I saw someone mention about this earlier on a thread. Good point I thought. So, I thought we could have a little vote on it. Also by making a main thread about it gets all involved easier.
I voted yes but I think that maybe it depends on the type of post thats made.
If its a "could I have got off this hand" type of post where for example the player with KK has been beaten by AA and is asking for advise about the hand then I don't see a problem with both players names being shown. But if its a "How could they call with THAT hand" type of post them I do think that the "villians" name should be changed.
1. If it's a post where a player has played badly, then I want to know the usernames of these players so I can target them, easy money innit?
2. If it's a post about me, I want to be able to see where I've gone wrong because I might not remember the hand afterwards, but someone else might put it up for me.
Anyone who can't take criticism shouldn't play poker, IMO.
As for people who post ridiculous rants when they don't need to, either have a designated thread for them or delete their posts. We're grown up people, surely we can take the risk of maybe, just maybe, having something criticised...
i've voted yes on this one... names in my opinion should be removed.
Steve is right in saying that the context of the post is important, but to keep it simple and to ensure no one can be upset at being named, a simple rule of removing names takes care of it.
Dont really agree with you kaidus, it is unfair to say that someone who does not like receiving criticism should not play poker If a player asks for constructive criticism then fine, but if someone doesnt want it, they shouldnt need to hear it. If you are up against a player you perceive as weaker, do not criticise them. Just take their chips or money quietly.
Poker is a social game that should be fun to play.
Re-reading my post, I may have come across a bit hard.
However, I also feel that names are good for another reason, namely that if you are playing against a reg, you can then get opinions from other people that have played against the reg and will have a read on that player. One thing that can affect strategy posts is the lack of reads in that situation, which can be important, and the more information we have as players, the better imo.
I THINK ITS OKAY TO PUT NAMES IF AS LONG AS YOUR NOT BEING ABUSIVE ABOUT THEM. IF SOME ONE WANTS TO KNOW WHY A PLAYER MADE A CALL THERE EXPLANATION MAY BE HELPFUL.BY READING THESE EXPLANATION POST I HAVE LEARNT QUITE A LOT.
For me it depends on the nature of the hand in question. If a person posts a hand where they have been thouroughly outplayed and is asking advice on how they could have played it better, then the other players are being lauded and their names should stay because they have done well. But if it is a post where the player is being criticised for the cards they play, how they play them or for dishing out a bad beat on the "hero", then there names should not be used because it is just whinging on the part of the poster and other players should not be dragged down this level.
Comments
Purely out of courtesy and consideration for the other players on the table.
If its a "could I have got off this hand" type of post where for example the player with KK has been beaten by AA and is asking for advise about the hand then I don't see a problem with both players names being shown. But if its a "How could they call with THAT hand" type of post them I do think that the "villians" name should be changed.
1. If it's a post where a player has played badly, then I want to know the usernames of these players so I can target them, easy money innit?
2. If it's a post about me, I want to be able to see where I've gone wrong because I might not remember the hand afterwards, but someone else might put it up for me.
Anyone who can't take criticism shouldn't play poker, IMO.
As for people who post ridiculous rants when they don't need to, either have a designated thread for them or delete their posts. We're grown up people, surely we can take the risk of maybe, just maybe, having something criticised...
Steve is right in saying that the context of the post is important, but to keep it simple and to ensure no one can be upset at being named, a simple rule of removing names takes care of it.
Dont really agree with you kaidus, it is unfair to say that someone who does not like receiving criticism should not play poker If a player asks for constructive criticism then fine, but if someone doesnt want it, they shouldnt need to hear it. If you are up against a player you perceive as weaker, do not criticise them. Just take their chips or money quietly.
Poker is a social game that should be fun to play.
Ray
However, I also feel that names are good for another reason, namely that if you are playing against a reg, you can then get opinions from other people that have played against the reg and will have a read on that player. One thing that can affect strategy posts is the lack of reads in that situation, which can be important, and the more information we have as players, the better imo.