Is it just me....

It is almost a rite-of-passage to post about the good ol days..and I'm not certain I've earned the right yet...

but am I the only one who thinks that the forum seems to be dying off a bit?

It seemed to be a lot more fun and active, way back in '06.

Comments

  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    It seemed to be a lot more fun and active, way back in '06.

    You shoulda seen it in '04. Those where the days.......
  • Hang on just a tic kids...this Caddy fight could be good. Two months or so of PM flame war, I assure you he's got skillz. book your seats now.
  • agreed; beanie, zithal, etc. seemed to have a lot more interesting posts back then. Also we use to have active commentators on this site but they have more or less vanished.
  • JohnnieH wrote: »
    You shoulda seen it in '04. Those where the days.......

    That's when I joined.

    The days of Magi and BBC going at it, GTA and BBC going at it.

    Half the forum and BBC going at it.

    I still check the forum almost daily, and I play poker.....but it's rare that I post here. Besides, I live in Vancouver now, poker doesn't exist west of waterloo for most of this forum.
  • Sad but true. Hand histories aren't being offered much anymore, and even when they are, the responses have been pretty quiet overall. Alot of old forumers have elected to leave completely are like Dino, only check in and not contribute. Not sure why. Personally, I miss the old debates, even the flame wars. Don't have any thing to offer as a suggestion to revamp the forum, but I'm all ears to any suggestions anyone else may have.
  • STR82ACE wrote: »
    Hand histories that don't suck aren't being offered much anymore
    Fixed.

    /g2
  • As always...thanks /g2 for the clarification
  • I'm doing my best.. on the flame war front...see other thread.
  • I miss the old forum. It just looked much cooler. And much more Canadian. Felt more like home. This new one is too red.

    /g2
  • I have been watching. And I am not amused. YET!
  • I've felt this way for a while, and posted this a number of times (although I was often shot down being told the forum is fine). I enjoyed the poker discussions, and even some of the off-topic flame wars. However, too often the actual poker discussions broke down into off-topic flame wars, and the original thread got lost. The thread Kristy mentions (http://pokerforum.ca/showthread.php?t=14151) is a perfect example - started off as a great discussion, then turned into a long, heated fight with little reference to the original thread. That's half the reason why I don't bother posting anything "real" anymore - you know it's just going to get lost in the noise anyway.

    I know that there are gems hidden if you look for them, I just don't feel like expending the effort anymore. And I'm embarrassed to admit that most of my recent posts (which aren't related to home games) haven't been that productive either.
  • beanie42 wrote: »
    I've felt this way for a while, and posted this a number of times (although I was often shot down being told the forum is fine). I enjoyed the poker discussions, and even some of the off-topic flame wars. However, too often the actual poker discussions broke down into off-topic flame wars, and the original thread got lost. The thread Kristy mentions (http://pokerforum.ca/showthread.php?t=14151) is a perfect example - started off as a great discussion, then turned into a long, heated fight with little reference to the original thread. That's half the reason why I don't bother posting anything "real" anymore - you know it's just going to get lost in the noise anyway.

    I know that there are gems hidden if you look for them, I just don't feel like expending the effort anymore. And I'm embarrassed to admit that most of my recent posts (which aren't related to home games) haven't been that productive either.
    I think you're wrong beanie. I think if you just completely ignore 50%+ of the posts you can still have a great discussion. It's not as much work as you may think.

    I guess my opinion is this... If you aren't part of the solution you're part of the problem. Possibly harsh, but I think it is fair for anyone who has stopped contributing to the forum due to flame wars, spam, newbies, etc.

    Also, I don't believe your "being told the forum is fine", but I trust you'll produce a bunch of links proving me wrong :)

    And don't feel bad if posts aren't productive. IMO, as long as they're entertaining in any way, it's all good. Ron Jeremy though, that's just gross. Shame on caddy for stooping that low ;) if you're gonna flame with porn stars please good looking ones only.

    /g2
  • Respectfully Trevor, your source of amusement and entertainment may differ from mine, but neither is more valid or worthwhile.

    To claim that you can determine what makes a good thread seems unreasonable...and I'm guessing good P.D. isn't it...but the proof is in the pudding, let's check the # of views on equally aged and sized flame wars vs. poker discussions.

    I'm not certain, but I expect the results to support my position more than yours.



    Well at any rate, here's the torch guys, I put in a few hours posting randomness that I would want to read....your turn to pimp our CPF
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    Respectfully Trevor, your source of amusement and entertainment may differ from mine, but neither is more valid or worthwhile.

