I have spent ages trying to think of the best reply to your last comment this is what I have got..... "You are a key board bashing troll, who attempts to start wars and belittle people from behind the safety of his PC/laptop screen". This is the last reply you will get from me as I think you are a complete tool and a waste of my time and oxygen. The above sentence wasn't a planned re-write it was just improv! Yours Kalie xx Hunnybun Posted by Batkin88
For the record, I hope now you understand why you might not get taken as seriously as you'd like on this forum.
On every occasion I've seen you disagree with someone, you either ignore them, or call them childish and immature. I mean, I must be special for you to go a step further, right? :P
Nahh, but seriously, this reaction is really out of line. Whether you've recently had a child or not, this is no way to react in a public forum, or any setting for that matter. Your condescing attitude constantly tries to undermine the oppositions intelligence, and when you finally get stood up to, this type of stuff comes out.
Not ONCE in this entire thread, have I resorted to personal insults, flaming, or name-calling. My argument does not need to hide behind any passive-aggressive attitude for it to be heard, and I consider myself too good of a person to cave to emotion when tackling a contraversial and often fiery topic like this one.
Whether others will just skip to this page, and make incorrect assumptions about our dialogue, is up to them. I hope for your sake this thread dissapears before the forum has a chance to see how you react when confronted with nothing by rational arguments that clash with your preconceptions.
If you want to open the discussion up again, and tackle the subject at hand, I'd be more than happy to get stuck in. But labelling me as:... "An extremely sexist, hypocritical, belittling, childish, immature, tool, waste of time, waste of oxygen, argumentative, key board bashing troll." is unacceptable. All of those words have been sourced directly from this thread. You won't find even 10% of that from my side, I can assure you, and for good reason.
Told ya :P When this inevitably gets deleted, do a vlog about this topic Carlos, need some new content! Posted by DOHHHHHHH
Just screen-capped the lot, just in case I get tempted to do so :P
Should be a few coming very soon man, just had an insane amount of BS to get through. Will MSG ya personally when a tonne go up (maybe even tonight if you're lucky! Ooooooooh!)
Good stuff Smit, I do like a good vlog. Still gutted you've pulled out of the SPT 6-max.
FWIW, it's a shame what the thread deteriorated in to, through no fault of your own imo. I love a good debate but as you say, your fight should always be with the arguements made not the person giving them.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said. I understand why some people might have concerns about playing with men (or w/e) but the solution is to resolve the concerns not just create a workaround.
Just read this whole thread hadmissed it fairly took off! lol
No biggies, a contentious issue 2 different opinions expressed/ debated it's all good.
Was pretty funny at female only tournies inAmerica that they made the buyin for males 10 x that of ladies to prevent men entering as men were entering and claiming discrimination so they had to be allowed in! Charging them a lot more soon sorted it out haha
Smitalos; you are a good guy i like you despite the fact you chickened out of playing me in £1 turbo games lol
I would say it's good to have our opinions, and debate it, but it's just a public forum. A chilled out fun community!
I would say it's good to have our opinions, and debate it, but it's just a public forum. A chilled out fun community! It's all good Posted by LARSON7
It's not all good, some of it is utter tripe. Mainly the 'I've seen 5 pocket pairs in a row flopped quads in 4 of them and lost each time' and 'sky is rigged but I'm going to register for a few more tournaments' and 'I'm leaving please give me a guard of honour oh I'm back again' threads.
This one provoked debate and was interesting to a point. Smit debates hard, maybe tonally we got into a bit of a scrap here. Guard down on the 'brain sports' comment, although I highly suspect that was left in in jest.
Let's encourage people to make suggestions, and encourage others to discuss them (positive or negative), without getting personal.
Good stuff Smit, I do like a good vlog. Still gutted you've pulled out of the SPT 6-max. FWIW, it's a shame what the thread deteriorated in to, through no fault of your own imo. I love a good debate but as you say, your fight should always be with the arguements made not the person giving them. I agree with pretty much everything you've said. I understand why some people might have concerns about playing with men (or w/e) but the solution is to resolve the concerns not just create a workaround. Posted by Lambert180
Cheers bud, I'll get 'em up sooner rather than later, I promise. SPT Grand Final at the DTD, i'll 100% be there, and drinks on me. Again, another promise for you and ye forum faithful. I tried to keep this thread on the more meaty parts of the topic, but ultimately failed I guess. I know my approach can be brutally blunt at times (if not, all the time, haha :P) and some people will naturally take the brash, crushing of bad ideas bit to heart. As said, I don't think a set of ideas belong to anyone, so taking offence when someone points out why you're wrong, feels really silly to me (especially when it has the ability to make you better. Win win!) And, while I do my best to filter every one I come across through the ol' Logic + Reason machine, I genuinely love it when someone can tweak something I've said or reasons I've given, to make them even better.
