twoplustwo banned me for life

[propoker]

If only a couple things then that's an admission I was pretty spot on. Your statement about being a good member and contributing as well as noteable info is a laughable statement given the fact of Mason's treatment of Daniel Negreanu has at best been laughable. It would seem to me the treatment of DN proves most of my statements about Mason to the core. Its bad enough to arbitrarily get a hair up your ass and banhammer some random like ftpjesus and even to ban Druff which at least himself has some poker street cred but to bring down the hammer on the top money winner all time in poker (as of his 2nd place in this years 1M 1D finish) proves that "somebody" important has zero meaning in who is notable.

Where do you get this stuff? Daniel was never perma banned and is still a member. You must have missed the Choice Center thread. It is widely known public information that he was given a one day temp ban a couple years ago, to which he admitted to me that his reaction was way over the top. As far as being a positive contributor to the community, I think you would be hard pressed to find any posts from him on 2+2 that weren't self-serving. There may be a few if you dig long and hard enough but they were few and far between.

[Dan Druff]

Ryback has a couple things wrong as does Druff.

Marco is a friend of 2+2 and we (myself, Mason and Mat) had lunch with him last week.

Thomas has been and is welcome to embed his own parody videos and video reports. There are several other instances where we allowed folks to link to their own articles. That flexibility has been present for a long time.

A person that has been a member for a while and is a consistent contributor of good content, is allowed leeway in linking off site. This is provided the info is important to the community and not spamming a site or product. Most folks that are in this category understand the self-promotion rules and have asked prior to posting their link for permission.

Someone that links to their own site on their first post, will get the banhammer, unless they are confirmed someone noteable with important info for the community. Without semi-strict rules about self promotion the site would be a spam fest. If you would like to see the self promotion policies they are in the last section of 2+2's T&C.

One thing you will never see is a member of 2+2 management or any of the mods enter someone else's site and link or direct traffic to 2+2. We expect the same courtesy, and will make exceptions for those that have been positive contributors to the site, like Marco and SrslySirius.

In some cases either myself, Kevmath, or other members will link off-site to someone's content when something important is worthy of discussion. We recognize the value of a good article or topic on some other site and love it when it generates discussion traffic on 2+2. Then we have a win-win, we both get added traffic.

Sorry, but some of what you're saying above isn't true.

I would like to consider myself a positive contributor to 2+2 (when I was allowed to have an account there). I never engaged in self-promotion, and it was clear that my presence there was because I enjoyed taking part in the discussions, rather than for any financial gain.

Despite that, I was never allowed to post PFA links.

Others were (and still are) allowed to post PFA links, but not me., because I own PFA Which is ridiculous.

So I would write up a whole story about something (often BEFORE it is being covered very much on 2+2), and I'm not allowed to link everything I already wrote on PFA. Instead, I am stuck copying and pasting everything if I want it posted over there.

I received stern warnings in the few instances I tried to post any PFA links.

I think the 2+2 mods are smart enough to tell the difference between terrible spam attempts and legit posters linking to things they wrote on their own site.

So while I believe that certain 2+2 darlings like SrslySirius are granted exceptions (and deservedly so), the "spam" policy is much too tight.

And Mason himself is just so petty that you really have lost a lot of good posters due to his frivolous bans.

[propoker]

Sorry, but some of what you're saying above isn't true.

I would like to consider myself a positive contributor to 2+2 (when I was allowed to have an account there). I never engaged in self-promotion, and it was clear that my presence there was because I enjoyed taking part in the discussions, rather than for any financial gain.

Despite that, I was never allowed to post PFA links.

Others were (and still are) allowed to post PFA links, but not me., because I own PFA Which is ridiculous.

So I would write up a whole story about something (often BEFORE it is being covered very much on 2+2), and I'm not allowed to link everything I already wrote on PFA. Instead, I am stuck copying and pasting everything if I want it posted over there.

I received stern warnings in the few instances I tried to post any PFA links.

I think the 2+2 mods are smart enough to tell the difference between terrible spam attempts and legit posters linking to things they wrote on their own site.

So while I believe that certain 2+2 darlings like SrslySirius are granted exceptions (and deservedly so), the "spam" policy is much too tight.

And Mason himself is just so petty that you really have lost a lot of good posters due to his frivolous bans.

Todd, I think it is entirely true. It comes down to a few things.

One thing you will never see is a member of 2+2 management or any of the mods enter someone else's site and link or direct traffic to 2+2. We expect the same courtesy,

As the owner of another forum, how do you not get this? You may disagree with this but there is also a frequency issue, as it did appear you wanted to spam links to PFA whenever possible. That was the perception anyway and the reason for the stern warnings.

At any time did you PM myself or any other mod to ask us "hey, I've got some breaking news that I posted over at PFA, do you mind if I link to it?" It comes down to professional courtesy and respect. At a minimum, if it was something that would interest 2+2 members I would have started the thread for you, with a link to PFA. I am sure there are others that would have done the same, and there is a decent shot you would have received approval to do it yourself. There are ways to play the game where everyone wins.

We get post reports constantly from members that believe they are getting spammed. Our policies regarding linking to your own site or material are policies that most of our members want and appreciate. Without it every poker author in the world would be starting a thread, linking to their articles, blogs, great new ideas, and products.

[Dan Druff]

I wanted to spam PFA links wherever possible?

Come on.

I spent many, many hours posting good content on 2+2, with thoughtful, detailed posts. How many times, out of all of those posts I made since being unbanned, did I post PFA links? Like twice? And it was absolutely never gratuitous. It was one of those situations where I had already done a big writeup on a situation, and I wanted to respond to an existing 2+2 thread with a link to my writeup.

