PDA

View Full Version : Please Read Before Posting: Clarifying thread titles



savafan
04-20-2004, 11:45 AM
I hope this doesn't sound catty, or mean spirited, because it's not meant that way. I'm just wondering if something could be done about making thread titles a bit clearer about what the thread actually subject is. Lately, it seems like I have to read every thread just to make sure that I'm not making a double post. Not that I don't eventually read most threads anyway, but usually when I first sign on I skim the board to see what's new and what the topics are while scanning the news wire at the same time.

creek14
04-20-2004, 12:02 PM
Hey sava, this might be a good thread to post over where the non-subscribers can read it too.

BTW, Alias rocked this past Sunday. I think you'll really like season 3.

savafan
04-20-2004, 12:07 PM
Hey sava, this might be a good thread to post over where the non-subscribers can read it too.

BTW, Alias rocked this past Sunday. I think you'll really like season 3.

Mods or admins, if you agree, could you move this to the non-baseball section?

savafan
04-20-2004, 01:38 PM
Mods or admins, if you agree, could you move this to the non-baseball section?

Actually, after thinking about it, it seems that the baseball side of the board is where I'm personally having the most problem. I'll leave it up to you guys.

Boss-Hog
04-20-2004, 01:42 PM
Yes, I agree with you. I had been thinking about saying something similar to this, so I'll move it over.

smith288
04-20-2004, 02:35 PM
You mean "So is it me or......" isnt a good thread title?

How about "Its about time...(AP article)"

Stuff like that bothers me too.

GriffeyFan
04-20-2004, 02:55 PM
[QUOTE=creek14]Hey sava, this might be a good thread to post over where the non-subscribers can read it too.QUOTE]

I didn't know non-subsribers couldn't read all the reads. I thought the only difference between subsribers and non-subsribers was the use of avatars and such.

westofyou
04-20-2004, 03:38 PM
[QUOTE=creek14]Hey sava, this might be a good thread to post over where the non-subscribers can read it too.QUOTE]

I didn't know non-subsribers couldn't read all the reads. I thought the only difference between subsribers and non-subsribers was the use of avatars and such.


First rule about Fight Club is you don't talk about Fight Club

TeamCasey
04-20-2004, 03:45 PM
[QUOTE=creek14]Hey sava, this might be a good thread to post over where the non-subscribers can read it too.QUOTE]

I didn't know non-subsribers couldn't read all the reads. I thought the only difference between subsribers and non-subsribers was the use of avatars and such.

Sssssshhhhhh ..... it's a SERP thing.

Boss-Hog
04-20-2004, 04:26 PM
Subscribers, mods and admins are the only ones with access to the Hall of Fame forum where this message was copied from.

Unassisted
04-21-2004, 10:01 AM
I think this would be easier to convey if we had some guidelines about thread titles. Here's my contribution.

1. If a new post is mainly about a person and something they did, the subject of the post should include:
a. the person's name
b. the thing they did

Example: Let's say Ryan Freel hit an inside-the-park HR in yesterday's game and you think it was great...

Some good thread titles that include both a and b would be:
- Ryan Freel's inside the park HR was amazing!
- Freel's inside-the-park shot

Some bad thread titles would be:
- Freel is freaking awesome!
- Where does he get that speed?
- Inside the park...
- About Ryan Freel yesterday
- Freel rips one
- Not much offense, but one great display of it
- Impressive yesterday
- Ryan Freel!

Not picking on anyone in particular... I'm just sayin' that none of the "bad" subjects tells me the main subject of the thread is about Freel's HR. I might be able to guess that from the ones that contained Freel's name, but why should I have to? If I wanted to make a post about it, I would have a hard time guessing most of those "bad" subjects were discussing it because they don't contain "a" and "b" above. A couple of the subjects I posted contained neither "a" nor "b."

Anyone else have some ideas for guidelines?