But yeah, you said it yourself sir. Long story short, creating seperate tourneys for women is just solving one problem with another. It's the attitude in the first place that needs correcting, whether it's women for poker, baking or yoga for men, knitting and bridge for the young, or the internet for the old. Saying these groups of people can't like said activity is just... well, lol. Basically. ty for speaking up in this forum sir, it's appreciated in more ways than a few pixels will allow me to express. That goes for you too Dohhh, even if you do love to be the peacemaker! :P
...Smitalos; you are a good guy i like you despite the fact you chickened out of playing me in £1 turbo games lol
I would say it's good to have our opinions, and debate it, but it's just a public forum. A chilled out fun community!
It's all good
N'awwww, ty sir! Although, I'm too much of a nit to let my Sharkscope graph get demolished by the like of you With the way I play, it'll be no time before my bankroll won't even allow me to play in £1 games man, so I'll hit you up in them ASAP b4busto!
In Response to Re: New female tourneys : It's not all good, some of it is utter tripe. Mainly the 'I've seen 5 pocket pairs in a row flopped quads in 4 of them and lost each time' and 'sky is rigged but I'm going to register for a few more tournaments' and 'I'm leaving please give me a guard of honour oh I'm back again' threads. This one provoked debate and was interesting to a point. Smit debates hard, maybe tonally we got into a bit of a scrap here. Guard down on the 'brain sports' comment, although I highly suspect that was left in in jest. Let's encourage people to make suggestions, and encourage others to discuss them (positive or negative), without getting personal. Posted by bbMike
Oki dokes, this post is getting wayyyyy too long, so i'll wrap up AQAP.
Thank you, I see the "hard debator (debater? It's debater isn't it...????!!?!??"!2121!??"/1!) as a big ol' compliment dude, thank ya.
The point regarding the fact that men are generally speaking, more adept at commonly played mind-sports, is a true one actually. Cliff-notes version, is that men are hard-wired to be (naturally) better at Spacial-Awareness, Math, Perception, Problem solving, etc. Whilst women are (naturally) better at Communication, Social Situations, Language, and the more Artsy stuff? This DOESN'T mean men are better than women at X, or that women crush men at Y, obv obv obv. And it's not a cultural, or sexist statement either. Neurological evidence to back it up. Either I got taught absolutely garbage at A-level Pysch, or it's all about right. Ish, anyway.
"Let's encourage people to make suggestions, and encourage others to discuss them (positive or negative), without getting personal." (Gunna give this the biggest 'one' I can sir.)
In Response to Re: New female tourneys : It's not all good, some of it is utter tripe. Mainly the 'I've seen 5 pocket pairs in a row flopped quads in 4 of them and lost each time' and 'sky is rigged but I'm going to register for a few more tournaments' and 'I'm leaving please give me a guard of honour oh I'm back again' threads. This one provoked debate and was interesting to a point. Smit debates hard, maybe tonally we got into a bit of a scrap here. Guard down on the 'brain sports' comment, although I highly suspect that was left in in jest. Let's encourage people to make suggestions, and encourage others to discuss them (positive or negative), without getting personal. Posted by bbMike
lol aye there is some tripe, but overall it is a fantastic community. In my opinion it should be a chilled out fun community, which for the vast majority it is.
I was being the peacemaker here lol
To expand on what i said, Batkins and Smit are both decent and valuable contriubtors on the forums.
The topic went a bit ott, which can easily happen with a contentious issue.
In my opinion, it's not that big a deal, just something that went a bit to far. It happens.
" From my time spent on there (however brief it may have been!) The split was roughly 50/50, maybe leaning slightly towards guys. Now bear in mind Zynga has a player pool that's bigger than all Real-Money sites put together, the rebuttal of "But all the men are playing REAL money, because they tend to gamble more than women (which is true actually)", crumbles into nothingness when we take a look at the numbers and show even at BEST, you're looking at a 2/1, mayyyyyyyybe even 3/1 ratio of guys to gals that play poker on the internet (real, or play money)."
1. Small sample size, not sure how much you played. but it sounds like it is statistically insufficeint to draw a conclusion from. Therefore I would guess that, statiscially Type 1 error is present so the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.
2. I would love to know where you get the ratio statistics.
3. Playing a facebook application for what could be 20 or so minutes at a time (I dont know) is totally different to sitting for a few hours day in day out grinding. As such in my eyes it would not constiture playing poker. I dont know how many and how long these women play (if they do as you day). But it might well be the equivalent of me knocking a tennis ball against my garage wall for five minutes once a month, and claiming I play tennis - which would be accurate to some extent. But woefully misleading if we were to do a nationwide survey and find that 80% of the population play tennis (for example).
