Poker-AI.org

I'd like to know what people out there think the structure of this forum should be. I think we have a unique opportunity here to rethink the categories that you would like to chat about so please give me your input.

Please vote in the poll and elaborate in posts to this thread.

Edit: This is to satisfy my personal curiosity. We might decide upon a completely different structure that deviates from the majority's opinion if we feel it we feel it would be better for the forum.

_________________
Cheers.

I think that the old structure shouldn't be copied EXACTLY. But should be strongly inspired. Indeed, the "Open Poker Protocol" is dead since 2009. I don't see any reason to copy it in the new forum, unless people are interested to develop it again. That's the first thing that comes in my head, but there are maybe other examples of cleaning/restructuring.

I agree with above.
I liked the layout of the old site, the sections seemed to work and keep everything organised.
However, there are definitely subsections that could be removed, and from the looks of it haven't had anything posted to them in years either.
So, more or less a cleaner, filtered version of the old forum

Hi. Let the posts dictate this. Keep it simple and minimal at first and add structure when it's needed.

Ideas:
- Open tournament hosting (just for fun). Maybe something like what the PokerAcademy guys used to do with Polaris.
- Live chat?

I agree. For instance, the legal section is used so rarely, I don't think one needs a sub forum. In general, I personally prefer less forums but active ones.

I'm also a fan of KISS, (keep it simple and stupid).
So keep the old usual style/layout with less (sub)forums.

A long time ago in a land far far away I tried talking Indy into reforming the levels... Epic fail. Next post is a verbatim copy of the (overly ambitious) PM I sent him.
PS “far far away” == http://www.pokerai.org

Right now there is effectively a binary system whereby zero contribution gets a visitor 90+% of the benefit. Access to information on this site needs to be stratified across different levels. This requires a balance between the value of a levels information and the value of what it will cost members to reach that level (classic supply vs demand). Unfortunately, it's impossible for members to accurately place a value on the next levels information until AFTER they have paid for it. Each member is taking a risk when they try to move up a level. Is the next levels information worth my time and effort? We can't eliminate that risk but, we need to reduce it, a lot. We reduce the buyers risk by lowering the cost of advancing to the next level & we reduce the sellers risk by lowering the value of each levels information. The key to maintaining intellectual standards is that we must increase the total number of (active) levels.
Theory aside, there are at least three practical issues associated with such a system. How much & what information is available in each level? Second who should get access to each level? And third, how the fuck do we implement hundreds of level promotions each year without making the admin quit his day job?

Part 1: how much & what information is available in each level?
Using a content aging system to restrict access to threads would guarantee a certain level of stratification across the levels. For example: public forum is the 15 newest threads (use creation date not date of last post). Level 1 is access to the 30 newest threads, Level 2 is access to the 50 newest threads, & Level 3 the 75 newest. This kind of control is a good way to create low value levels. This works well for quantity control but it is not helpful for quality control.
For quality control we will stick with something similar to the current system. High value threads get moved to higher levels. With a stratified system this can (and should) be done more often. Unfortunately non of this really works with the academic papers. The best I can think of is make your 3 favorite papers publicly available. All other academic papers can be made available at Level 3.
Level 4 on the new system provides identical access that non level 1 members have under the current system.
Level 5 provides identical access to current level 1 members
Level 6 and a few more levels should continue with very high value content & awesome source code

WARNING: If the content ageing system is going to be implemented I would like to point out that any advanced notification will cause some viewers (especially security professionals) to crawl & archive a copy of this site!

Part 2: who should get access to each level?
Under the new system public level, level 1, & level 2 will serve our three largest demographics haters, quitters, & morons. I'm not trying to sound like an ass. The fact is losing players who hate pokerbotters outnumber intelligent dedicated coders by a wide margin. By Level 3 some commitment should be visible. When you see level 4 under a persons name you should be cautiously optimistic about their intelligence. If your level 5+ you don't suck at programing. Specifics are below, the community nomination system is elaborated in part 3:
Level system with content aging and community applications:
Public level:
goal: create non-member interest
requirements: none
content: the 15 most recently created threads & the 3 best academic papers

level 1:
goal: get visitors into the system
requirements: creating a username
content: 30 most recently created threads.
Notice that joining costs 2 minutes of time but rewards you with twice the access

level 2:
goal: get the lurkers to start contributing & the quitters to start quitting
requirements: 10 posts & level 1 member for at least 2 weeks
content=50 most recently created threads

level 3:
goal: start to separate the serious from the stupid
requirements: 25 posts, level 2 member for 2+ weeks.
content=75 most recently created threads, all academic papers, and access to some semi valuable source code maybe the hand equity calculators?