Boss-Hog
04-21-2004, 10:12 AM
I think those are pretty good guidelines. One thing that is especially difficult is when people start a thread like "Anyone know....." and leave the rest of the question in the thread, presumably to get more people to read it. We have enough posts that everyone shouldn't have to read every one to see if something's been posted before - that much should be noticeable from the thread titles.

Boss

Unassisted
04-24-2004, 11:49 AM
Looks like the message of this thread is not being received, despite the sticky. Perhaps the subject should be prefaced with "Please read before posting:" ?

WebScorpion
04-24-2004, 02:06 PM
Personally, I think it's a little too controlling to try to govern what people put in the title of their threads. I agree in principle that it might save many people time, but I sort of like a little comedy and/or mystery in the title. Just another opinion. :angel:

KittyDuran
04-24-2004, 02:20 PM
I just move the pointer over the thread title and the lines of the first message of the thread are viewed in a pop-up window... :confused: So I'd say 9 out of 10 times I know what the thread is about and whether I'm going to respond.

Unassisted
04-24-2004, 03:20 PM
Bad thread titles make it harder to find a previous post. That leads to more reposts, which makes more work for the mods. So, I'm more than a little surprised to see a mod come down on the opposite side of this issue.

Sometimes, I like to cite someone else's earlier post on a subject, because there's plenty of clever and knowledgable folks contributing here. If the thread containing that bon mot has an oblique subject, even a simple search can take several minutes.

Using good subjects is really about being considerate to your fellow posters. If a topic is worth posting, it's gotta be worth taking a few seconds to condense the message into a few well-chosen words for the "subject" field.

TeamCasey
04-24-2004, 07:57 PM
I think the request has been sent and most folks will try to do a better job. Some will receive it and try to do a better job, some won't give it a thought. It's all cool. No biggie.

Keep it simple. Don't try to set up guidelines.

Chip R
04-25-2004, 11:26 AM
I think the request has been sent and most folks will try to do a better job. Some will receive it and try to do a better job, some won't give it a thought. It's all cool. No biggie.

Keep it simple. Don't try to set up guidelines.
I think TC is right. I think we're spitting into the wind here if we expect posters to not start new threads on the same subject. It would be nice if they didn't but I just think it's unrealistic to expect that they do. I just merged two threads about Austin Kearns and the older thread's title was "Is anyone worried about Austin?" It really couldn't have been more clear but a new thread was started anyway. No big deal, us mods will just have to watch out for that.

savafan
07-18-2004, 09:25 PM
Been noticing lately that we've been getting a lot (and I do mean a lot) of threads where the subject is a player's name, and nothing else. I don't know about other posters, but it'd be a little bit helpful to have a bit more information in the thread title (in my opinion) than having 3 threads on the front page that are titled "Jose Acevedo" and 4 threads titled "Adam Dunn" (an obvious exaggeration, I know, but I think you get my point.) I think that Unassisted's guidelines for posting thread topics, while not written into law, are a pretty decent thing to live by. Again, just my opinion.

CaseyClub21
07-18-2004, 10:18 PM
yeah I agree. It's only natural thought to try to make the subject as interesting as possible by leaving you guessing what it could be about. But - this is a forum and I would have to agree it gets hard to know what some certain topics are about.

Matt700wlw
07-18-2004, 10:22 PM
Maybe it's just me

What is this thread about exactly? I can't seem to follow it too well... :mhcky21:

savafan
07-18-2004, 10:39 PM
It's only natural thought to try to make the subject as interesting as possible by leaving you guessing what it could be about.

I used to feel this way also, and I believed that my threads were "successful" if I received 20+ replies. But, then I realized that it's not a contest, and you don't get points for how many replies or views your thread gets. What is interesting to you may not be as interesting to other posters, and that's okay, you just try to put it behind you and move on. Not calling you out in particular CaseyClub21, just relaying how I used to think, and how I think now. I've adapted and mellowed a lot over the years.