I dont have time to / nor want to waste my time on this post further. So I reject your offer of no reply and you win which is, of course, nonsensical. And will bid this thread farewell.
" From my time spent on there (however brief it may have been!) The split was roughly 50/50, maybe leaning slightly towards guys. Now bear in mind Zynga has a player pool that's bigger than all Real-Money sites put together, the rebuttal of "But all the men are playing REAL money, because they tend to gamble more than women (which is true actually)", crumbles into nothingness when we take a look at the numbers and show even at BEST, you're looking at a 2/1, mayyyyyyyybe even 3/1 ratio of guys to gals that play poker on the internet (real, or play money)." 1. Small sample size, not sure how much you played. but it sounds like it is statistically insufficeint to draw a conclusion from. Therefore I would guess that, statiscially Type 1 error is present so the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. 2. I would love to know where you get the ratio statistics. 3. Playing a facebook application for what could be 20 or so minutes at a time (I dont know) is totally different to sitting for a few hours day in day out grinding. As such in my eyes it would not constiture playing poker. I dont know how many and how long these women play (if they do as you day). But it might well be the equivalent of me knocking a tennis ball against my garage wall for five minutes once a month, and claiming I play tennis - which would be accurate to some extent. But woefully misleading if we were to do a nationwide survey and find that 80% of the population play tennis (for example). I dont have time to / nor want to waste my time on this post further. So I reject your offer of no reply and you win which is, of course, nonsensical. And will bid this thread farewell. Posted by calcalfold
Almost every point I've witnessed, is typically just conjecture, or mostly avoiding the topic at hand. Instead of addressing the points or retorts made, you just get bored and move onto giving wild examples that don't hold true to what you're trying to back-up or explain.
It seems to me (and this isn't meant as a personal dig, just a friendly tip), that from the various threads I've seen you in (not to mention this one), you think you're a pretty smart guy. I'm not about to say you're thick, not by a long shot, but imo, you think you're a lot smarter than you actually are. I'm still waiting for a thread that you're heavily involved in, whereby you win the argument bolstering your own personal claims with evidence and reason. Combined with a calculated, methodical approach, showcasing to others involved in the debate why their PoV is incorrect, and you can prove why.
All you've done is swat my claims away, desperately inventing unrelated ideas or incredibly poor examples. Some parts were good, don't get me wrong. Like asking me to back up my opinions with some source material, a greater sample size, more substantial evidence . But there's often little to no effort on your part to show or explain why you're right, just scrambling to show why I'm wrong.
After a little research, and some number crunching, I found that the difference between real-money and play-money Male-Female players is pretty slim, although not insignificant, still slightly favouring a majority for men. My argument would then veer towards trying to explain how, for most social (networking) games, women have over a 2:1 representation over men, while on zynga (poker) for example, it's closer to 1:2. What is stopping women from trying/enjoying poker, etc etc.
Comments
On every occasion I've seen you disagree with someone, you either ignore them, or call them childish and immature.
I mean, I must be special for you to go a step further, right? :P
Nahh, but seriously, this reaction is really out of line. Whether you've recently had a child or not, this is no way to react in a public forum, or any setting for that matter.
Your condescing attitude constantly tries to undermine the oppositions intelligence, and when you finally get stood up to, this type of stuff comes out.
Not ONCE in this entire thread, have I resorted to personal insults, flaming, or name-calling. My argument does not need to hide behind any passive-aggressive attitude for it to be heard, and I consider myself too good of a person to cave to emotion when tackling a contraversial and often fiery topic like this one.
Whether others will just skip to this page, and make incorrect assumptions about our dialogue, is up to them. I hope for your sake this thread dissapears before the forum has a chance to see how you react when confronted with nothing by rational arguments that clash with your preconceptions.
If you want to open the discussion up again, and tackle the subject at hand, I'd be more than happy to get stuck in.
But labelling me as:...
"An extremely sexist, hypocritical, belittling, childish, immature, tool, waste of time, waste of oxygen, argumentative, key board bashing troll."
is unacceptable.
All of those words have been sourced directly from this thread. You won't find even 10% of that from my side, I can assure you, and for good reason.
gg and gn guys.
Should be a few coming very soon man, just had an insane amount of BS to get through. Will MSG ya personally when a tonne go up (maybe even tonight if you're lucky!
FWIW, it's a shame what the thread deteriorated in to, through no fault of your own imo. I love a good debate but as you say, your fight should always be with the arguements made not the person giving them.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said. I understand why some people might have concerns about playing with men (or w/e) but the solution is to resolve the concerns not just create a workaround.
No biggies, a contentious issue 2 different opinions expressed/ debated it's all good.