Level 4
goal: quitters have quit, smart people are building creditability, head of casino security starts getting nervous about what his employees are contributing to this site in an attempt to move up our ranks
content:
cumulative archive of all threads.
all academic papers
access to afore mentioned source code
Basically everything that is available to non-level1 members in current system.
requirements: 75 posts, level 3 member for 4+ weeks & nominations by 3 level 4+ members.

Level 5: (equivalent to current level 1 )
goal: smart & committed only. Reduce risk of security professionals joining this form.
requirements: level 4 member for 4+ weeks and one of the following options
option #1: something similar to the current requirements for level 1: 10 very high quality posts in the Poker Papers 50+ posts overall, application & 1 nomination by a level 5+ member
option #2: 150+ posts and peer application approval with 3 nominations by 3 level 5+ members.

Levels 6, 7, 8 to be determined

Level 9:
requirements: majority of your $1,000,000+ income comes from pokerbotting, annual fee of $50,000 (tax deductible), mandatory attendance at our annual week long pokerbotting conference.
content: free ticket to conference
Member fees will be put towards anticipated conference expenses such as:
hotel accommodations, airfare to Hawaii, lectures by ex-casino employees and signals analysts downsized during the arab spring, food, booze, jet ski rentals, strippers, booze for strippers, etc. Too far? Back on topic...

Anyway we would also have to include some sort one time overhall/promotion for existing members to get everything started. Id recommend the following:
members that have not posted in the last 90 days get level 1 access
members with less than 50 posts get level 3 access
member with more then 50 posts get level 4 access (exempted from nomination)
members with level 1 get level 5 access
members with level 2 get level 6 access etc

Part 3: how the fuck do we implement hundreds of level promotions each year without making the admin quit his day job?

In the level system outlined above levels 1, 2, & 3 are easily scripted. Levels 4 & 5 rely mostly on a community application. This application should move the work of evaluating a promotion away from the admin and onto the members & applicant. If standards are set properly the admins work should be reduced to a final approval or veto. You could even delegate final veto | approval of level 4 access someone trustworthy like spears.

APPLICATION PROCESS:
Create a thread in level 3 thread called “level 4 applications” when a level 3 member wants to get access to level 4 they can apply by posting their “application”. Application includes their join date, what requirements they met, links to intelligent posts they made, reference to any of their posts that were bumped to a higher level, and why they should be promoted to level 4.
In level 4 we create a thread called “applications review” where existing level 4+ members would have the opportunity to comment on the application, give applicant their vote of confidence, express concerns about security, lack of intelligence, etc.
In order to keep the application process effective & easy to implement I would recommend a few rules:
1. If application does not get required number of nominations within 7 days the application expires and request is denied. Applicant must wait AT LEAST 14 days from date of original application before reapplying.
2. First level 4 member who notices that an application has expired is obligated to paste some boiler plate rejection into the level 3 application thread. For example: “Unfortunately your application did not received the required number of nominations. Please feel free to re-apply but no sooner then 2 weeks from the date of your last submission”
3. Members can make a max of 2 approval nominations per month (no rollover votes). This will prevent hyperinflation/over approval. The community can self police this as all votes are visible in the thread
4. If required number of members give their vote of approval then the last member to cast vote of approval sends moderator a message for final approval or veto. This member should also make a 1 line post in thread along the lines of “notified modorator via PM that applicant Stan received the required 3 votes from level 4 members Kile, Kenny, & Eric”
5. If a lazy member attempts to circumvent this process by sending moderators a PM they are treated as if their application was just denied. They can reapply in two weeks (=

That's it.

I'm pretty tired so I apologies if this looks a little rough. Also my bad about how long its taken me to get back to you. I've been crazy busy and probably will be until the end of July. If you want to implement this system or something like it; it needs to start with and keep a critical mass of players across the different levels. If members & casino staff find out they are about to lose access to a lot of information they are going to download all the academic papers, mirror the forums, & then jump ship. If they find out after the systems implemented they might complain but in a few weeks the will move up a level and start liking the system. basically you should just tell very senior members & on a need to know basis. Also I understand this is kinda long so please feel free to take your time getting back to me, no pressure.

