and who absolutely loathes live group interactions.
solid
If I lived in Washington state, the threat of a mere felony conviction would keep me from playing online. In a place where blogging results in capital punishment? Not a chance I'd do illegal stuff like that. Actually a little surprised that gambling web sites aren't blocked, tbh.

Also true. But sometimes you're stuck with the tools that you have, even if there are limitations.

I've heard of such things. It's like back in the 1970s(?) when companies played chess with applicants to determine their analytical reasoning. It's about as bad as throwing random math problems at people, which I think was popular last decade.

Just another example of the wrong use of information.

I agree that many fit this profile but I question why they loathe live group interactions. Perhaps they just haven't found the right setting. For me? Whether it's playing a round of golf with strangers as a single, or sitting on a ski lift with strangers, or sitting at a bar next to a stranger, doesn't really matter to me. I've met many nice people in all of those situations and countless other situations. Maybe in a strict debate these experiences aren't worth ****. Oh wel. There are different ways of making sense of reality and I'm not one to say which way is right or wrong. I make sense of the world through my own experience. The news, the papers, history books, etc, these external information sources make it all too easy to look at the world as an evil place imo.

I also agree that putting people into nice neat categories such as "introvert" and "extrovert" doesn't even scratch the surface of human impulse and behavior. Aaron is clearly a closet extrovert in that sense.

+1

The more general question is what the options are.

My former company hired a consultant to come in and give us all the Myers Briggs. Ideal? No. Better than the system we had in place, which was that hiring managers only hired people culturally like them, and neither tried very hard to understand or to be understood by people with different personalities? Absolutely.

My current company hired me in part because, and I'm quoting my boss, I "knocked it out of the park" when it came to random math questions. Ideal? No. Acceptable? Yes. It may have even made sense, in that none of the decision makers were chemists when I interviewed. So my ability to estimate the number of barbers in Chicago coupled with my knowledge of risk adjusted expectation (See? Poker isn't evil.) gave them confidence in my chemistry skills. Ironically (or IMO not ironically), now I'm one of the strongest and most vocal opponents of the random math questions, because now there's a strong chemistry team and we have better options than random math questions.

Because they can't have the good time without altering their consciousness.

I like roller coasters. I have fun at amusement parks. By your logic I cannot have a nice time without altering my relative velocity.

Last night I went to a bar with a friend and had a nice time without drinking a drop of alcohol.

fyp

Note to self: stop feeding trolls.