Was pretty funny at female only tournies inAmerica that they made the buyin for males 10 x that of ladies to prevent men entering as men were entering and claiming discrimination so they had to be allowed in! Charging them a lot more soon sorted it out haha
Smitalos; you are a good guy i like you despite the fact you chickened out of playing me in £1 turbo games lol
I would say it's good to have our opinions, and debate it, but it's just a public forum. A chilled out fun community!
It's all good
SPT Grand Final at the DTD, i'll 100% be there, and drinks on me. Again, another promise for you and ye forum faithful.
I tried to keep this thread on the more meaty parts of the topic, but ultimately failed I guess. I know my approach can be brutally blunt at times (if not, all the time, haha :P) and some people will naturally take the brash, crushing of bad ideas bit to heart. As said, I don't think a set of ideas belong to anyone, so taking offence when someone points out why you're wrong, feels really silly to me (especially when it has the ability to make you better. Win win!) And, while I do my best to filter every one I come across through the ol' Logic + Reason machine, I genuinely love it when someone can tweak something I've said or reasons I've given, to make them even better.
But yeah, you said it yourself sir. Long story short, creating seperate tourneys for women is just solving one problem with another. It's the attitude in the first place that needs correcting, whether it's women for poker, baking or yoga for men, knitting and bridge for the young, or the internet for the old. Saying these groups of people can't like said activity is just... well, lol. Basically.
ty for speaking up in this forum sir, it's appreciated in more ways than a few pixels will allow me to express. That goes for you too Dohhh, even if you do love to be the peacemaker! :P N'awwww, ty sir! Although, I'm too much of a nit to let my Sharkscope graph get demolished by the like of you
With the way I play, it'll be no time before my bankroll won't even allow me to play in £1 games man, so I'll hit you up in them ASAP b4busto!
Thank you, I see the "hard debator (debater? It's debater isn't it...????!!?!??"!2121!??"/1!)
as a big ol' compliment dude, thank ya.
The point regarding the fact that men are generally speaking, more adept at commonly played mind-sports, is a true one actually. Cliff-notes version, is that men are hard-wired to be (naturally) better at Spacial-Awareness, Math, Perception, Problem solving, etc. Whilst women are (naturally) better at Communication, Social Situations, Language, and the more Artsy stuff? This DOESN'T mean men are better than women at X, or that women crush men at Y, obv obv obv.
And it's not a cultural, or sexist statement either. Neurological evidence to back it up. Either I got taught absolutely garbage at A-level Pysch, or it's all about right. Ish, anyway.
"Let's encourage people to make suggestions, and encourage others to discuss them (positive or negative), without getting personal."
(Gunna give this the biggest 'one' I can sir.)
+1
I was being the peacemaker here lol
To expand on what i said, Batkins and Smit are both decent and valuable contriubtors on the forums.
The topic went a bit ott, which can easily happen with a contentious issue.
In my opinion, it's not that big a deal, just something that went a bit to far. It happens.
Onwards and upwards
Feartie
1. Small sample size, not sure how much you played. but it sounds like it is statistically insufficeint to draw a conclusion from. Therefore I would guess that, statiscially Type 1 error is present so the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.
2. I would love to know where you get the ratio statistics.
3. Playing a facebook application for what could be 20 or so minutes at a time (I dont know) is totally different to sitting for a few hours day in day out grinding. As such in my eyes it would not constiture playing poker. I dont know how many and how long these women play (if they do as you day). But it might well be the equivalent of me knocking a tennis ball against my garage wall for five minutes once a month, and claiming I play tennis - which would be accurate to some extent. But woefully misleading if we were to do a nationwide survey and find that 80% of the population play tennis (for example).
I dont have time to / nor want to waste my time on this post further. So I reject your offer of no reply and you win which is, of course, nonsensical. And will bid this thread farewell.
It seems to me (and this isn't meant as a personal dig, just a friendly tip), that from the various threads I've seen you in (not to mention this one), you think you're a pretty smart guy. I'm not about to say you're thick, not by a long shot, but imo, you think you're a lot smarter than you actually are.
I'm still waiting for a thread that you're heavily involved in, whereby you win the argument bolstering your own personal claims with evidence and reason. Combined with a calculated, methodical approach, showcasing to others involved in the debate why their PoV is incorrect, and you can prove why.
All you've done is swat my claims away, desperately inventing unrelated ideas or incredibly poor examples. Some parts were good, don't get me wrong. Like asking me to back up my opinions with some source material, a greater sample size, more substantial evidence . But there's often little to no effort on your part to show or explain why you're right, just scrambling to show why I'm wrong.
After a little research, and some number crunching, I found that the difference between real-money and play-money Male-Female players is pretty slim, although not insignificant, still slightly favouring a majority for men. My argument would then veer towards trying to explain how, for most social (networking) games, women have over a 2:1 representation over men, while on zynga (poker) for example, it's closer to 1:2. What is stopping women from trying/enjoying poker, etc etc.