The Recreational Forum Has Been "Hijacked," Again!

[OTABILL]

In October 2018 I created a topic entitled: “The Recreational Forum Has Been "Hijacked."” To remind everyone, my opening post was as follows, “According to the descriptor, the Recreational Forum was established to discuss “The lighter side... playing for entertainment, less concerned about "the math."”. You would not know this reading posts and replies recently. Almost everything is math oriented or related. The lighter side, what a joke. Playing for pure entertainment, that’s almost heresy. Folks should be able to post their views without being bashed or being criticized for what they find enjoyable. Quite frankly, it’s understandable why many former regulars are no longer posting and there are few newbies. Where are the Billyjoes and others who made the forum a lively and diverse place?”

Unfortunately, what I said then has reemerged once again. There are several individuals who jump on anyone who dares play/looks at VP entertainment, not a moneymaking activity. I am glad Webman stepped in on Might Wins post but there have been similar comments on other topics in recent weeks. The post by stevel96a1 on Progressions is another example. Look at some of the comments on notes1 post, “how one spends their money.” Perfect wording, spending money on entertainment. There are other posts where the same attitudes are expressed. Nobody is telling Aps etc. to view the primary objective of VP as entertainment rather a moneymaking activity. One can disagree civilly without the condescending/derogatory/demeaning/caustic language. There are those who are respectful. This is not directed at them.

If someone posts questionable strategy on the Strategy Forum, then come down hard on them. But not here. In all cases, be respectful.

Thanks.

[royal flush]

i am hardly on this site anymore i am an advantage player on vp live poker and the stock market but didnt like al the arguing with players. i am not a gold player anymore as i do not find value in this i used to practice games that i wouldnt play for real money but were playable for fun if folks want to play these games for fun good for them they find "fun value" so it is a positive experience

[Jstark]

That was my bad and I apologize.

[Gronbog]

To be fair, the original post on the progressive betting thread specifically asked about whether the math supported the theories outlined in the book that was mentioned, specifically asked for opinions on it and asked me by name to comment.

Leaving incorrect information unchallenged, even in the Recreational Forum, could lead some to the conclusion that the information is correct. I always try to be respectful when when challenging these things. Also recall that in the "rules" for this forum, Webman did allow for the correction of erroneous information.

[billryan]

Are we supposed to apologise for correcting bad information because the poster only plays for fun?

[onemoretry]

To be fair, the original post on the progressive betting thread specifically asked about whether the math supported the theories outlined in the book that was mentioned, specifically asked for opinions on it and asked me by name to comment.

Leaving incorrect information unchallenged, even in the Recreational Forum, could lead some to the conclusion that the information is correct. I always try to be respectful when when challenging these things. Also recall that in the "rules" for this forum, Webman did allow for the correction of erroneous information.

Well said.

To me, it seems that the original poster was not really interested in receiving opinions that did not support the "progressive betting is better" contention. When they received such opinions, which were presented in a non confrontational way, they initiated arguments with the respondents. instead of simply accepting those replies.

[Webman]

Also recall that in the "rules" for this forum, Webman did allow for the correction of erroneous information.

Absolutely. This is one thing that I think will always be important. But it shouldn't get in the way of understanding that people have different goals in playing the game. Several people have expressed a desire to have a place to simply share experiences. People should respect that, even if they don't understand "why" someone would play the game for entertainment alone.

If you aren't interested in playing recreationally, there is no obligation to read the posts in the Recreational forum. Some would be better off just staying out. You are of course welcome to read them, but only if you can remain respectful. Some are better at this than others.

If someone posts a strategy or information here that is incorrect then it should be respectfully corrected. There is no benefit to letting people share inaccurate information just because they only play for entertainment.

But coming here simply to criticize people who have different goals in the game is equally unhelpful. It doesn't help them become a better player and it certainly doesn't help the mood of the forum. People are tired of these little feuds.

[Webman]

To me, it seems that the original poster was not really interested in receiving opinions that did not support the "progressive betting is better" contention. When they received such opinions, which were presented in a non confrontational way, they initiated arguments with the respondents. instead of simply accepting those replies.

Also true. In fact, the original post was confrontational towards a couple of members before it even got started. Which also doesn't really live up to the spirit of the Recreational forum.

In hindsight, it was more of a Strategy thread to begin with.

[stevel96a1]

To be fair, the original post on the progressive betting thread specifically asked about whether the math supported the theories outlined in the book that was mentioned, specifically asked for opinions on it and asked me by name to comment.

Leaving incorrect information unchallenged, even in the Recreational Forum, could lead some to the conclusion that the information is correct. I always try to be respectful when when challenging these things. Also recall that in the "rules" for this forum, Webman did allow for the correction of erroneous information.

i did ask a legit question about progressive betting with a fixed bankroll which was study on with computer analysis and not echoing and recycling what the experts say conquer the casino book 2004 edition was a eye opener for me but some how "people" decided to talk down to me and tear me down and it basically had nothing to do w/ the topic so im taking a break from posting threads =/

[billryan]

Bye Felicia