Unassisted
07-19-2004, 12:21 AM
Since this is a pet peeve of mine, I will be more blunt... By forcing posters to open your incompletely-titled thread to learn its contents, you are wasting bandwidth on the board, along with people's time.

Bandwidth costs money. The owners of and subcribers to this board pay for the bandwidth that delivers the content. Think of it like electricity.

Wasting other people's time is just a matter of being considerate to your fellow RedsZoners, and that consideration affects how the community here views you. If you want to be viewed as a person of intelligence and substance here, the best course of action would be to use your thread titles to inform, rather than tease.

jmcclain19
07-19-2004, 12:41 AM
Since this is a pet peeve of mine, I will be more blunt... By forcing posters to open your incompletely-titled thread to learn its contents, you are wasting bandwidth on the board, along with people's time.

Bandwidth costs money. The owners of and subcribers to this board pay for the bandwidth that delivers the content. Think of it like electricity.

Wasting other people's time is just a matter of being considerate to your fellow RedsZoners, and that affects how the community views you. If you want to be viewed as a person of intelligence and substance here, the best course of action would be to use your thread titles to inform, rather than tease.

IE - Quit doing it, or Sava and Unass will be the Cards and you'll be Danny Graves, due for some smack down.

Unassisted
01-03-2005, 07:48 PM
Since we're bumping pet-peeve threads today, it seems like a good time for this one to float to the top again.

macro
03-08-2005, 11:56 AM
Let's bump it again.

westofyou
03-08-2005, 12:07 PM
Since we're bumping pet-peeve threads today, it seems like a good time for this one to float to the top again.

Ugh. ;)

macro
03-08-2005, 12:17 PM
Ugh. ;)

:D

I have no idea what you are talking about.

:D

Unassisted
03-08-2005, 12:40 PM
If I had mod powers, I'd be using them to fix incoherent/incomplete titles. It's not like the title of a thread is etched in granite.

Just sayin'

westofyou
03-08-2005, 01:16 PM
If I had mod powers, I'd be using them to fix incoherent/incomplete titles. It's not like the title of a thread is etched in granite.

Just sayin'


Umm.... check your PM's you're in violation. :allovrjr:

Blimpie
03-08-2005, 01:50 PM
Ugh. ;)Ironically, these three letters also represent the title of a recent thread...... :mhcky21:

macro
03-08-2005, 01:53 PM
I'm pretty sure that's what he was getting at, and it's what my reply was based on, as well. Actually, at this point, Santo's thread has gotten so many hits and so many replies that it would actually cause more confusion to change it than it would help to avoid. I did feel the need to bump this thread as a reminder, however. :)

WebScorpion
03-08-2005, 09:50 PM
Shaka, Bra!!http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/owen/scatter.gif

Unassisted
11-24-2005, 04:30 PM
Lots of threads lately with just a player's name for the title. This is a pet peeve of mine.

The best thread titles contain nouns and verbs. :thumbup:

savafan
11-25-2005, 12:20 PM
Lots of threads lately with just a player's name. This is a pet peeve of mine.

The best thread titles contain nouns and verbs. :thumbup:

Amen!

TeamBoone
11-26-2005, 02:28 PM
I've also noticed that sometimes a person will start duplicate threads on ORD and RL... wouldn't it be more efficient to start the thread ONCE on RL as all posters have access to it?

savafan
11-26-2005, 03:03 PM
I've also noticed that sometimes a person will start duplicate threads on ORD and RL... wouldn't it be more efficient to start the thread ONCE on RL as all posters have access to it?

Hmmm...then what would be the purpose of ORG? I know, I tend to post mainly on Reds Live, but the seperation of the forums was for the ORG to be discussion free of trolls and what not, and RL is still susceptible to trolling.

TeamBoone
11-26-2005, 05:19 PM
oh, ok. I guess I forgot.

