BS AP's

[redietz]

The "APs" (and I include Rob because he does "advantage plays" of a different kind) would be better participants here if they would do less criticizing and shared more of their knowledge.

Sharing knowledge does not mean revealing the particular dealer at the particular casino who flashes cards. Sharing knowledge does not mean revealing the single video poker machine that in error offers 9/5 BONUS poker.

But sharing knowledge does mean offering something constructive and without the constant insulting.

Yet, every time an AP does share their knowledge here, you and Rob attack it saying it's not beneficial, any good, or something like, "But I live in LA, I don't live in City X, therefore this means nothing to me." Hell, you don't even think getting a 20% rebate on each individual losing hand on VP is good. It's always the same shit -- you & Rob chime in about "phantom bucks" or whatever else BS you guys think.

A perfect example of this -- Alan (in the other thread) is arguing some bullshit about "the English language", thinking the wording of something is more important than the math or the reality of it.

Sorry but any casino offering 150% loss rebates would advertise the hell out of it. They wouldn't want it to be a secret for the APs. The BS meter is flashing red.

The one I'm thinking of -- I don't think they're doing it anymore (I just checked their website), but a casino was absolutely doing a 150% loss rebate...although it was for a small amount.

RS, the English language line made me cringe. Writing is not something that just willy nilly happens. It has a grammar and logic and flow chart decision-making at each and every step of the process. Good writing is, in many ways, as tightly constructed as math formulas.

The dice cup "problem" was written to engender a particular response, in this case the "wrong" one, from a majority of people. The writing is not an accident. No writing is an accident, or an afterthought. Writing should be (and in the dice cup example, is) as purposeful as a screenplay. Every line, every camera angle, what follows what and how, these are decisions designed to have effects on an audience.

If the effect of writing is a wrong conclusion for most people, the fault lies in the author, not the reader. If the network coverage of a football game has cameras pointing at weird angles at the sky and the grass and bathroom stalls in the stadium, then not knowing the score of the game is not the fault of the viewers at home.

This inability to appreciate that language is not a set of tools anyone can pretty much pluck from the tool box and use to the same effect is common and recent. It might be a byproduct of communication occurring between niche groups that share some sub-cultural jargon and rely on the jargon too much. It's almost undoubtedly influenced by communication via truncated third-grade phrasing, as occurs with most texts and almost all tweets. Texts and tweets and jargon don't enable communication. They retard it.