PDA

View Full Version : Let's all take a deep breath (everyone please read)



Pages : [1] 2

Boss-Hog
05-29-2006, 04:09 PM
All,

It's no secret that the overall quality of the board has gone down hill lately and I'll be the first to admit it. I think that there are several reasons for this, but I'm not really interested in debating who's responsible for this and who isn't. I'm much more interested in solving the problem over the long haul.

One thing that GIK and I have always tried to do is listen to the users of the site by giving them a voice in the way things are run. While I admit that it's harder for the board to work as a democracy with an increasingly large member list, it's something that I feel still can work. I'd like to use this thread for members to air out their grieviences as to how things can be improved so that we can spend our time discussing Reds' baseball and eliminate the nastiness that has occurred. I do not want to see individuals called out or demeaning names used, such as statheads and the like. Concerns should remain in this thread as opposted to within other threads, like I've seen recently. I don't want to see this thread become a microcosm of the problems that plague the board. I want to see things improved and this thread is a good place to start.

I also want to use this thread to remind everyone the purpose of distributing reputation (for the users that it applies to). It should be used for posts that you think represent the positive quality that has been associated with RedZone. I've seen two uses that are not the proper way to give out reputation. First, reputation should not be given out for the purpose of attempting to have all users "promoted" to the Old Red Guard. This is something that should be earned by making quality posts and not just because someone has less then 200 reputation points.

Secondly, I've seen negative reputation left for personal matters, i.e. two users have a disagreement that turns nasty and it's "settled" by negative reputation being left. This should never been done; instead, the users should try to work out the issue privately. If that can't be done, then they should place each other on ignore. Administrators and moderators should not receive private messages and/or emails regarding reputation they feel is unjust. We have never gotten into the habit of moderating reputation because it undermines the purpose of the system, which is to let the users of the board determine what is and isn't a quality post. These type of matters should be handled between the users in question - the administrators and moderators should never been involved in these type of matters. Additionally, we've never had to revoke the ability to leave reputation, but if users continue to knowingly misuse it, we will. Finally, I want to remind everyone that reputation members should never be discussed on the board, such as discussing reputation that has been left for you or asking for reputation points. If I continue to see this, the offending users will be disciplined appropriately.

Since I'm asking for people's two cents (again, in a respectful manner) I'll start with my own thoughts. I think that one of the problems is the way that newcomers become acclimated to the board. RedsZone has existed for over six years now and I think it's safe to say that it's not your average message board. We have different rules here and it's my responsibility to ensure that they are clearly communicated to the users (new and old). This is a process that I think can and will be improved.

When new users come aboard, they're often not familiar with the fact that we've already covered a number of frequently discussed topics. As a result, some of the responses to their posts are not particularly friendly. It's important that we keep in mind what's allowed on other web sites may not be allowed here. We should all keep in mind that we were all new around here at one time or another and do what is necessary to help new users adjust to the way we do things around here.

In short, I know that the system we have in place here works because I've seen it work. The concept of two forums and a reputation system is something that most forums don't use, but they're things that have proven to work for us. If the administrators and moderators continue to see the overall rudeness to other users, we will be much less tolerant in dealing with it than we have been to date. Everyone can do their part to improve things by ensuring that others are treated with respect. Having said that, I'm interested to collect your thoughts (again, in a civil manner) about what we can do to improve things around here.

Raisor
05-29-2006, 04:13 PM
I think there should be a "beaten to death" forum. Topics (say, like Dunn, K's, and sac flies for example) could be sent to the "beaten to death" forum.

If someone wants to keep arguing about it, they can go in there. Two men enter, one man leaves: THUNDERDOME!!!!

RAS
05-29-2006, 04:19 PM
I like discussing those issues BUT, if they are so boring to those old timers that it becomes bothersome, then I agree that maybe they should be conducted elsewhere. I am new to this board and I do try to be polite to all even if I disagree, I figure it's mostly opinions and everyone's got one

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 04:36 PM
Boss-Hog, please allow me to be the first to respond in this thread. Some things I have noticed (since you asked that the guilty not be mentioned, I won't bother pasting links to specific thread) are:

- two posters posting essentially the same thing, but the poster with the larger number of posts (often it's a huge difference in post counts) will be treated as "in the know", and I suspect would also be given postive reputation points

- certain posters make it clear that their intention is to "suck up" to those with large post counts, in hopes of being given positive rep points in return

- certain posters "seem" nice and welcome the community spirit, but once they have put in their time here, so to speak, they turn nasty. They start treating other posters in the vein of "I'm part of RZ, move along". Hate to sound cynical, but it's what I feel I have witnessed in reading the stuff that certain posters have been writing to each other within threads

- The "Thanks for the callup!" threads in the ORG forum rub me the wrong way. I guess my feelings on this stem from the fact that I don't like the reputation point system. I've always felt that Internet forums should be about community spirit and sharing knowledge (and OPINIONS without facts to support them) with one another, and that rep point systems foster a competitive poster environment in which opinions are not welcome (here it does seem to be the case). In a nutshell, I feel that it's all nice and well that a poster gains posting privileges to ORG (I could care less, I just enjoy reading what others here have to say about the Reds), but saying that you're appreciative of the callup sends a bad message, in my opinion. Who exactly is calling you up? Are your opinions any more worthy than those that don't get called up? I hardly think so.

If you covered any of this in your opening post, BH, I apologize. It will take me another reading in order to digest everything. :)

pedro
05-29-2006, 04:41 PM
I think there should be a "beaten to death" forum. Topics (say, like Dunn, K's, and sac flies for example) could be sent to the "beaten to death" forum.

If someone wants to keep arguing about it, they can go in there. Two men enter, one man leaves: THUNDERDOME!!!!

We could call it "And you may ask yourself" after the Talking Heads song "Once in a lifetime"

And you may ask yourself
How do I work this?
And you may ask yourself
Where is that large automobile?
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful house!
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful wife!

same as it ever was

The Baumer
05-29-2006, 05:01 PM
I think if moderators are going to publicly name or call out posters for being nasty or argumentive in a thread, they need to name and call out every poster who has been nasty and argumentive. I have seen moderators jump on their high horse and wag their finger at a new poster, but fully brush over the fact that their buddies with high post counts were doing the exact same thing in the very same thread.

On the same note, I have seen threads where people will gang up on a new poster and the thread is not closed or visited by a moderator. However if a gang of new posters gang up on a poster with a high post count, moderators jump out of the woodwork reciting board code & policy. There is too much of a difference in attitude there.

Mods should moderate according to the board rules, and enforce these rules to everyone. There are times when I feel like moderators make decisions based on the question "Do I personally like or agree what is being said in this thread?" That takes things into subjective territory, where everyone has their own definition of what constitutes 'right' or 'wrong' or 'intelligent' or 'offensive'.

You can't moderate according to subjective principles.

flynn78
05-29-2006, 05:07 PM
Boss,
I appreciate the board so much. It is a great service to Reds fans. It stinks when the game thread gets hijacked, but I hate that the game thread here (Live) is deserted. I just want to talk Reds baseball. With nobody here to discuss with, you get frustrated. It seems like there is a "take my ball and go home" strategy from some. I hope it can be worked out to have the game thread in a common area, but unfortunately I can understand if it cannot.

dougdirt
05-29-2006, 05:08 PM
I think one of the problems with the argueing is that as new members come along, you are adding in more personalities and opinions and when you get so many of those, there are going to be members who will disagree with eachother more often. Ideas will clash and sometimes it just gets bad becuase each side believes that they are right and the other is wrong (guilty).

With that said, I am not completely sure how to keep that from happening because people will always disagree with others, but the ignore list is a nice place to start if people are constantly argueing with the same people over and over.

Redszone is however about 50 times more positive than it is negative and I know that I enjoy posting and reading here every day. Where else can you have so many Reds and baseball fans come together and talk and chat and trade information and ideas? Nowhere I have found like this place.

bthomasiscool
05-29-2006, 05:15 PM
We need to keep in mind that this is a message board. It's kind of ridiculous that its come to this. Not trying to sound like a jerk but some people need to get a life. While I am one to check on here throughout the day, I realize its a message board. While I occasionally will say something to someone on here, I have actual friends outside of my computer room. Cheer up everybody and have fun!