Unassisted
12-14-2005, 01:31 PM
Also, Reds Live is not accessible to visitors who are not logged in. We should continue to put good stuff on ORG if we want to entice new users to bring more of the same.

Back to the topic of the thread... the cryptic and incomplete thread titles problem is happening more than ever lately. Any chance this thread could get stickied for a few days? Please? :)

macro
05-02-2006, 05:50 PM
It's the return of the thread that will not die! :laugh:

I've noticed some thread titles showing up lately that contain only the player's name, etc. I've since edited those thread titles to be more descriptive. Just thought I'd bring this back to the top for the sake of the many who have joined us in recent months.

Heath
05-02-2006, 05:56 PM
It's the return of the thread that will not die! :laugh:

I've noticed some thread titles showing up lately that contain only the player's name, etc. I've since edited those thread titles to be more descriptive. Just thought I'd bring this back to the top for the sake of the many who have joined us in recent months.

Yeah, but you guys killed the thread about the 10. ;)

Chip R
05-03-2006, 10:09 AM
Yeah, but you guys killed the thread about the 10. ;)

It was on orders from the 10. ;)

KronoRed
05-03-2006, 04:35 PM
The 10 killed the 10?

Isn't that suicide? :dunno:

Heath
05-03-2006, 04:40 PM
The 10 killed the 10?

Isn't that suicide? :dunno:

I think it was a homicide/suicide.

I'm bringing in these guys and gals...

http://www.mandos.org/joninbrea/Law%20Order%20Pics%20Web/title.jpg

paintmered
05-04-2006, 12:53 PM
It's been mentioned a few times in this thread but I want to mention it again:

Please please don't just put a player's name for the thread title.

Unassisted
05-07-2006, 03:46 PM
Looks like it continues to happen about once a day. :runaway:

Remember: The best thread titles contain at least a noun AND A VERB!

savafan
05-08-2006, 02:38 AM
Remember: The best thread titles contain at least a noun AND A VERB!

I like the ones that are just verbs.

Dunner44
05-08-2006, 03:45 PM
Looks like it continues to happen about once a day. :runaway:

Remember: The best thread titles contain at least a noun AND A VERB!

what about words like "poop" which are both nouns and verbs? If my thread title is "poop" can I double count or do I have to type "poop poop" to meet your criteria for a good title?

Unassisted
05-08-2006, 05:03 PM
what about words like "poop" which are both nouns and verbs? If my thread title is "poop" can I double count or do I have to type "poop poop" to meet your criteria for a good title?Since "poop" is singular, I hope you'd use the singular form of the verb. "Poop poops" is what we'd be looking for in that instance. ;)

BTW, here's some relevant reading material (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0916291456) if you want to confirm the verbs.

Dunner44
05-08-2006, 08:21 PM
Dang, you're right... and if I went the other way it would have to be "Poops poop." And I was so close....

Unassisted
05-11-2006, 01:05 PM
Mystery of the Day: What did Kearns (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45995) do? You'd never know by the thread title.

macro
05-11-2006, 01:31 PM
Mystery of the Day: What did Kearns (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45995) do? You'd never know by the thread title.

I have merged that thread with this one:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45845&page=2

so Unassisted's link won't be valid at this point. The thread in question now begins at post #23 of the Kearns thread.

Unassisted
05-12-2006, 11:36 AM
Thanks for the clarification yesterday, macro.

Today's mystery thread topic is Rick White (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46039).

Unassisted
07-05-2006, 10:27 AM
Prior (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48185)

Prior to what? Prior to the start of each Reds game, there shall be a game thread? Prior to posting, select a thread title that is descriptive and contains a noun and a verb? Nahhh.

Oh, this one's about Mark Prior! What happened to Mark? You'd never know by the thread title.

Actually, nothing happened to him. This one's speculating on whether the Cubs might be willing to trade him.

"Would the Cubs be willing to trade Mark Prior?" seems about right.

I count 6 threads on the front page of Reds Live now with titles containing only a players name. This is why it's confusing and selfish.