    To claim that you can determine what makes a good thread seems unreasonable...and I'm guessing good P.D. isn't it...but the proof is in the pudding, let's check the # of views on equally aged and sized flame wars vs. poker discussions.

    I'm not certain, but I expect the results to support my position more than yours.

    I don't think I claimed that I "can determine what makes a good thread", only that I personally don't like/enjoy what's going on, and I think that's partly why the forum is dying. But you can find a good flame-war on any forum, any topic, I think it's the other content which keeps you there (and I don't see as much other content anymore). Not sure if you fabricating a claim from me is an attempt to spark another flame-war (since the one with Caddy seems to be ending now) or just that my post wasn't clear, but whatever. I'm just giving an alternative reason supporting your assertion that the forum is dying.

    Either way, I'm a strong believer in letting the "market" decide, and everyone does seem to prefer the flame-wars, so I don't dispute your position at all. I also realize my views are often way outside the main (many of our conversations, here and live, good ones and ugly) have shown that. And if I don't like things, I don't need to read or contribute as often, and that's what I've chosen to do. I think the forum will grow or die, and members will come and go, as the forum meets each members needs and preferences. And the majority of active forumers will shape what the forum becomes, for better or worse, and that's how it's supposed to work.
  • I didn't actually read all that, I might tomorrow:

    Quick Q though: It was you who pm'd AJ and asked him to ask Caddy and I to tone it down a little right?
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    Quick Q though: It was you who pm'd AJ and asked him to ask Caddy and I to tone it down a little right?
    No - as I said, I'm basically letting the forum take care of itself now...
  • ok thanks for letting me know
  • It is almost a rite-of-passage to post about the good ol days..

    It's actually a function of poker itself and the boom bust cycle that has gone on in the meantime. I mean, back in "the good old days" we had a large pool of players that all started with the same skill level. Discussions involved basics and intermediate level thinking. As time goes out though, the 'starters' upgrade thier skill and start having higher and higher level talks. Thread discussions that were interesting and relevant at this lower stage become boring and redundant.

    So you've got this large mass of players who have skilled up over the past two years but theres still this trickle of new players showing up. So the newbies get put out of place as yet another "raise AK?" question pops up.

    Now on the other side, the skilled up people start to realise that the situations they discuss are being more and more read and situation dependent, which makes doling out advice harder. So that trickles off too.

    Toss in NL replacing limit, and I can see pokerforums having a hard time.
  • BBC Z wrote: »
    It's actually a function of poker itself and the boom bust cycle that has gone on in the meantime. I mean, back in "the good old days" we had a large pool of players that all started with the same skill level. Discussions involved basics and intermediate level thinking. As time goes out though, the 'starters' upgrade thier skill and start having higher and higher level talks. Thread discussions that were interesting and relevant at this lower stage become boring and redundant.

    So you've got this large mass of players who have skilled up over the past two years but theres still this trickle of new players showing up. So the newbies get put out of place as yet another "raise AK?" question pops up.

    Now on the other side, the skilled up people start to realise that the situations they discuss are being more and more read and situation dependent, which makes doling out advice harder. So that trickles off too.

    Toss in NL replacing limit, and I can see pokerforums having a hard time.

    When did you become the voice of reason?

    I do agree though.
  • After reading the post, I had to double check to make sure who wrote it myself ;)

    Nail it bang on though didn't he.
  • I want to further add that poker discussion is not the only driving factor to visit a forum. I think that 36 hrs and 800 views proves the point that Beanie elluded to.

    Flame away, but the fact is that many of you read and enjoy the nonsense.
    and the one thing this forum is lacking of late is fun.

    BBC is right..I can't bear another conversation about when to fold a/k pf and I'm certain that while many are feeling my same fatigue;

    If your clicks can be extrapolated, you certainly don't seem to be getting tired of the drivel I tend to spout. In the interim I am just doing what I can to make myself laugh in the long gaps between interesting and fresh conversation.


    Soooo ummmm.....who would win in a fight? Bill Cosby 1982 or Jack Nicholson today?
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    Soooo ummmm.....who would win in a fight? Bill Cosby 1982 or Jack Nicholson today?
    Any year Jack Nicholson would slap the sh*t out of any year Bill Cosby. He'd smack him across the face with a cup of pudding.

    /g2
  • g2 wrote: »
    Any year Jack Nicholson would slap the sh*t out of any year Bill Cosby. He'd smack him across the face with a cup of pudding.

    /g2

    New video...2 guys 1 pudding cup :wav:
  • lol..gg hobbes!
Sign In or Register to comment.