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 05:26 PM
We need to keep in mind that this is a message board. It's kind of ridiculous that its come to this. Not trying to sound like a jerk but some people need to get a life. While I am one to check on here throughout the day, I realize its a message board. While I occasionally will say something to someone on here, I have actual friends outside of my computer room. Cheer up everybody and have fun!

Thanks for summarizing what took me a page-long effort to do. :D There are a lot of folks here who could easily strike newcomers as "not having a life". When discussions turn to "you're not posting facts, therefore your opinion doesn't count", it's no longer a "community".

WVRed
05-29-2006, 05:27 PM
I think a way to prevent disputes being handled by rep points is removing the negative rep alltogether. IMO, it really doesn't serve a purpose. Another idea is moving the positive rep from 200-300.

Just my thoughts.

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 05:31 PM
If you remove negative rep points then what's the point of the rep system?

I like Raisors idea of a 'been there done that' forum.

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 05:36 PM
I don't think there is ever a good reason for a rep point system. I've not ever seen it work effectively on any other forum, anywhere. It always seems to isolate posters, kill any notion of community spirit. If I were to ever implement a rep point system, it would be used ONLY to isolate those posters that attack other posters or attempt form cliques with other posters. Eliminate the bad apples, socially. :D

UKFlounder
05-29-2006, 05:47 PM
I like discussing those issues BUT, if they are so boring to those old timers that it becomes bothersome, then I agree that maybe they should be conducted elsewhere. I am new to this board and I do try to be polite to all even if I disagree, I figure it's mostly opinions and everyone's got one

I disagree. If an "old-timer" see a subject that he/she thinks is beaten to death, all that poster has to do is ignore it. We don't have to respond to every thread that is started, and, IMO, it is often better not to respond than to respond with a comment (often that comes off as condescending even if that's not the intent) like "here we go again") (For example, watch what happens if a new poster tries to defend or criticize a player based on batting averagel.)

At some point, the posters who have been here for a while and have made their positions known on subjects like these just should realize that they cannot make that point to every single new poster, or, at least, to do so in a way that does not make the new person feel unwelcome.

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 05:48 PM
A better option IMO for the rep system would be to turn the viewing of the number off and also the green bars, nobody is going to get upset about a number they can't see, then the system will have to be used the way it was intended, to give reps for good posts and negs for bad ones, no "Well lemme rep him over 200" because nobody will have any idea where everyone is at.

Just a thought.

pedro
05-29-2006, 05:52 PM
A better option IMO for the rep system would be to turn the viewing of the number off and also the green bars, nobody is going to get upset about a number they can't see, then the system will have to be used the way it was intended, to give reps for good posts and negs for bad ones, no "Well lemme rep him over 200" because nobody will have any idea where everyone is at.

Just a thought.

I think that's an excellent idea.

Boss-Hog
05-29-2006, 06:03 PM
A better option IMO for the rep system would be to turn the viewing of the number off and also the green bars, nobody is going to get upset about a number they can't see, then the system will have to be used the way it was intended, to give reps for good posts and negs for bad ones, no "Well lemme rep him over 200" because nobody will have any idea where everyone is at.

Just a thought.
I was thinking of that, as well. I don't have a problem with it.

Reds Fanatic
05-29-2006, 06:11 PM
A better option IMO for the rep system would be to turn the viewing of the number off and also the green bars, nobody is going to get upset about a number they can't see, then the system will have to be used the way it was intended, to give reps for good posts and negs for bad ones, no "Well lemme rep him over 200" because nobody will have any idea where everyone is at.

Just a thought.

I agree with that idea too. It would still allow people to give positive or negative rep but it would cut out arguing about rep numbers or people asking for rep. I would also make it more likely a person got over 200 from good posts not from people trying to help them make the number.

guttle11
05-29-2006, 06:58 PM
The biggest problem with Redszone that I see is a blatant lack of respect for peoples opinions by many. Even some of the "best" posters on this board do it all the time. There is a lot of ingorance and "hes teh SuXXXX!!" type posts, but there is also a plethora of egotistical posters who think they are always right because of how they interpret and use certain stats, or because a certain player has a bad stretch of AB's or games.

I made a claim to leave Redszone for a while, and to be honest it has improved a little over the last week. If it goes back to the way it was though, I'll be looking elsewhere for my internet baseball fix.

As far as the rep system goes, I've never once cared about it. I rarely give or recieve rep points. I'm not against it, but I don't see the point of it.

redsfanmia
05-29-2006, 07:00 PM
If you want to elimanate the giving rep out only based on who is below 200 (of which I am guilty)do what krono is suggesting. Thats a good idea to squash that. I now would like say that I think this board is over moderated, is being called a stathead really offensive? Is talking about the Dixie Chicks not wanting certian people to buy their cd political? I really enjoy coming here and reading the posts but am dissappointed that the non-baseball board has become reduced to whats for dinner and who is you favorite band threads. When any good discussion starts the mods come in a close it, its just over done. That being said I like the board and enjoy coming here but I have noticed like everyone else how this board has gone down in quality as of late and I would love to see less moderation.

DunnFan44
05-29-2006, 07:10 PM
I dont care about how many posts I have made, or Rep points system. I love this forum and visit it several times a day. I love to read the comments about the Reds. It also helps me with info that I may not know about the REDS. I just want to thank you for letting me post my opinions, and comments.
This is the best Reds forums out there!!!:)

Stewie
05-29-2006, 07:12 PM
I like Raisors idea of a 'been there done that' forum.


On the Phillies board, one of the mods developed a permanent 'sticky' post that goes over a lot of the 'been there, done that' issues that pop up. There, it is generally "Bobby Abreu is unclutch," "Abreu is lazy," or "Abreu strikes out too much." The mod uses past discussions on the board as well as off-site articles in order to refute many of these misconceptions. Basically, the thread allows newcomers who may not be familiar with the site an opportunity to get an overview of how the board is run and what type of discussions go on in sort of a one-stop shopping environment -- without having to use the search feature in order to find out if a topic has been discussed at length before. I don't know if something like that could be beneficial here, to just have one thread that reviews all of the "Dunn Ks too much" threads, etc. that have been sort of beaten to death. It's not supposed to eliminate discussion on those topics, but it just provides information as to what has been previously discussed.

edabbs44
05-29-2006, 07:49 PM
I agree with that idea too. It would still allow people to give positive or negative rep but it would cut out arguing about rep numbers or people asking for rep. I would also make it more likely a person got over 200 from good posts not from people trying to help them make the number.
I think this is a good idea, except if people are friends they will just let the other person know where they are and how many points they need.

The one thing I have noticed lately is that there are a lot of new joiners on the board and if someone makes a post on a "touchy" subject (i.e., Dunn's BA, Griffey's fielding range, etc) they get absolutely pounded by some members with stats about Dunn's OBP and the like. For all of the more seasoned posters on the board, people have the right to give more value to one statistic over another. So if someone complains about Dunn's batting average, they are complaining about his BA and not his OBP. I've seen some posters get obliterated b/c of discussions like this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and we are all on here to talk about the Reds. But when the "elder statesmen" of the board start complaining about that everyone is harping on the fact that Dunn's average is awful, someone else can turn around and say that Dunn's OBP is being harped on as well.

PS: I'm not generalizing about newer posters vs. ORG members, but it just appears to me that it happens that way most often.

PPS: I'm not trying to start something on the beaten to death Dunn topic, but I thought that was most relevant.

MrCinatit
05-29-2006, 08:05 PM
Think before you post.
Think before you rep.
Don't be scared of those with large post/rep numbers.
Don't automatically think those with small post/rep numbers are ignorant.
Treat others as you with to be treated.
If you don't like it, don't look at it, don't post it.
Drama is for the soap operas.
Personal arguments have no business on the forums - this is what the PM feature is for.
There is no such this as Fight Clu..oh...wrong list.

reds44
05-29-2006, 08:05 PM
I think this is a good idea, except if people are friends they will just let the other person know where they are and how many points they need.

The one thing I have noticed lately is that there are a lot of new joiners on the board and if someone makes a post on a "touchy" subject (i.e., Dunn's BA, Griffey's fielding range, etc) they get absolutely pounded by some members with stats about Dunn's OBP and the like. For all of the more seasoned posters on the board, people have the right to give more value to one statistic over another. So if someone complains about Dunn's batting average, they are complaining about his BA and not his OBP. I've seen some posters get obliterated b/c of discussions like this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and we are all on here to talk about the Reds. But when the "elder statesmen" of the board start complaining about that everyone is harping on the fact that Dunn's average is awful, someone else can turn around and say that Dunn's OBP is being harped on as well.

