Yeah wtf does “gaming” have to do with a dying message board though? Like, video games are still really popular, Have you seen the IGN boards lately? Some of the big fantasy football boards I posted on ~15 years ago are similarly virtual ghost towns nowadays, and fantasy sports, particularly DFS, seem to be going strong.
You’re conflating “gaming” generally with that site in particular; we’re talking about two different things here I think?
Even if Mason’s promised Trump Poker Boom™ does finally materialize (and Mason himself seems so thoroughly convinced of its inevitability that he {checks notes} sold his Web site devoted to poker) that in no way guarantees that toopluztogotcomm is going to ever achieve anything approaching its heyday. And if it doesn’t, how could anyone justify paying more than a few bones for that site? I mean these guys aren’t Google or Gavin Belson or whatever. The only reason I would personally pay anything for that site would be because I had a better idea and I wanted to make it go away to help attract more people to my Better Idea.
In fact, I think they’d have been much better served taking the money they lit on fire when they handed it to Mason and the Sklanskys and just started a brand new site that doesn’t have the previous owners’ stink on it. At least the people here might give such a venture a look.
If it takes off and becomes what it was before c. 2010, I’ll come back here and eat my words (or maybe even do it there, provided Mason and David and Mat aren’t red admins there by then). But I don’t think that will be necessary. Once message boards die, historically, they tend to stay dead.
Gaming is an industry white washed name for gambling. I’m not confusing anytning, it’s literally my job for over two decades. I put the “” to make sure no one will post whatever it is you posted.
It is mind blowing how opinionated people are about stuff they don’t understand. While it’s pefectly reasonable to guess that these guys will do poorly, 2p2 is still worth obscene amount of money if handled properly.
Your entire post is missing the point because if it “takes off” and becomes what it was in 2010 it will be worth 200m at least. We were discussing a 6 figs deal. I can make that in the first month simply by affilating sports betting sites, which pay absurd amont of money for users now and the 2p2 database correlates great with sports betting clients.
I guess maybe they will beat the odds and become i dunno the first(?) to make a site that was once successful but then died successful again . That one is pretty tainted though. I look forward to learning more from you though for sure, dickhead.
So you didn’t know what gaming is. You are talking about something that isn’t your expertise. You are talking to someone that this is his expertise. You make irrelevant claims (site is “dead”, they need to bring it “back to its glory days” to make a profit), you have no idea what profit avenues there are for them and you end your post with some cussing.
It seems like discussion of the original proposal has run its course, so I’m going to propose that we move to the next step of creating a poll to vote on the wording of the proposal.
The proposed rule will be adopted if it receives support from at least two thirds of all voters for moderator appointments or if it receives support from at least 60 percent of voters for all other rules .
Since this does not relate to a moderator appointment, it seems clear that banning him would require 60% approval.
Hard to remember. He was accidentally perma’d, there was a vote to unban that was 60/40 for unban, he was unbanned, but no one locked the poll, people kept voting and he was eventually banned at 59% and at that point the poll was locked.
Is that right?
Well, that’s precedent, so can you try to accidentally ban Sklansky?
As a follow-up: I’m not a moderator, just a sometimes admin. And the benefit of the admin role is that I don’t make judgment calls. I thought that this was a straightforward interpretation of how to proceed. If others disagree, for any reason, I’m not going to unilaterally act on my interpretation.