RBA
07-05-2006, 10:38 AM
If you put your pointer over the title before opening, it gives you a little preview of what the thread is about. Takes a second of your time.

remdog
07-05-2006, 11:14 AM
But it also only takes a second of someone's time to write a clear title. That way, 473 people don't even have to bother putting the little pointer over the title---they can just move on. Is that too much to ask? :)

Rem

Unassisted
07-05-2006, 11:20 AM
If you put your pointer over the title before opening, it gives you a little preview of what the thread is about. Takes a second of your time.And I could argue that it only takes the poster three additional seconds to type out three more words to make a proper thread title. Let's see: three seconds for one person vs. one second for hundreds of people... which is more efficient? :evil: [edit] Nice to see that remdog agrees. :thumbup:

As I've said before when this was pointed out, those popups aren't accessible to the handicapped, so we shouldn't be relying on them if we are truly considerate of everyone who reads here. Besides, many times the essential information for determining the topic (like anything tagged as a blockquote) does not come up in those popups.

I want to be able to skim the list and figure out which threads I want to read. A thread title which lists only a player's name or worse yet, a player's last name, does not permit that to happen.

Cryptic thread titles are a nuisance when searching, too. Imagine how much fun it would be to search for a thread that contained information about a player who was traded if the title of the thread announcing the trade was like 50 other threads that included only the player's name.

RBA
07-05-2006, 12:05 PM
Okay, I see your point. I didn't realize they weren't accessible to the handicapped.

crazybob60
07-05-2006, 12:07 PM
Sorry bout the Norm Charlton thread the other day....I will try to do better when starting a thread next time, I didn't realize this fact. I can see where it might be annoying or throw people off.

savafan
05-02-2007, 02:37 PM
Thought we could all use a reminder. I'm just sayin'

coachw513
05-02-2007, 02:48 PM
Looks like the message of this thread is not being received, despite the sticky. Perhaps the subject should be prefaced with "Please read before posting:" ?

For whatever reason, just read this thread...

Consider me guilty :thumbdown

Consider me repentant and seeking to improve :thumbup:

It's a valid point...I kindof liked the mystery of a good thread title, but I bow to the masses :D

Unassisted
05-02-2007, 03:37 PM
It's been mentioned a few times in this thread but I want to mention it again:

Please please don't just put a player's name for the thread title.

Paint posted this nearly a year ago, but the advice is just as relevant today. :thumbup:

AmarilloRed
05-03-2007, 02:22 AM
Some of us are new posters and dont know all the rules of creating threads so any help would be apppreciated.:redszone:

Ltlabner
05-03-2007, 07:44 AM
But it also only takes a second of someone's time to write a clear title. That way, 473 people don't even have to bother putting the little pointer over the title---they can just move on. Is that too much to ask? :)

Rem

Was this in the days before the creation of the intergalaticly famous shrug? :laugh:

Boss-Hog
05-03-2007, 08:15 AM
Some of us are new posters and dont know all the rules of creating threads so any help would be apppreciated.:redszone:
There aren't any official rules, but a little help in identifying what the topic is about before opening the thread is always appreciated. For example, a thread titled "Ryan Howard" could be about a number of things (his performance in a recent game, his performance over the course of the year, an injury, a trade, etc.) but "Ryan Howard's Struggles this Year" is a much more descriptive title, while still keeping it short. (By the way, I certainly don't mean to pick on Ryan Howard - just using him as an example :) ).

paintmered
05-03-2007, 08:27 AM
Some of us are new posters and dont know all the rules of creating threads so any help would be apppreciated.:redszone:

Not rules, just recommended guidelines.

BuckWoody
05-03-2007, 09:44 AM
Not rules, just recommended guidelines.

http://www.potcinteractive.com/barbossa1.jpg
The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

Ltlabner
05-03-2007, 04:04 PM
http://www.potcinteractive.com/barbossa1.jpg
The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

What if we are disinclined to acquess to their requests?