PS: I'm not generalizing about newer posters vs. ORG members, but it just appears to me that it happens that way most often.

PPS: I'm not trying to start something on the beaten to death Dunn topic, but I thought that was most relevant.
Yes, and normally it is by the same few posters that bring up his OBP every single time. If somebody is complainign about his BA or BA with RISP, they don't want to hear about his OPS. Some people may think it is stupid to care about batting average, but people do care about it. And baseball isn't all about stats, sometimes you have to go off of what you see with your owns eyes. Most of the time on this board, if you don't have stats to back up your opinon you're not allowed to have one.

A few weeks back I was part of the problem of the board, but since then I think I have cooled out. Sometimes you just need to agree to disagree.

I really don't know what needs to be done, but hiding the rep points isn't a bad start.

IslandRed
05-29-2006, 08:30 PM
I don't think there is ever a good reason for a rep point system. I've not ever seen it work effectively on any other forum, anywhere. It always seems to isolate posters, kill any notion of community spirit.

I didn't care for it initially, but understand that the reputation system was a response to a problem -- pretty much the same problem that led to the creation of Redszone in the first place. If Redszone had kept going down the same road, Boss and GIK may well have said the heck with it.

I've been through that. There's a college sports site I've worked with for years. After a long growth period, it went "network," then the owner got fed up and decided it wasn't worth it. We re-opened the original site and make no apologies for the fact that the site still exists for the sake of preserving a community, and anyone who can't get along with the clique is sent packing. Redszone is more welcoming by comparison.

M2
05-29-2006, 08:37 PM
I like the confidential rep point totals and dead horse forum ideas. Though I think mods need to be clear on what the dead horses are and that individual posts should be moved to the dead horse forum when a mod thinks it's appropriate.

BUTLER REDSFAN
05-29-2006, 08:55 PM
i have been a reds fan since i was a little kid...I like this website--nice to have a place to celebrate victories,endure losses,etc..i have never been that big into the rep points(as is obvious by my total)..but to have someone out there neg you because i spelled anyone "any1" to save space..just petty beyond words...almost wish there was a separate forum on here for people who didnt care about points at all

Patrick Bateman
05-29-2006, 08:59 PM
but to have someone out there neg you because i spelled anyone "any1" to save space..

People who neg people for stuff like that should not be allowed to hand out negs. That's beyond ridiculous. That's not what the rep. system is about.

reds44
05-29-2006, 09:03 PM
People who neg people for stuff like that should not be allowed to hand out negs. That's beyond ridiculous. That's not what the rep. system is about.
I got negged for pointing out correct stats before.

That was fun.

Don't give me rep points back, but I was just pointing out flaws in the system.

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 09:11 PM
That may be, but I can tell you there are other sports forums more welcoming than RedsZone. To each is own, I guess. Also, there is a difference between cliques and community spirit. In the former, posters are evaluated on the substance of their posts and whether or not they "measure up" in some way, so to speak, determines whether they join that clique or not. I don't know that it's a matter of whether one gets along with a clique or not. I believe it to be more a matter of whether you are ever a part of the clique in the first place. Think back to workplace issues :D In a community-oriented forum, there isn't as much value placed on 'value' of posts or post-count, but rather on one another looking out for each other. The former is more competitive in nature (kind of your sports bar), the latter more about good times.

Spitball
05-29-2006, 09:15 PM
All posters deserve to be responded to with toleration and respect. I believe much of what has happened lately has been born from a condescending comment or two.

I'm quite certain none of us would talk to our spouses that way. We wouldn't talk to our bosses, employees, or customers that way. We wouldn't talk to our friends that way. Why is it alright to talk to other posters that way?

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 09:18 PM
i have been a reds fan since i was a little kid...I like this website--nice to have a place to celebrate victories,endure losses,etc..i have never been that big into the rep points(as is obvious by my total)..but to have someone out there neg you because i spelled anyone "any1" to save space..just petty beyond words...almost wish there was a separate forum on here for people who didnt care about points at all

I don't even know how to tell what I was 'negged' for. How can I do that? To be brutally honest with you, I don't believe you typed "any1" (and I wasn't the one that negged you, don't even know what thread that was in) because it saved space. It's not important why I believe you did that, nevertheless. Still, just as one would be expected to place his elbows all over the kitchen table while eating at a friends' house, I think it's reasonable to use *some* etiquette (spelling?) when writing online. You can find all sorts of articles on this very issue.

MrCinatit
05-29-2006, 09:31 PM
I don't even know how to tell what I was 'negged' for. How can I do that? To be brutally honest with you, I don't believe you typed "any1" (and I wasn't the one that negged you, don't even know what thread that was in) because it saved space. It's not important why I believe you did that, nevertheless. Still, just as one would be expected to place his elbows all over the kitchen table while eating at a friends' house, I think it's reasonable to use *some* etiquette (spelling?) when writing online. You can find all sorts of articles on this very issue.

Under the banner, you will see a red line with various links (Donate, Chat...and User CP) - hit User CP, and you should see where your rep points have come from.

Ltlabner
05-29-2006, 09:32 PM
I am still new to the forum and look forward to being a productive poster and community member. I like the hide rep points and sticky threads with beat to death topics.

So much of this can be solved with common sense. The vets here should activley take the time to hand out rep points and not be lazy about it. If you want a rep system to work you can't stop handing it out because you've gotten bored or torked with "newbies". I'm not saying give it away willy-nilly but are vets honestly taking the time to read posts from new people and rewarding those that are good? (a retorical question). I think this is a fair topic to raise as a number of people on this thread and a simular one on ORG have admitted to being lazy about giving out rep.

For us new folks we should spend more time writing good posts and less time worrying about who likes us or doesn't. We are all human and want to "fit in" on some level, no matter how much we deny it. But if we spend more time doing research, thinking about how we express our opinions, re-reading our posts before posting them, asking questions instead of trying to think of the best come back, etc etc then the rep will come. Also, if a vet responds with a reply that rubs you the wrong way, send them a PM asking them to explain further or discuss the topic in more detail. Don't just instantly take offence and gear up for a battle royale.

People spend too much time trying to be "right" about particular topics and not enought time considering what the other person might be trying to say. If the vets do their part, and the new folks focus on quality posts (combined with the tweaks discussed above) problems will iron themselves out.

Heath
05-29-2006, 09:33 PM
If you remove negative rep points then what's the point of the rep system?

I like Raisors idea of a 'been there done that' forum.


Some genius wanted to call it "Frank Pastore's House of Blues".

Smart thinker that guy. :D

Also, for those who've been down this road, sung the song, danced the dance, and all you got was that stupid t-shirt - remember -long seasons and if the Reds regress (unfortunetly) to career norms, all that will be left is the "battle-tested scrappy posters" of RedsZone.com by September.

We now return to your regularly scheduled "kiss the mod's ring session" already in progress :D

(BTW - nice work Boss - :smoochesring: )

MrCinatit
05-29-2006, 09:46 PM
We now return to your regularly scheduled "kiss the mod's ring session" already in progress :D


Oh. We're supposed to kiss their rings...shoot, is my face red :p:

Unassisted
05-29-2006, 09:52 PM
I think the carrot part of the rep system is good, but the stick doesn't hurt enough to change behavior. I want to see negs count as much as positive rep. I also want to see disciplinary actions of any kind result in a pre-defined decrease of rep. And if a poster drops below certain pre-defined rep levels, reduce their privileges on the board.

The Dead Horse forum is an interesting concept, but I wouldn't like to see it used for threads that start on a completely different topic and veer into "dead horse" territory. Posters should be able to scan the list of topics, see that there are three topics in there that mention "Dunn" and "strikeouts," and recognize that the issue is effectively verboten. If a poster looks in the special forum and sees a bunch of thread titles that are unrelated to the "Dead Horse" issue, I don't think it will solve the issue any better than locking such threads.

Maybe instead of the separate forum, there should be a wiki page listing current "dead horse" and "hot-button" topics, linked from the board as a forum, that only the mods can edit? I think the mods and admins would benefit from having a place like that to publicly post their current hot-button issues, to avoid the need for Boss to start up a thread like this when things boil over. The mods communicate among themselves, I presume. Having a wiki page would enable them to communicate better with us.

