Return to Answer

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the effect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the effect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the effect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the effect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the affect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.

I can offer an outsider's perspective on this. For some background, I have been playing poker for over a decade, at times professionally. In this time, I have contributed to TwoPlusTwo and to poker discussions that take place on other platforms. I have a solid understanding of the rules, procedures, nuances, best practices and healthy habits, etc.

I am also a proponent of the Stack Exchange network. Needless to say, I was excited for the prospect of a poker site on SE and watched with anticipation through its proposal and staging phases.

For whatever reason, I didn't stick with it. Apparently not many people did. Maybe Paparazzi is correct that SE is not the optimal format for poker questions.

But by chance, I got a dose of what your community has to offer this week. There was a brief exchange on the /r/poker subreddit wherein someone expressed confusion between the no-limit 50% raise rule and the fixed-limit 50% raise rule.

The Reddit user cited this revision of the top-voted answer to this question which incorrectly interpreted and applied the TDA rule.

No problem, I'll submit an edit. That's what I did. Twice.

Both edits were rejected by Toby Booth who seemed to also misunderstand the wording of the rule. After my first edit was rejected by him, I alerted Toby to his misunderstanding on Twitter and in my second attempt at editing the answer. He again rejected it.

Then Toby argued with me and a poker pro on Twitter, willfully ignoring the wording of the rule and refusing to back down long after he realized he was wrong. At one point he called the wording of the rule subjective in an attempt to save face. It's not at all subjective. When confronted with the effect his conduct was having on the quality of this site, he deflected with the "internet tough guy" response.

This is insane behavior by one of your mods.

You have someone who is either incompetent or malicious submitting more reviews here than anyone else. No wonder nobody wants to participate.

And it's not as if the bar for poker Q&A is super high. The other options have never been great. But at least at TwoPlusTwo and Reddit we can be pretty confident that a single brat isn't able to suppress our corrections while propagating false information in a grab for internet points.

In this particular instance, I cared to the extent that an accepted answer was causing confusion in outside discussions, but I and other poker enthusiasts otherwise don't care about this site. We simply go elsewhere. That is a huge problem for you.

When /r/poker of all places is producing far better and more accurate Q&A content, you know the integrity of your community is tenuous and its outlook dismal.