FlightRick
05-03-2007, 08:00 PM
I know I'm far from an Experienced Veteran Regular Poster here, but as a Beloved Internet Personality and an owner/operator of a website with a forum not too much smaller than RedsZone, I have spent years developing opinions and peeves about posting habits.

So I'm all for declaring an all-out jihad on lame thread titles. To anyone who claimed to love the "mystery" and "creativity" of a "good" title that will "entice" readers, I ask you to perform one simple test. Before wasting everybody's time by starting a thread just because you came up with an allegedly hilarious thread title, go back one step on the flow chart and FRICKING MAKE SURE YOU HAVE SOMETHING WORTHWHILE TO SAY.

You do that, and I'm quite confident you will have more than ample readers, even if you have to lower yourself to using an illuminating thread title. Sadly, when you're dealing in a volume business on a forum of this size, you're always going to have people who skip this vital step. I'm sorry if this sounds prickish, but at the very least, hey, I practice what I preach: registered here for 4 years, a total of 50 posts to my name, and a noble ZERO threads started by me. And until I dared to offend people's delicate sensibilities by making a funny regarding a recent change in the Cardinals' pitching depth, I was running at a nice "2 Rep Points for every 1 Post" average, because doggone it, people like me. Quality over quantity, and all that.

Also, while we're jihading against annoying Internet Dum Dum Behavior: may I PLEASE insist upon setting up a crack commando unit to break into the houses of any dimwit who actually thinks they are adding to the discourse by posting a reply that contains more emoticons/smileys than it does Complete Sentences, and then slap the hell out of them? I may not? Oh well, I had to try.

zombie-a-go-go
05-07-2007, 11:55 AM
Also, while we're jihading against annoying Internet Dum Dum Behavior: may I PLEASE insist upon setting up a crack commando unit to break into the houses of any dimwit who actually thinks they are adding to the discourse by posting a reply that contains more emoticons/smileys than it does Complete Sentences, and then slap the hell out of them? I may not? Oh well, I had to try.

:lastyear: :deadhorse :bang: :D

membengal
05-07-2007, 02:29 PM
I wish one of the site's founders could declare a "NO ICON USAGE" week, just to see how it goes on a trial basis. That would be outstanding. Not even at the ends of sentences. Not the winky ones. And certainly not that annoying mooning one. And, absolutely not the head banging into wall one. None of them. That would be like a week of redszone heaven.

Ltlabner
05-07-2007, 02:48 PM
I wish one of the site's founders could declare a "NO ICON USAGE" week, just to see how it goes on a trial basis. That would be outstanding. Not even at the ends of sentences. Not the winky ones. And certainly not that annoying mooning one. And, absolutely not the head banging into wall one. None of them. That would be like a week of redszone heaven.

First no venting and now no emotcons.

Geez...next thing is you'll want to eliminate Dunn Ks too much and 58 different Josh Hamilton threads.

:mooner:

membengal
05-07-2007, 02:53 PM
If we all work together, we can get there, I know we can. Like, say today, when I wanted to note a few things on Hamilton, rather than start a BRAND NEW thread, I bumped one from a few weeks ago. Fun, because people can examine thoughts previously had on the subject and an ongoing conversation can be had.

And, yes, no icons. What a wonderful world that would be...

Unassisted
05-07-2007, 03:05 PM
If we all work together, we can get there, I know we can. Like, say today, when I wanted to note a few things on Hamilton, rather than start a BRAND NEW thread, I bumped one from a few weeks ago. Fun, because people can examine thoughts previously had on the subject and an ongoing conversation can be had.

I think thread-recycling is a very good thing, especially on subjects like Hamilton, for which there are already many threads. This thread we're posting in is a great example of that.