TOBTTReds
05-29-2006, 10:00 PM
My 2 cents:

I dislike LARGE amounts of sarcasm in threads that are "inside" jokes, even though I know what people are talking about. I'm very tired of hearing someone is "a scrappy vet," "scrappy," or the old one that went away was being a "mocker." I know why those things were said once, but it has been WAY OVERUSED. Basically anything that DanO, Miley, or Narron has said gets repeated here way too much.
------------------
Be nice, people. If someone says something that you know is wrong, explain to them why in a post, and maybe even back it up some how. If someone says something that I disagree with, I try to explain it to them like they are my girlfriend. Many of us don't have a clue who eachother is, or our backgrounds in baseball. If you say something incorrect and I feel the need to correct you, I will try to do it as nicely as possible, without showing you up.
----------------------
I would like Rep points hidden as many people mentioned.

----------------------
I would like something where we could "pimp" our collections or stuff like that. I know some people have great organizations they are a part of that they would like to share with us.
----------------------
Don't continually say a player sucks. Especially when he is playing well. This does a major thing: People lose respect for you, because no matter why you dont like them, the things you say are just ridiculous. There have been numerous posts about many players on our team this year like Dunn, Freel, Brandon Phillips, Hatteberg, LaRue, and name a pitcher other than Harang or Arroyo.
----------------------
Be respectful. My NUMBER 1 pet-peeve on this board, is when people get VERY disrespectful just because of difference in opinion. Just be nice. Just about all of us love the Reds here. Could you imagine being at a stadium then getting in a fight with someone because they like Hatteberg vs. lefties or something like that.

We are here for one reason...the Reds. Not to showcase our knowledge of the game, our use of numbers, or how much we know about K's, SB's and small ball. Go REDS!

GAC
05-29-2006, 10:23 PM
All posters deserve to be responded to with toleration and respect. I believe much of what has happened lately has been born from a condescending comment or two.

I'm quite certain none of us would talk to our spouses that way. We wouldn't talk to our bosses, employees, or customers that way. We wouldn't talk to our friends that way. Why is it alright to talk to other posters that way?

Good post. And the reason why you can get away with it is because you will most likely never have to face that poster/member face to face.

The internet makes some people very bold in their talk. ;).

What bothers me about this forum - and alot of others have expressed the very same sentiment - is what you mention above Spitball - the condescending attitude that leads to basically a "know it all" attitude.... I'm right, and I'm trying to do you a favor and educate you.

We all, myself definitely included, will always encounter individuals that are more knowledgeable on various subject matter or topics.

Our whole lives are about learning.

But it's the way or approach inwhich it is done.

You have a vast mixture and diversity of not only people on here, but also type of fan...

from the casual fan, all the way to the die-hard statiticians.

I've stated this before - everyone derives their enjoyment from the game of baseball in different ways.

People don't want to simply respect that.

But there are also people who act childish in the real world - so it's no big deal for them to do so on a forum. They know no better, and nothing is gonna change them.

Finally....

I don't like the two separate game threads.

It has created "classes". There are those who come into chat, and want very much to participate on a gamethread, but are not able to NOW do so because a majority now post on the ORG gamethread.

And from my standpoint, these were not people who were "troublemakers" before. But now they are basically being "punished".

I think the gamethread should be accessible for all. Ther is a positive to that too. It enables people to get to know others better.

When you isolate people, even when the intentions were noble and good, that is very hard to do.

When a person joins RZ, are they required to have to read the forum rules (so they know/understand) and then sign a disclaimer that they accpet them?

That might be a solid idea to consider.

Alot of new members come from other various forums that have little or no moderation. So they are use to a more "open" atmosphere where little rules/etiquette are involved.

Also - maybe a few more moderators as this forum continues to grow?

ThatsAStrike
05-29-2006, 10:27 PM
First of all, thanks for letting those of us in Reds Live to voice our opinion. I've followed some threads in ORG and have wanted to comment but obviously cannot.

Concerning the "dead horse" issues: I'm sure there are some topics that long-time members of this board are sick to death of hearing about, but to new posters, well, it's a new topic. Perhaps if you're so sick of hearing about a certain topic that you can't contribute to the conversation without being snide or condescending, maybe you shouldn't respond. (See UKFlounder's post above -- he said it much better than I can.)

Regarding the game thread being moved to ORG: From my perspective, there were just as many ORG members causing problems in the original game threads as there were non-members. It may be pointed out that the game threads have become more "civilized" since moving to ORG. I believe that's simply because it was a wake-up call for some people and they decided they'd better behave themselves. Just my own opinion.

Basically it just comes down to respect, as noted in several of the posts above. Just treat each other with respect and most of these problems go away.

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 10:30 PM
I like the 2 game threads because it keeps the noise down, you can follow the game instead of hitting refresh and seeing 25 new posts and maybe 1 of them saying something about what actually happened on the field.

Edskin
05-29-2006, 10:38 PM
First of all, I agree mostly with the "just chill out" crowd. This is a message board after all, and I think most of these "problems" could be solved if people just didn't get their panties in such a bunch over such silly things.

But if we were to make a hard-fast rule, here would be mine:

Eliminate "Reds Live" altogether. I think having the two separate forums has created a sort of cast system that naturally brings division. It also brings confusion-- sometimes I'm not sure where to post my thoughts.

To me, Redszone is Redszone. There should be ONE community. Of course, you could still keep the non-baseball forum, etc... but there should be one "big board."

I believe you will continue to see petty arguments and board degeneration as long as there are two main boards-- especially seeing one board is considered a "call up" from the other.

Perhpas we could install a "time" rule upon registering at the site? Maybe a newbie would have to wait a certain number of days or weeks before they could post-- even after signing up. That way, they could still follow the board, see how things work, and post once they've become a little more acclimated?

redram
05-29-2006, 10:42 PM
People who neg people for stuff like that should not be allowed to hand out negs. That's beyond ridiculous. That's not what the rep. system is about.

But it happens, as a matter of fact it happened to me a year ago. I like coming here, reading and seeing what is new for the Red's. I will look in the game thread, but not post much. As you can see by my rep, it means nothing to me either, but mainly because of what happen a year ago. I think that rep points are given out to much by who ya know, as opposed to what you post sometimes. I love the Reds, love coming here, but just ran out of gas trying to get enough rep points to get to 200. I have posted many positive things and yes some neg things as well. I get very passionate about this team, and get mad when we lose. guess that is why I just read more now, lol and opposed to posting after tough losses like we had today. Just wanted to chime in here. Go Red's

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 10:43 PM
I like the 2 game threads because it keeps the noise down, you can follow the game instead of hitting refresh and seeing 25 new posts and maybe 1 of them saying something about what actually happened on the field.It will be a moot point if the team goes "south" - like this game thread last year in September when there were only 74 replies. :p:
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40103

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 10:45 PM
Perhpas we could install a "time" rule upon registering at the site? Maybe a newbie would have to wait a certain number of days or weeks before they could post-- even after signing up. That way, they could still follow the board, see how things work, and post once they've become a little more acclimated?Interesting idea....:)

Ron Madden
05-29-2006, 10:50 PM
A better option IMO for the rep system would be to turn the viewing of the number off and also the green bars, nobody is going to get upset about a number they can't see, then the system will have to be used the way it was intended, to give reps for good posts and negs for bad ones, no "Well lemme rep him over 200" because nobody will have any idea where everyone is at.

Just a thought.

I agree with Krono, I like this idea.

SandyD
05-29-2006, 10:54 PM
I like the two game threads.

I like the idea of hiding rep points.

My first thought today when I saw all of this: Maybe it would be a good time to take down the board for 24-hours. Maintenance. ;)

There are so many different ideas of what this forum should be that it's quite a challenge to the mods to keep it in check.

Boss-Hog
05-29-2006, 10:58 PM
Thanks for the initial feedback everyone.

flyer85
05-29-2006, 11:02 PM
How bout separate forums for optimists and pessimists.

griffeyfreak4
05-29-2006, 11:02 PM
Compared to other boards, this is a great board. I enjoy being on here, and check it many a time throughout the day.

The two game-threads are extremely annoying though. I used to come here all the time during games becuase the atmosphere in the game-thread was great. But now the Reds Live! thread is deserted, and it's so boring to be there, so I no longer come during games.

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 11:15 PM
How bout separate forums for optimists and pessimists.Actually in either 2001 or 2002 RedsZone had two separate game threads that were separate just that way...:) [I didn't like it then and I don't like the separate game thread now... :p: ]

saboforthird
05-29-2006, 11:20 PM
I would like Rep points hidden as many people mentioned.


