In reply to Stoney-

Sorry, you're mistaken Stone, each table does have a maximum limit. Also, I think you have forgotten the whole point of this site...its a monthly competition, so you have to either be good or lucky to win it. Long term strategy doesn't apply (in regards to medals).

Just about every other free poker site is not like this place. So if 'they're' no good to you, and here's no good, what exactly is it that you want?

Do we need to just cut the crap and build mommyboipoker.com where everybody's incoherent requests are met and mashed together to grow into a super poker site, rebranded as clusterf$ckpoker.com?!

You all have such grand plans, pity you all don't put this much effort into your game.

ps. Stop making threads lol.

rerazor, you appear to have an average vocabulary but you have a well below average ability of understanding what you read. I said no maximum so go back, reread, & ask a 10 year old what it means. Maybe then you might understand.

? Nice comeback, likely deserved, and a bit different from the usual lol.

But I know what you typed, and I also know what you meant to type. You were just a bit confused, and that's cool, and its why you all need to spend just a little time thinking this through before coming to a consensus.

I do know what you all want, and that is, a fairer game. Rather than we all try and outdo each other with random haphazard thread ideas, we need to contribute on the same page, so to speak, so that we can basically choose between good ideas or improve on ones with potential. I have no dog in this fight, I basically care that people make good decisions more than if they impact me or not. I appreciate your reply, which kinda shows you are serious about contributing to this, so the best and right thing for me to do is add you into a cliff update.

Whatever idea gains consensus you can bet your sweet pippy it won't be reversible (so this is why I ask to be careful what you all wish for), because if my membership adaption comes in I know it will work, and stay, and it will be the last whimper about table limits. But if you guys can't wrap your head around the math of that, then maybe you prefer a more 'simplistic' 'solution' as was originally proposed here. My advice- consider anything that prevents the need for table limits, because nobody 'wants' them anyway. Also, plz don't add too many crazy ideas here, because they might all be combined eventually, creating an output none of us want or expected (ie. unintended consequences/unknown unknowns).

Cliffs- So far, as far as I'm concerned we have 3 different stand alone proposals to address chip inequity.

1. The 99k bankroll limit for the lowest table.

2. My membership revamp (on the previous page).

3. Stoney's revolutionary 'Any bankroll/blind, Any table' (his 2nd preference to Fech's idea).


True, this thread does require big picture/grand plan thinking, and SO FAR I'm personally liking it.