-Northcroft

tl;dr ... just kidding, but seriously I think this is overkill. All that would accomplish is killing traffic completely. Especially from people that post only very occasionally but are obviously experts in the field, e.g. Sam Ganzfried, Michael Johanson and Tysen Streib, just to name a few. And it would encourage spam from a bunch of idiots too, which in turn requires too much overhead to manage.


I liked that part. A vision of the great things yet to come back in July?

_________________
Cheers.

exactly this happened and will happen again for the Level1+.
At the other hand, there should be some defined requirements, when and how you can reach Level x oder Level y.
The old system required something like post good input in 50 threads, find 10 papers etc.
But it was very frustrating, at least for me, after reaching the requiremnts, still not getting access to a higher levels. first you had to contact indy which felt like some kind of begging.

In my opinion there is not too much left, you can contribute for level 0. Most of the papers are found etc.
So we have to rethink the old system for leveling up. just my 2 cent.

I'm curious, what's the big deal. What are or were these levels for at all? Do you even have something to protect? What would talk about at level 1 and up? Share code to make lives easier? Because to me, all information here (at level 0), that's not code, is pretty much disposable. Something that I use just to help to keep my mind in the context. And it's also really everything I need. I can't event think of anything else that I would like to have an access to.

Ingenious. But I'm far from convinced the effort to implement this would be time well spent.

I see the idea behind the levels, but I also see it as quite a challenge.

Most papers have been routed out and posted already, any new ones are usually on the site relatively quickly.
Asking for people to contribute a number of papers seems overkill in my opinion.
I agree that only those who have contributed to the forums should be allowed access to the upper level, but maybe this contribution standard should be lowered? If not, this could just mean that fewer and fewer people will gain access to the upper level, reducing the content and reducing the visitors to the site?
For example, a member who's posted 50+ times, a few of these new and intelligent contributions, the rest helping others or asking for help with new ideas, should be promoted. They are clearly devoted, relatively intelligent and committed to the cause. Whereas in the previous forum this would be no where near being allowed into level1.

It can't be too difficult to notice a member who's contributing and posting regularly (not just spamming) and promoting them?
Again, the promoting powers would have to be delegated, but I think this could be a good way.

Just my 2 cents..

PS I do like northcroft's idea too - although it does sound tough to implement, and maybe a few too many levels?

I think the idea of the levels... Somewhat contrary to the very notion of a "forum". Structure to levels more logical to call the pyramid.

Yea, I can understand that. crowd sourcing promotions could just be a bunch of polls in the level1 area. That's a quick and dirty fix. But the rest would take some time. I though about suggesting we just shut down the public area of this site and all migrate over to stack exchange http://poker.stackexchange.com/ It's basically dead & has effectively nothing about botting so I figure a rapid influx of ~50 pokerbotters and we would basically own the place. New members join that site, if we like them we recruit them for the Level 1 area of poker-ai.org
But that might backfire:
1. I suspect current members on poker stack exchange fall into the 99% of poker players who hate us
2. If we can't sell the recruitment then this site is done. For good.
3. Stack exchange is very well structured and quality threads are permanent. Non contributors get 100% of the benefit. For us that's a problem
4. Stack exchange culture fits well with our intelectual side. which is good. You know what else is good? going balls deep in Jeffs grandma.
5. Stack exchange does not recognize the value in Jeffs grandmother or the topic of going balls deep within her.

I think there is a board missing that would be appropriate for stuff like hand evaluation. It's not quite online botting, it's not quite AI or research, is it?

Maybe just a board about general bot programming? Without the online thingy?

regarding the levels: how about a low-rules approach: the admins just select members to level x when they see that their contributions are valuable. Yes, it's obviously subjective, but other 'hard facts' like number of posts or something just provide fake objectivity. For instance, if a person like amax just put in 10 posts, but provided always good insights/code etc. should he not get access because he didn't hit the x posts mark while another person who had 50 posts in the junk forum or irrelevant posts in others gains access? Personally, I think that spears and coffee are reading enough to get a good picture of the situation.

Currently that would go in AI Research. That forum is for anything that is not necessarily bot related but related to creating strategies for poker and generally researching poker.
Online botting however is everything botting related. If you are not doing it online, what is your bot for? So essentially we could call the forums this too:
AI Research = Brain / Strategy / Poker
Online Botting = Scraper / Management / etc

_________________
Cheers.

Thanks everyone for your insight and please continue to contribute to this thread.

However, at this point we feel pretty good with the current structure and our decision to make private forums a matter of case-by-case basis, the way development labs were handled before. I don't think there is going to be a general restricted forum until we see the need for it.

_________________
Cheers.