This is an excellent idea, in my opinion. Perhaps I'm a bit overly-sensitive, but on more than one occasion I shy away from discussion because talking heads with 2-6k posts are sharing their "insider" information in said thread. I mean, if the point of the RZ forums is to share knowledge about the Reds, and love of the game, and community spirit is the focus of this forum (is it?), then there's really no point in forcing the whole world to see your rep point count. Or your post count, for that matter. There are many forums out there now that are doing away with post counts for this very reason.

RBA
05-29-2006, 11:25 PM
Actually, I don't find much different in the ORG and the Reds Live game threads. Not much of any action being reported in either. It would be better if we had something in "real time" like a chat feature. Than people who want to post "he gone", "multi-tasking", and "Deno would of caught that", etc. would have a place to release it without cluttering up the game thread.

Say what? There is a chat feature. Than, why not use it?

flyer85
05-29-2006, 11:28 PM
Actually in either 2001 or 2002 RedsZone had two separate game threads that were separate just that way...:) [I didn't like it then and I don't like the separate game thread now... :p: ]I think the main issues lately have been excessive negativity(we all realize the team is slumping) and some voices are probably overly shrill which grates when people are a little grumpy because the team is losing.

I was down there Sunday and I have been to a number of losing games this year but in the end I just love watching the game of baseball and the Reds and I never boo at the game. Baseball is an incredibly hard game to play and succeed at and it is much more apparent when you watch it in person.

reds44
05-29-2006, 11:29 PM
Actually, I don't find much different in the ORG and the Reds Live game threads. Not much of any action being reported in either. It would be better if we had something in "real time" like a chat feature. Than people who want to post "he gone", "multi-tasking", and "Deno would of caught that", etc. would have a place to release it without cluttering up the game thread.

Say what? There is a chat feature. Than, why not use it?
He Gone is when an opposing player strikes out.

Seems like reporting the action to me.

Newman4
05-29-2006, 11:33 PM
First of all, I could care less about rep points. Because, I could care less what people think of me. Keep it, do away with it whatever.

My problem is certain topics that are deemed "beating the horse to death" are still topics of interest. Some issues will not go away. People complain about the same things everyday: taxes, traffic, Iraq, their job, etc. But nonetheless, they always have an audience because those are common issues that are important to a lot of people. Same with Dunn's Ks, George Grande, Dan O'Brien et al. Logically, people should have an outlet for these topics, even if they are redundant. If you want to have a separate forum or whatever, that's your call, but it shouldn't be outlawed or looked down upon. As mentioned, some new posters like to discuss these issues for the first time and other experienced posters like to rehash the same issues because they are important.

Lastly, sometimes I like to vent. I'm not a great writer and don't usually put things very eloquently. As you can tell, I sometimes ramble. However, I don't understand why people can't have a place to vent when frustrated about things associated with the Reds. It makes me feel better to vent with others who feel the same way. Is it possible to have a rant forum or special section where people can just say "Larue sucks" or " George Grande loves Edmonds" without having to go into a big, long explanation?

dsmith421
05-29-2006, 11:33 PM
People who neg people for stuff like that should not be allowed to hand out negs. That's beyond ridiculous. That's not what the rep. system is about.

I disagree. I'm far from a grammar Nazi, but it takes a fraction of a second to type and spell properly, and displays respect for everyone who reads what you've posted. People should be encouraged to write in proper English, and the rep system seems to be the only method of doing so.

The last thing we need is people posting in text-speak.

Heath
05-29-2006, 11:35 PM
How bout separate forums for optimists and pessimists.

No fair stumping for your own forum... ;)

Newman4
05-29-2006, 11:36 PM
Compared to other boards, this is a great board. I enjoy being on here, and check it many a time throughout the day.

I don't think there is any other Reds board is there? Redszone pretty much has a monopoly.

Newman4
05-29-2006, 11:41 PM
I disagree. I'm far from a grammar Nazi, but it takes a fraction of a second to type and spell properly, and displays respect for everyone who reads what you've posted. People should be encouraged to write in proper English, and the rep system seems to be the only method of doing so.

The last thing we need is people posting in text-speak.

To play devil's advocate, there's an awful lot of people using text-speak and it's pretty much a change in culture there. Using negative rep points for not using proper grammar is quite picky to be honest and discriminatory.

Johnny Vander m
05-29-2006, 11:41 PM
Actually, I don't find much different in the ORG and the Reds Live game threads. Not much of any action being reported in either. It would be better if we had something in "real time" like a chat feature. Than people who want to post "he gone", "multi-tasking", and "Deno would of caught that", etc. would have a place to release it without cluttering up the game thread.

Say what? There is a chat feature. Than, why not use it?


Ok, I can go along with that but where does "multi-tasking" fit in and WTH does it mean? I mean there is one poster who says it a lot on the game thread, kinda stupid IMO.

edabbs44
05-29-2006, 11:42 PM
Ok, I can go along with that but where does "multi-tasking" fit in and WTH does it mean? I mean there is one poster who says it a lot on the game thread, kinda stupid IMO.
Multi tasking is from a Red Roof Inn commercial that is played about 20 times per game.

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 11:45 PM
Ok, I can go along with that but where does "multi-tasking" fit in and WTH does it mean? I mean there is one poster who says it a lot on the game thread, kinda stupid IMO.IIRC, "multi-tasking" is in reference to a much aired commercial on the Fox Sports OH games.

flyer85
05-29-2006, 11:46 PM
No fair stumping for your own forum... ;)I would hang out in both :laugh:

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 11:46 PM
I don't think there is any other Reds board is there? Redszone pretty much has a monopoly.
Cincinnati.com has one as does Cincinnatireds.com

They are...not fun places.

wolfboy
05-29-2006, 11:48 PM
Good post. And the reason why you can get away with it is because you will most likely never have to face that poster/member face to face.

The internet makes some people very bold in their talk. ;).

What bothers me about this forum - and alot of others have expressed the very same sentiment - is what you mention above Spitball - the condescending attitude that leads to basically a "know it all" attitude.... I'm right, and I'm trying to do you a favor and educate you.

We all, myself definitely included, will always encounter individuals that are more knowledgeable on various subject matter or topics.

Our whole lives are about learning.

But it's the way or approach inwhich it is done.

You have a vast mixture and diversity of not only people on here, but also type of fan...

from the casual fan, all the way to the die-hard statiticians.

I've stated this before - everyone derives their enjoyment from the game of baseball in different ways.

People don't want to simply respect that.

But there are also people who act childish in the real world - so it's no big deal for them to do so on a forum. They know no better, and nothing is gonna change them.

Finally....

I don't like the two separate game threads.

It has created "classes". There are those who come into chat, and want very much to participate on a gamethread, but are not able to NOW do so because a majority now post on the ORG gamethread.

And from my standpoint, these were not people who were "troublemakers" before. But now they are basically being "punished".

I think the gamethread should be accessible for all. Ther is a positive to that too. It enables people to get to know others better.

When you isolate people, even when the intentions were noble and good, that is very hard to do.

When a person joins RZ, are they required to have to read the forum rules (so they know/understand) and then sign a disclaimer that they accpet them?

That might be a solid idea to consider.

Alot of new members come from other various forums that have little or no moderation. So they are use to a more "open" atmosphere where little rules/etiquette are involved.

Also - maybe a few more moderators as this forum continues to grow?


GAC I agree with most of what you said. I don't agree with the extra moderation on the board. In my opinion, it all comes down to personal responsibility. The animosity is what is poisoning this board. We have to read through personal argument after personal argument. In the end, the only thing that will make this place better is posters doing what's best for the board (even when it's tough for the ego). I summarized my feelings in another thread:


To be fair, that's been the flavor du jour for a while around here.

In all honesty, this place is turning into one giant mess. That isn't on the mods. That isn't on Boss or GIK. It's on posters who just can't let things die. If people on this board could just accept "agree to disagree" into their thinking, this place would shape up quickly. I come to this place for good Cincinnati Reds discussion. The pissing matches are getting really old.

There is room for emotion on this board. There is room for statistical discussion on this board. There is room for personal observation. Some posts will be in depth and well reasoned, others will not. Baseball fans are a very diverse group. Some follow the game religiously, others casually. Some fans are guided by emotions, and others are guided by a statistical approach. Many are a mix of both. Many on this board need to accept the different approaches, because in the end we're all baseball fans.