The ridiculous thing was the fact that anyone besides me was able to post PFA links under the identical circumstances. If a link is relevant and not gratuitous, then it's not spam. If the link is just a transparent way to get traffic to a site, then it is spam. The identity of the poster shouldn't matter.

I would totally understand 2+2's position if my entire contribution to the forum was backdoor ways to get traffic to PFA, but you know that's not at all what I was doing.

I have always been respectful of the 2+2 rules (even the "spam" ones we are debating here -- I stopped linking PFA once I got warned), and I can't post on the site. Ridiculous.

[anonamoose]

dear propoker,

how does it feel to be a robot?

sincerely,

kill yourself (oh wait you have no soul, you're a robot)

[ftpjesus]

dear propoker,

how does it feel to be a robot?

sincerely,

kill yourself (oh wait you have no soul, you're a robot)

No actually PP is just a reverse muppet (normally the muppet has a hand up its ass by the muppet operator, in this case PP has his muppet head up Masons ass)

[Numba3]

a lot of fat nerds are mods at 4. its loserville

[Daniel72]

I was considering to make an account on 2+2, but when i hear all this crazy ban shit (Negreanu, Druff, Kessler etc.) i think ist a weird place (they have no respect) and i am rather a member of sites likes PFA. I know a lot of people who dislike 2+2. Also it looks like a big chaos.

[Dan Druff]

I was considering to make an account on 2+2, but when i hear all this crazy ban shit (Negreanu, Druff, Kessler etc.) i think ist a weird place (they have no respect) and i am rather a member of sites likes PFA. I know a lot of people who dislike 2+2. Also it looks like a big chaos.

The biggest problem there, aside from Mason and his iron-fisted style of moderation, is the signal-to-noise ratio is very low. There are a few really good/interesting posts, but you have to read through a lot of useless garbage to find them. That's why I hate those 100 page 2+2 threads, because 99% of the posts in those threads are crap.

[haleylh]

Todd, I think it is entirely true. It comes down to a few things.

One thing you will never see is a member of 2+2 management or any of the mods enter someone else's site and link or direct traffic to 2+2. We expect the same courtesy,

As the owner of another forum, how do you not get this? You may disagree with this but there is also a frequency issue, as it did appear you wanted to spam links to PFA whenever possible. That was the perception anyway and the reason for the stern warnings.

At any time did you PM myself or any other mod to ask us "hey, I've got some breaking news that I posted over at PFA, do you mind if I link to it?" It comes down to professional courtesy and respect. At a minimum, if it was something that would interest 2+2 members I would have started the thread for you, with a link to PFA. I am sure there are others that would have done the same, and there is a decent shot you would have received approval to do it yourself. There are ways to play the game where everyone wins.

We get post reports constantly from members that believe they are getting spammed. Our policies regarding linking to your own site or material are policies that most of our members want and appreciate. Without it every poker author in the world would be starting a thread, linking to their articles, blogs, great new ideas, and products.

C'mon, Michael, do you really need to come over here to peddle Mason's BS? While I'm hardly a fit to PFA's typical user profile, I post here simply to avoid dealing with Mason's crap or giving unneeded traffic to your site.

What's even funnier is...:

1) How many times I've been involved with a topic or something where I had new info to share or someone mentioned me or a story of mine erroneously, and I would only post a brief reply on 4 without adding much more info. Invariably, someone then posts or DMs me asking why I don't link to the better, fuller story, and my response is always, "Due to Mason's dickhead policies, I can't, but you can."

2) How many times full stories of mine were pasted into the forum without links or proper attribution, and how slow the site's mods were to rectify that. They're better now, but mind that it took years of me slapping Mason upside the head before he understood I was serious about protecting my work. Funny how he demands the same protections and then some.

3) How I publicly dared Mason to ban me after I told him what a piece of garbage he was a few years ago, when he tried to denigrate me in conjunction with a book-review project I was working on -- the story he told the forum wasn't true at all, and I had the e-mail exchange to prove it. But Mason proved to a lot of people in that episode the petty, (non)-quality person he was, and I see nothing to indicate he'll ever mature or mend his ways. (And he didn't ban me, coward that he was. I feel left out.)

4) The hilarious, PETTY way that the "Dutch Boyd apology thread" is -still- pinned to the top of the NVG forum. God, that's embarrassing for Mason. But eminently typical.

[Hockey Guy]

C'mon, Michael, do you really need to come over here to peddle Mason's BS? While I'm hardly a fit to PFA's typical user profile, I post here simply to avoid dealing with Mason's crap or giving unneeded traffic to your site.

What's even funnier is...:

1) How many times I've been involved with a topic or something where I had new info to share or someone mentioned me or a story of mine erroneously, and I would only post a brief reply on 4 without adding much more info. Invariably, someone then posts or DMs me asking why I don't link to the better, fuller story, and my response is always, "Due to Mason's dickhead policies, I can't, but you can."

2) How many times full stories of mine were pasted into the forum without links or proper attribution, and how slow the site's mods were to rectify that. They're better now, but mind that it took years of me slapping Mason upside the head before he understood I was serious about protecting my work. Funny how he demands the same protections and then some.

3) How I publicly dared Mason to ban me after I told him what a piece of garbage he was a few years ago, when he tried to denigrate me in conjunction with a book-review project I was working on -- the story he told the forum wasn't true at all, and I had the e-mail exchange to prove it. But Mason proved to a lot of people in that episode the petty, (non)-quality person he was, and I see nothing to indicate he'll ever mature or mend his ways. (And he didn't ban me, coward that he was. I feel left out.)

4) The hilarious, PETTY way that the "Dutch Boyd apology thread" is -still- pinned to the top of the NVG forum. God, that's embarrassing for Mason. But eminently typical.

Come on Haley. Obviously 2+2 works with the poker community to make sure it's a win-win for everybody.