lol i dont even know what you ever were or still are mad about but putting your petty little months-long grievance on display with comments like this at every opportunity is definitely not a good look

Ahh, not mad about anything in particular. It's just classical conditioning - you know, the Pavlov's dog thing.

For years and years, whenever we see "+rep_lol", it's followed by a stream of foul sewage. So now, we see your name and that's what comes to mind.

That is what you planned, right?

Is there an "Official NVG Moderation Discussion Thread" Discussion Thread to discuss moderation of the Official NVG Moderation Discussion Thread

Was the PPA press announcement thread closed because people were giving them a hard time, or because they already have too much exposure? Or other reasons obv.

It was started and closed by Rich so he is the one that could answer your question if he sees this or you could shoot him a PM.

I just got the PPA email regarding that thread as I donated a long time ago.

Wow - he seems like a snowflake if he closed it down.

And screw the sports betting stuff - I didn't buy a t-shirt for that!

Why is WPN still allowed to have banners up in light of all of the issues coming to light? Money is money, but should you guys really be funneling players here right now? Needs to be taken down until there is some sort of concrete evidence it isn't ran by scumbags.

That is a question for the ATF forum if you wish management to pay attention.

I'm not sure what that is.

ATF = "About the Forums" forum.

It's the "umbrella" forum where members can post their views/questions to 2+2 admin, mods, and other members.

Edit: I see you already found it.

I have been barred from posting in the Joey/ACR allegations thread, and on the one hand I basically understand why, but on the other I think its a disservice to the community for that to be so.

There is a relevant situation with a crypto currency called USD tethers. The proposal is the digital tokens (USDT) are 1:1 backed in a secret bank account and there is a social media campaign trying to audit them and calling them a scam.

We don't seem to understand, collectively, the importance of free market capitalism and free banking (theory). This is very comparable to poker. You want the liquidity of the markets to arbitrage and evaluation the trustworthiness of the currency issued, whether USDT or chips on a poker site.

In regard to Joey's endeavor and acr...

A poker site should be allowed to offer any exploitable parameters that they want. So I think if they are giving a loophole for cheating, it is their right. But that might not be palatable for players so I would rather suggest that if a site feels they can create a greater player pool and liquidity by offering regs and astute players the ability and incentive to late reg and tank into a bubble then that is their right. It's completely moral and rational.

For this I think Joey would say ACR is intentionally fostering cheating, or at worse, obviously allowing it, and I think ACR would reply, “That is only your subjective opinion.”

And if ACR offers this “loophole”, which seems to be only shown in freerolls (or is it low stakes or high stakes too?) and players catch on, is it really that these players are nefarious and surely colluding? Or are they good players because they see a +ev spot and a coincidence of wants with the site that is trying to have reasonable players fields so the tournaments fire.

This has SOMEWHAT been brought up in that thread. But I think I understand the counter argument better than those that have similar sentiments.

Another example, and I brought this up and can't understand why we see it as a derail, is if a site uses bots to fill up tables and tournaments and that these bots are either break-even or have a negative expectation, or if they are profitable, that the site puts the bot winnings back into the economy of the site through either rakeback or being added tourney bonuses (ie overlays) etc.

If we aren't balance the discussion with these points I think we are hurting the poker community and making it impossible for new competitors to arise.

Are you the Nash guy that got banned loads of times?

yea that free market trickle-down-esque garbage sounds lovely in theory except for one fairly big problem- that's not at all how it works in reality. sites don't increase rakeback or give more bonuses, the shareholders and execs just pocket more money- same as it ever was.

if that's the best take you have to give in your defense here, then i'm glad they banned you.

You aren't describing a free market. And you are also cleary not aware of the emerging model (which is already paying negative rake and will likely have deflationary chps).

Generally speaking 2+2 mods are charged with facilitating a well-run discussion forum.

A mod's central focus is not judging whether views are true or false, important or unimportant, popular or unpopular, new or old, etc.

A mod's central focus is facilitating and encouraging discussion that is productive, informational, lively, enjoyable, vigorous, spirited, entertaining, and topical.

To those ends, occasionally a member may be asked to modify their posts or posting style for the betterment of the community. Occasionally a member may be asked to contain certain views to a limited number of threads where those views are most germane.

In this specific case, I think it is fair to state that you (Nooseknot) have had more than ample opportunity to express your views here on NVG and throughout the 2+2 forums. In fact, I would hazard to guess that there are only a few NVG'ers who are not aware of your views on the subject in question. So allowing those views to be repeatedly posted in threads that are not directly related to their subject matter can become unproductive and counter to the aims of this discussion forum.

I applaud much of the modding here. I really do. And it took me a long time to understand what is done well. I wrote up post 1611 sent it sort of accidentally but the sentiments are clear and stand true imo.

It's frustrating watching someone like Joey, who doesn't even use the term GTO correctly, foster different player movements and boycotts (him and anky were tantamount to the 2nd pokerstars player's boycott) that are unreasonable and impossible endeavors.