For those of you who can remember the cincinnati.com board, please ask yourself: do you want this place to be that bad? Granted, we don't have trolls like Gallagher, but the animosity around here is getting to cincinnati.com levels.

I guess you could say this is a plea for posters on this board to take some responsibility. Accept the fact that there will be disagreements. If they are getting to a point where they hijack a thread, take them private. The rest of us don't need to read a personal argument. If you have animosity towards another poster/group of posters, take it private. I am not alone in my disgust towards these incidents.

edit: I'm not trying to single out this thread. I'm sure anyone who has visited a game thread lately will know what I mean.

SunDeck
05-29-2006, 11:48 PM
Confidential Rep System = good idea.

Here are some other good ideas:
Read your posts before submitting them.
Remember that everyone is here because they like the Reds. (well, almost everyone).
If you want to start a fight, go to a bar where you can actually get punched in the teeth.
Remember, there are some youngsters on the board. Let's try to act like grownups for their sake.

paintmered
05-29-2006, 11:49 PM
Cincinnati.com has one as does Cincinnatireds.com

They are...not fun places.


In fact, many of the original and longtime posters around here came from cincinnati.com.

That board was a mess and they eventually killed it. I haven't been there since they brought it back but if I were to guess, it's more of the same.

James B.
05-29-2006, 11:51 PM
I disagree. I'm far from a grammar Nazi, but it takes a fraction of a second to type and spell properly, and displays respect for everyone who reads what you've posted. People should be encouraged to write in proper English, and the rep system seems to be the only method of doing so.

The last thing we need is people posting in text-speak.

I don't think the rep system was set up to punish people for bad grammer was it? I thought it was about the quality of the post. I just survived an English Composition class last year and I am still not very good with it.

paintmered
05-29-2006, 11:51 PM
Confidential Rep System = good idea.

Here are some other good ideas:
Read your posts before submitting them.
Remember that everyone is here because they like the Reds. (well, almost everyone).
If you want to start a fight, go to a bar where you can actually get punched in the teeth.
Remember, there are some youngsters on the board. Let's try to act like grownups for their sake.

If everyone could follow those guidelines, there would be no need for moderation. :thumbup:

Newman4
05-29-2006, 11:52 PM
Cincinnati.com has one as does Cincinnatireds.com

They are...not fun places.

I thought the Cincinnati.com board was shut down and thus the creation of Redszone occured.

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 11:54 PM
It's come back in the last year I think.

Popped into one thread and someone was called a jackass 3 posts in.

Great place ;)

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 11:54 PM
I thought the Cincinnati.com board was shut down and thus the creation of Redszone occured.The original Cincinnati.com board for shutdown because of the increased traffic on the Enquirer website for 9/11.

KittyDuran
05-29-2006, 11:55 PM
The original Cincinnati.com board for shutdown because of the increased traffic on the Enquirer website for 9/11.And by that time RedsZone was already up in running, starting in 2000.

Newman4
05-29-2006, 11:57 PM
It's come back in the last year I think.

Popped into one thread and someone was called a jackass 3 posts in.

Great place ;)

So you can call people names like "jackass" and not get kicked off?

Heath
05-29-2006, 11:58 PM
It's come back in the last year I think.

Popped into one thread and someone was called a jackass 3 posts in.

Great place ;)

I'm shocked it took that long ;)

Send some Sierra Mist their way, ok? :D

KronoRed
05-29-2006, 11:59 PM
So you can call people names like "jackass" and not get kicked off?
"Pompous windbags" too.

That was a poster referring to redszone by the way :laugh:

Ender
05-30-2006, 12:03 AM
There's a rep system? :evil:

Heath
05-30-2006, 12:15 AM
"Pompous windbags" too.

That was a poster referring to redszone by the way :laugh:

I feel like this guy now....

http://www.bestcareanywhere.net/img/charles1.jpg

OldRightHander
05-30-2006, 12:37 AM
When I was new I came in here with a lot of opinions about the game that were not in agreement with many of the people here. Many of my opinions were not very well informed but the older members treated me with a good degree of respect and patiently explained a lot of things. I looked at everything with a fairly open mind and was willing to rethink many of my opinions. When I still found myself in disagreement with someone else, I always found this a good place to discuss those disagreements in a civil manner. This doesn't happen as much now. If folks didn't take disagreements personally and attack back when their ideas are challenged we wouldn't be having so many of these other issues. Everyone needs to calm down a bit and realize that ideas and opinions are up for debate and should not lead to personal attacks. I really don't have problems with the rep system, but that's easy for me to say. I try to reward good content when I'm on here, but I can see where the system can lead to a degree of jealosy or complaints about a "caste system." I don't know if hiding rep scores would solve this problem or not, but I wouldn't have a problem either way. It would still be nice if there was a way to see if someone is above or below 200, even if the exact number is not seen. That's just because I like to give my rep to those who are under 200, since once you're over 200 it's all icing on the cake anyway.

cincyinco
05-30-2006, 12:42 AM
I disagree. I'm far from a grammar Nazi, but it takes a fraction of a second to type and spell properly, and displays respect for everyone who reads what you've posted. People should be encouraged to write in proper English, and the rep system seems to be the only method of doing so.

The last thing we need is people posting in text-speak.

Oh c'mon. I know text speak isn't exactly fun to read, but if its just someone typing ne1 or any1 at one point in a paragraph, as opposed to say a whole message like:

Ey3 h8 4d4/\/\ |>uN/\/, h3 K's 2 mU<h!&$%#@*$

There are better things to neg someone for.

I also want to say I think a lot of people need to relax about things - and a lot of people need to stop being so sensitive about things. I recently got dinged for "masked profanity" - which I understand is against the rules. But the manner in which it was said was not attacking anyone, and I didn't think it was overly offensive. Just my opinion, but I think Mods should loosen up a bit on the trivial things such as this(and someone else mentioned the word stathead.. is that really taboo? yeesh..), as long as its not a profanity laced tirade.

I think posters need to stop being so sensitive about words on a screen. Sometimes discussion can get "heated". We all want to be right. No one wants to be wrong. Its okay to make an argument with someone, as long as its conducted civily. No name calling, etc. I've gotten negged by someone for having a differ of opinion - however was able to resolve that by PMing the person who negged me and asking why? We worked it out.

Sorry to ramble, but a few other things... It does sometimes appear that there is an "in crowd" or a group of elitests. I don't think its really true, but sometimes it does appear that way. I dont think thats how it really is, but I can see why.

Someone mentioned on here about starting threads to discuss BA, or RISP - and when presented with stats such as OPS, get offended, or feel the thread is hijacked. I just think someone is saying that hey, you shouldn't get so worked up about such and such stat, check into this one, its a better gauge of what you're looking for, and here's why. Not "you're stupid, BA sucks, and OPS rules..".. obviously a bit exagerated, but you get my point.

Above all, a respect for users new and old. Differing opinions are fine. There are traditionalist and statheads. Its okay to be one or the other. Its okay to be and understand BOTH. Stats are not the only way to evaluate players, and just the same, traditional scouting isn't a full proof method either. Sometimes you get those players who scouts never really like, but they just keep on performing(i.e brian giles). We just need to remember that, respect each other, and stop and take a moment to remember we're all here becuase we love this ball club.

One last thing, that I just have to air a grievence about - some posters are just overly pessimistic about things - and I think at one time they had reason to be - but there seems to be an atmosphere of habit. Its so ingrained into us things like, Small Market, Low Budget, Carl Lindner, Jim Bowden, Barron Farm System, Dan O'Brien, etc etc - that I think new ownership and GM get some flack they don't deserve, simply becuase we're so used to failure. Its like we can never succeed. Its like just becuase Howington/Gruler/etc failed, that everyone else we draft will as well. Its an aura of even though things have changed, its going to remain the same. I wish people would give this regime a chance - they've only been on the job since what.. Jan/Feb. 1/2 a year. Patience needs to be shown by fans and posters on this board. If they fail, you have a legit gripe. But can you really, honestly, say we are doomed with a 1/2 year of evaluation on the new regime? You can say what you think, but sometimes people convey there thoughts very matter of factly. Hope that makes sense, sorry for the rant.