On another note, the threads with just a player's name as the title seem to be continuing in abundance. :thumbdown

If a post is important enough to justify starting a new thread, it's worth taking a few extra seconds to come up with a descriptive thread title that contains a noun and a verb. If it's not worth taking that few extra seconds, then it probably isn't worth posting in the first place! :angry:

savafan
05-07-2007, 03:39 PM
If we all work together, we can get there, I know we can. Like, say today, when I wanted to note a few things on Hamilton, rather than start a BRAND NEW thread, I bumped one from a few weeks ago. Fun, because people can examine thoughts previously had on the subject and an ongoing conversation can be had.




The "Search" function is a great tool!

AmarilloRed
05-09-2007, 02:26 AM
I will cut down on my icons in the future unless absolutely unnecessary. I was wondering what happened to my created thread on the bullpen. Now I know.

Ltlabner
05-09-2007, 10:19 AM
I'm sure it's discussed somewhere in this lengthy thread, but I'd like to see an end to the spate of "this bullpen sucks" and "I can't believe they blew it again" posts in Redslive every time the bullpen explodes.

There's one out there now that's a pretty good discussion of what could be done to fix the bullpen woes, however, most of them amount to 5 to 20 post of "they suck" , "Narron's an idiot" and "I'm sick of it". You know, real hard hitting baseball insights.

pedro
05-09-2007, 01:05 PM
I'm sure it's discussed somewhere in this lengthy thread, but I'd like to see an end to the spate of "this bullpen sucks" and "I can't believe they blew it again" posts in Redslive every time the bullpen explodes.

There's one out there now that's a pretty good discussion of what could be done to fix the bullpen woes, however, most of them amount to 5 to 20 post of "they suck" , "Narron's an idiot" and "I'm sick of it". You know, real hard hitting baseball insights.


Me too. Redszone has become almost as unbearable as the Reds.

Ltlabner
05-09-2007, 01:08 PM
Me too. Redszone has become almost as unbearable as the Reds.

I'm not the first to claim this, nor likely the last, but the quality of the board has gone in the toliet latley. Frankly, it's hard to tell much difference between here and Reds.com or Cincinnati.com some days.

Fortuntaley, there's enough posts actually talking about baseball and offering positive solultions to the problems to keep things somewhat interesting.

Razor Shines
05-09-2007, 01:10 PM
I'm sure it's discussed somewhere in this lengthy thread, but I'd like to see an end to the spate of "this bullpen sucks" and "I can't believe they blew it again" posts in Redslive every time the bullpen explodes.

There's one out there now that's a pretty good discussion of what could be done to fix the bullpen woes, however, most of them amount to 5 to 20 post of "they suck" , "Narron's an idiot" and "I'm sick of it". You know, real hard hitting baseball insights.

Don't forget the open letter threads to Krivsky

paintmered
05-09-2007, 01:11 PM
Posts that discuss events that took place during the game should take place in the game thread. Let's keep the forums free from clutter.

westofyou
05-09-2007, 01:11 PM
Don't forget the open letter threads to Krivsky

Yes... those are just clever aren't they?

Email probably would work better..or a blog?

919191
05-10-2007, 02:50 AM
Maybe there should be a stickied thread for "Bullpen Implosions". Seems like it could stay around a bit.

BRM
05-10-2007, 06:15 PM
I'm not the first to claim this, nor likely the last, but the quality of the board has gone in the toliet latley. Frankly, it's hard to tell much difference between here and Reds.com or Cincinnati.com some days.

Fortuntaley, there's enough posts actually talking about baseball and offering positive solultions to the problems to keep things somewhat interesting.

Abner must be the newest member of the RedsZone police. :evil:

I agree with you for the most part. When the Reds struggle, so does this board.

Ltlabner
05-10-2007, 10:32 PM
Abner must be the newest member of the RedsZone police. :evil:

I agree with you for the most part. When the Reds struggle, so does this board.

I'm trying to get off this stinking sub-committe review board. I'm tired of doing GAC's paperwork.