Any reasonable poker player, as a study of game theory, could see that a boycott cannot work because no player has incentive to unilaterally deviate.

I think it would be important to bring awareness to issues like cheating of all sorts. But Joey's case is weak (meaning it can't hold water). He has misunderstood the way the industry functions and should function. He doesn't understand the economics and game theory. And so it feels to me like his fame and popularity gives him moral and logical impunity where as my reputation makes it so I am not allowed to counter his argument and proposal.

He is not correct and the community and game suffers if I am not allowed to show why.

And I can drop this complaint if asked, but I felt compelled to say something because I care for the game.

(btw ty for your patience whosnext)

So why did Nooseknot get banned and unbanned then? The quality of the Galfond thread went right up when he was away.

I was temp banned, for no good reason, other than pointing out there are multiple new accounts that are filling the thread with a false narrative. Mason confirmed the narrative is false, but the thread is pervaded with ignorance. Interestingly I checked out the primer for what is acceptable posting in NVG and ignorance is one the first listed offences. I have no idea what mod banned me, but I am convinced they are friends with one of the posters whos ignorance I was highlighting (bumpandrun?).

The belief higher rake is favorable for poker needs to be dispelled. I was participating like everyone else except my logic and conclusions run in contrast to the popular (recreational) view.

If the mod that banned me could provide quotes of my "abusive posting" that would be helpful for me to reform.

Also LectorAJ if you are going to imply accusations please cite/reference.

Who banned me and for what reason, I think this should be cross-checked with the other mods...

How is "you are clueless about the real world" acceptable especially from a new account, while any single one of my posts is a bannable offense? That thread is littered with new accounts recently and similar ignorant or no content posts berating my character with absolutely no counter response .

NVG mods individually and collectively work towards the same goals. We frequently communicate with each other via PM and in the private mod forum concerning the current forum issues and posters deserving special consideration. So it truly doesn't matter which specific mod was the one who issued a temp-ban since s/he was acting on behalf of the entire mod team.

Some temp-bans are essentially the equivalent of a lifetime achievement award. There may be no single egregious offense that triggered a temp-ban but rather it may be the result of an accumulation of offenses that on the whole merit a serious mod response.

Mods can, should, and do take into account the views of members expressed in forum threads or post reports. If one person is frequently the subject of post reports and/or critical forum posts, mods may well pay special attention to that person and act accordingly.

Ok. I always read something like, "You need to take it up with the mod that banned you" perhaps that doesn't apply to temp bans. What I am looking for is an ability to post, within the moderation guidelines (including present subjective mod guidelines from present mods) without this:

I could count/quote tons and tons of these posts about me, in many threads, and 90% are made from accounts with less than 30 posts. And the majority of the rest are made from a small group of recreational 2p2 regs that each hold a very similar opinion on rake which is in contrast to mine.

These posts are contentless and attacks and they are not within the stated NVG guideless and I feel it is "special treatment" versus me that they are allowed and I get banned as a result of the "headache" *I* create.

This is why I would like some citations. Because as I understand, and I reviewed my posts, I was responding with proper counter points to specific points and posters. Otherwise I'm just getting banned arbitrarily with no recourse as to staying within the guidelines.

In many cases it can be difficult to explicitly characterize what makes someone a bad poster. When people feel a thread improves when someone is no longer posting in it, that is generally a sign that that someone is posting way too much without adding enough interesting content. When someone comes back from a ban and makes 10 of the last 33 posts in the thread for which they were banned, that is also generally a sign that they are posting way too much. So in your case, I would say that what makes you a bad poster worthy of banning is that you post way too much. I assume you also do not add much new interesting content with each of your posts, though I can't confirm this since I put you on ignore a while ago for some reason (presumably because you post way too much without adding any interesting content). I am not an NVG mod, though, so I cannot speak to why they felt you deserved a ban.

You won't see this but the community will. Firstly my ban was stated for being abusive and I have asked for citations so I can at least understand and have recourse for change. Secondly you can see in the relevant thread I am certainly putting forth a new perspective (ie content) and I am quite certain it is a logical correction that is also perfectly inline with Mason's observations. And this content is interwoven with numerous posts like the above, that are clearly contentless. So I think by your own standards you agree with me and you have already admitted you are ignorant in regard to the actual posts in question.

I think if he (and who knows how many others) blocked you for posting large numbers of redundant/uninteresting posts that he didn’t enjoy reading, then his opinion wouldn’t be swayed by reading even more of them.

I've been around here long enough to know that when someone is making as many posts as you are, and most of those posts are multiple paragraphs longs, that unless you are someone extraordinarily smart or interesting or relevant (like a Phil Galfond), nobody cares about the vast majority of what you are writing; and furthermore that posters like that ruin the ability of other people to enjoy threads due to the inability of these long-winded over-posters to adhere to the most basic social norms of not dominating conversations with stuff everyone else just doesn't care that much about (cf SageDonkey, who is back to making multiple 600-plus-word posts per thread).