Dunner44
05-30-2006, 12:45 AM
Just my 2 cents.... I've been off the board for about two weeks moving home from college and getting internet set up. When I left game threads were stll routinely going into 25-30 pages on RedsLive, and when I came back, the thread was 8 pages long and closed... what happened in the meantime? Did i miss something?

Its a shame if the thread is going to be permanently moved to ORG, because that thread was the best way for me to follow the game when I was at school, and while i can still read it in the ORG, it is much more fun to be able to participate. But i guess there's always game chat.

harangatang
05-30-2006, 12:49 AM
If you want to start a fight, go to a bar where you can actually get punched in the teeth.Amen. I love how some people hide behind their computers because they know they can get away with it.

savafan
05-30-2006, 01:25 AM
I now would like say that I think this board is over moderated, is being called a stathead really offensive? Is talking about the Dixie Chicks not wanting certian people to buy their cd political? I really enjoy coming here and reading the posts but am dissappointed that the non-baseball board has become reduced to whats for dinner and who is you favorite band threads. When any good discussion starts the mods come in a close it, its just over done. That being said I like the board and enjoy coming here but I have noticed like everyone else how this board has gone down in quality as of late and I would love to see less moderation.

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here, but I kinda agree here. I think the mods do a good job on the whole, and they have a thankless task set in front of them, but lately it does seem like the trigger finger is getting quicker, and threads are closed more out of fear of potentially becoming political, rather than actually being political. Some threads are also closed because the mod who closes it feels that it "no longer serves any purpose here".

I guess I don't understand the need for Ochre's board. I don't see why we have to go to a seperate site for those discussions when we're all here already. Perhaps a less moderated "rant" forum, as others have suggested, would be a good idea...I dunno.

I do like the idea about hiding rep points, maybe even hiding post counts.

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 01:35 AM
I guess I don't understand the need for Ochre's board. I don't see why we have to go to a seperate site for those discussions when we're all here already. Perhaps a less moderated "rant" forum, as others have suggested, would be a good idea...I dunno.

That type of stuff bleeds right back to the baseball forum, would lead to more trouble IMO.

savafan
05-30-2006, 01:41 AM
That type of stuff bleeds right back to the baseball forum, would lead to more trouble IMO.

But it exists anyway, by the same posters, just at a different url. I guess I just don't understand that.

Newman4
05-30-2006, 01:44 AM
Perhaps a less moderated "rant" forum, as others have suggested, would be a good idea...I dunno.
.

Good deal.

Caveat Emperor
05-30-2006, 01:54 AM
I'll weigh in on this...

I made some of my thoughts clear on the ORG thread along these lines -- namely that everyone from the newbies to the original cast and crew can do a better job of being respectful to one another. Taking an additional second before you post to consider "Am I living the standard I want others to follow?" would solve 95% of the problems on this board. Period.

As far as the reputation system goes...

I'm of the opinion that the system is broken, not because we can see one another's totals or anything so banal, but rather because both the incentive for getting positive reputation (the carrot) and the punishment for getting negative reputation (the stick) are too weak.

Before ORG got it's own game thread, was there really any incetive to having ORG status? Most conversation is in Live, the majority of the activity is in Live, the majority of the posters go to Live first. Similarly, what's the stick for getting negative reputation? Mods have said it before -- nobody really gets banned for having low rep. You have to ask -- what is the reptutation system trying to do? Is it still currently serving that purpose? I'd argue that, because this debate is occuring agian (a year later), it hasn't achieved it's long-term goal of continued viability. Theoretically, the reputation system should preclude this conversation from even needing to occur, but it isn't. It kicked the board in the pants a year ago because it was a change -- it lacks the effect a year later.

I don't have all the answers, and I haven't been around RedsZone nearly as long as most of the others here...but I think the issue that's at the core of all this (and the elephant lurking in the corner of the room) is what kind of board people want -- one that's an open forum for any and all to come and talk about the Reds, or one that's a limited commmunity for the few who are accepted. If you want an open forum, then part of the consequences are that you end up with all sorts of people -- some you may disagree with and some you may not like. It's the nature of the beast.

Never let it be said, though, that I come to the chalkboard with nothing but an eraser -- so here are my "quick fix" suggestions (not saying ALL should be implemeted, but maybe a few):

- Switch reputation from the number to the little squares or just hide it alltogether from public view. Once you hit 200, you get an avatar and it's pretty obvious you're in/out of the ORG.

- Require a set amount of time/reputation before a poster is allowed to create a new thread. One of the O&A messageboards I read does this, and it seems to cut down significantly on the amount of redundancy in threads and confines debate on "beaten to death" subjects to pre-existing threads, which limits the noise on the board and helps funnel discussion. Plus, it allows the posters to get a feel for how the board works before taking the floor and yelling loudly.

- Limit Game Thread creation to the ORG. This is a carrot/stick issue -- if the game thread is important to people and they enjoy participating in it then that's incentive to follow the rules, make good posts, and recieve reputation sufficient enough to participate in the game threads. And, again, if there's nothing on ORG that people want to participate in that they can't get on Live, what's the point of the reputation system?

- Day long suspensions for anyone who recieves more than X negative reps on a single post. If someone says something stupid enough to get negged a set number of times, then they really should spend the rest of the day off the board instead of continuing to fight and fan whatever flames are burning on the issue. Another carrot/stick issue for the reputation system.

I'll conclude by saying I love RedsZone -- I'd never have made it through the last year or two of law school without my daily reading (and, eventually, posting0 on here. I think it's still the best internet message board I've ever been to, and I think the majority of the problems can be fixed not with more rules, but with more common snese.

With that, we now return to our regular scheduled bickering.:thumbup:

SteelSD
05-30-2006, 02:26 AM
When I was new I came in here with a lot of opinions about the game that were not in agreement with many of the people here. Many of my opinions were not very well informed but the older members treated me with a good degree of respect and patiently explained a lot of things. I looked at everything with a fairly open mind and was willing to rethink many of my opinions. When I still found myself in disagreement with someone else, I always found this a good place to discuss those disagreements in a civil manner. This doesn't happen as much now. If folks didn't take disagreements personally and attack back when their ideas are challenged we wouldn't be having so many of these other issues. Everyone needs to calm down a bit and realize that ideas and opinions are up for debate and should not lead to personal attacks.

Well said, as usual, ORH. Frankly, I'd love to see the following added to the top of the Redszone Rules/Guidelines:

1. You have the right to have an opinion.
2. You do not have the right to have an unopposed opinion.

The folks who make it here long-term at Redszone almost instinctually understand those two truths. Those who don't...well, we've seen the issues.


I really don't have problems with the rep system, but that's easy for me to say. I try to reward good content when I'm on here, but I can see where the system can lead to a degree of jealosy or complaints about a "caste system." I don't know if hiding rep scores would solve this problem or not, but I wouldn't have a problem either way. It would still be nice if there was a way to see if someone is above or below 200, even if the exact number is not seen. That's just because I like to give my rep to those who are under 200, since once you're over 200 it's all icing on the cake anyway.

Also well stated. Excepting some abuse (which is a normal and expected residual), there's nothing wrong with the rep system as it stands, IMHO. I'm with you- if Boss and GIK decide it's best to hide rep point totals, not a big deal. That being said, there's a downside to doing so.

What most folks don't understand (even some vet posters) is that rep points don't equal reputation, credibility, or privilege. There's no mod out there who's going to bow down to posters with high rep points. The very idea of that is lunacy considering that just about every one of them has told a high rep poster (myself included) to shut up when shutting up was the best course of action. There's no high rep poster out there who hasn't had major disagreements with another high rep poster. There's no special caste. There are no major cliques. There is no "Redszone 10" unless "ten" equals "two hundred and fifty". The remainder of my post is going to be directed to anyone within reading distance, so my apologies for breaking off my response to you, ORH.

Every single person who has ever complained about not having enough reputation points doesn't understand the simplicity of the concept:


Reputation equals appreciation. Nothing more.

Type posts that folks appreciate and reputation points are earned. Quickly. And that runs into the point I probably should have made a couple paragraphs ago- hiding rep point totals does nothing to help posters who want to search for posts created by those with high rep point totals so that they may determine exactly what kind of information is valued.

Now, I dunno about anyone else but if it's me and I'm looking to try out a new message board that uses something akin to a reputation system, I'm probably going to do my homework before my first post and figure out the what kind of posts are appreciated versus the opposite by looking at contributions by the highest rep total posters on the board. So let's take a look at those guys in no particular order:

westofyou
Cyclone792
M2
SteelSD
Caveat Emperor
RFS62

Now, do any of those guys have major reputation point totals because they're just popular? No (and please note that I only listed posters off the top of my head). The tie that binds those names- while they may disagree with each other often- is that every one of those posters has the ability to think three dimensionally, understand situational dynamics, and when challenged they have the ability to produce well thought out factually-based counterpoints even though every one has the ability to also be "chippy" at times (my own snide cuss self included).

The lesson is that if you see the game as an emotional AB-by-AB sprint instead of a marathon and don't have the ability to look past what's right in front of you, that may not be the best plan. If you harbor resentment against a certain type of player or game without factual basis, this may not be the best forum for you. If your plan is to attack posters rather than concepts, this isn't the place you should be. If your M.O. is to emotionally escalate a debate, there are folks here who are better at that game than you. If you feel you have a right to have an opinion but can't handle a challenge to it, go elsewhere. Please. If you want rep points for effort rather than contribution, you won't get them unless said effort results in you making an actual point. There isn't a poster on this board who is immune to being wrong. That being said, there isn't a poster on this board who has the right to be right just because he thinks so.

But if you want to talk about baseball at an exceptionally high level and if you might be willing to shut up, listen, and learn about that which you don't know or you want to provide information above and beyond the general knowledge level of the forum then this IS the place for you.

I type the above not because I represent Redszone (I don't, of course) but because it is the Truth of any intellectual forum and in an intellectual forum that which demonstrates an understanding of fact and three-dimensional thinking rule.

And at this point, I've never seen an organization more in need of a mission statement than Redszone. The lack of one is what reduced SOSH to private membership.

savafan
05-30-2006, 02:35 AM
Okay Steel, you're making me reconsider hiding reputation points.

I hate it when you get me all confused like that.

TOBTTReds
05-30-2006, 02:45 AM
Well said, as usual, ORH. Frankly, I'd love to see the following added to the top of the Redszone Rules/Guidelines:

1. You have the right to have an opinion.
2. You do not have the right to have an unopposed opinion.

The folks who make it here long-term at Redszone almost instinctually understand those two truths. Those who don't...well, we've seen the issues.



It is how people's opinions get opposed that has created this whole thread. Everyone knows that there will be a rebuttle to their thoughts. That is why many post, to see the response and create discussion.

Some people get there opinions taken away by others because the opposition is so strong with their words and statements, that the person loses all opinion and gets absolutely slammed.

So if I had to add a rule:

Everyone's opinions will remain just that, even after discussion on it. A person can not be slammed, name called, and basically humiliated because of their opinion.

--------------
There have been many threads where someone has their opinion knocked by others, then it is an all out gang up on one guy. It's not the strength in numbers which is bad (bc then likely that one person was wrong), but it is the cruelty at which people go at it against that one person. Just like this title of the thread, people need to take a deep breath. And let someone have their own opinion.

Ron Madden
05-30-2006, 02:57 AM
Why would anyone want to believe in and cling to any opinion that is proven wrong? I don't understand this line of thinking.

I would rather someone dispute my opinion and prove me wrong than to go on believeing in something that is'nt true.

We must all keep an open mind.

TOBTTReds
05-30-2006, 03:03 AM
Why would anyone want to believe in and cling to any opinion that is proven wrong? I don't understand this line of thinking.

I would rather someone dispute my opinion and prove me wrong than to go on believeing in something that is'nt true.

We must all keep an open mind.

Many times things aren't proven wrong and the fight goes on. For example someone saying that Rich Aurilia is a better 1B than Hatteberg. Someone might feel very strong about Hatteberg, then a rebuttle is that Aurilia has more range. Hatte picks better though, Aurilia positions himself better....these types of things can't be proved. Even some stats that are used in hitting situations and stuff still create arguments.

If all opinions could be solved, they wouldnt be opinions, they would be facts, or wrong.

The Baumer
05-30-2006, 03:29 AM
I have noticed that the most admirable suggestions in this thread have come from those who have the well being of the WHOLE community in mind and not just themselves. Those who offer ideas that open the community and encourage new members and opinions.

It is very easy to make a post saying, "RedsZone members should be allowed to XYZ" when that particular privelage/activity is something that serves yourself. It's similar to my boss hassling me for being late to work and me responding with, "I think for the best interest of this company, all workers should start work at 8:15 instead of 8." I am offering ideas based on what serves me best.

I agree with the people who suggested a mission statement. This board either needs to be open to anyone or closed to the elite. It can't be both to different people. That is where a lot of conflict comes from, those who think posting on RedsZone is a privelage for a select few battling with those who think RedsZone is a place for all Reds fans to share their thoughts.

NastyBoy
05-30-2006, 03:36 AM
Here are my suggestions for improving the forum.

1. Eliminate reps points. Make ORG posting by invitation only.
2. Eliminate game threads. The whole concept of a game thread and a forum are opposed. A game thread is a stream of thought event. A forum post is a well thought out response to a topic. To hold both to the same standards is ridiculous. Create a live game chat and let the comments and emotion of the moment flow.
3. Set up a new forum called "the Crapper" or "the Toilet" or "the Dump" or "the Abyss". Here you can have all the Dunn HOF vs. Dunn SUX and Marty HOF vs. Marty SUX banter, RRS vs. RC, ROY vs. CYA, RISP vs. RSVP... etc. you want. And make it a free for all... anything goes.

Ron Madden
05-30-2006, 04:04 AM
Many times things aren't proven wrong and the fight goes on. For example someone saying that Rich Aurilia is a better 1B than Hatteberg. Someone might feel very strong about Hatteberg, then a rebuttle is that Aurilia has more range. Hatte picks better though, Aurilia positions himself better....these types of things can't be proved. Even some stats that are used in hitting situations and stuff still create arguments.

If all opinions could be solved, they wouldnt be opinions, they would be facts, or wrong.

Most of those arguments can be setteled with facts.

I have had opinions that I believed to be true proven false by others with a differing opinion. They backed thier opinions with facts.

Instead of being "Bull Headed" I learned from them. Thats all I'm saying by keep an open mind. ;)

TeamCasey
05-30-2006, 05:50 AM
I like the 2 game threads because it keeps the noise down, you can follow the game instead of hitting refresh and seeing 25 new posts and maybe 1 of them saying something about what actually happened on the field.

I was staying out of all this, but I will say this much. I enjoy the two game threads. It isn't about haves or have nots or quality of posts to me. It simply cut the numbers down. I can read either one and they aren't 30 pages long anymore.

TeamCasey
05-30-2006, 06:14 AM
I finally read through everything. Still staying out of the fray...... I hope. I did read a couple mentions of having a single game thread on ORG. That would be a tragic mistake, IMO. Everyone should have access to a game thread. I enjoy two because of the numbers.

That said, I would love to see more people involved in chat. I only get in there on the weekends. Sometimes a decent crowd, sometimes not. All are welcome new and old ...... and the rules are less restrictive. We even get a little naughty in there on occasion. ;)

Does everyone know it exists? Perhaps it's a bit camouflaged on the tool bar. Boss, can we make the chat button more prominent? Maybe a different color or a bit chat button on the upper right corner above the "Welcome TeamCasey"?

wheels
05-30-2006, 08:49 AM
Here are my suggestions for improving the forum.

1. Eliminate reps points. Make ORG posting by invitation only.
2. Eliminate game threads. The whole concept of a game thread and a forum are opposed. A game thread is a stream of thought event. A forum post is a well thought out response to a topic. To hold both to the same standards is ridiculous. Create a live game chat and let the comments and emotion of the moment flow.
3. Set up a new forum called "the Crapper" or "the Toilet" or "the Dump" or "the Abyss". Here you can have all the Dunn HOF vs. Dunn SUX and Marty HOF vs. Marty SUX banter, RRS vs. RC, ROY vs. CYA, RISP vs. RSVP... etc. you want. And make it a free for all... anything goes.

1. I couldn't care less about what is done with rep points, but I use them.

2. Game threads are great, and are the meat and potatoes of the board during the season. It's not really all that hard to be civil.

3. Different forum or not, the concept you've outlined still goes against the reason for Redszone's existance. How many different forums does one site need anyway?

Every time a new influx of posters occurs, this happens.

Every time the older posters get fed up with the junk that's floating around and start getting vocal about it, the newer posters start making a push to enact change even though they've essentially just joined the board.

If the owners of this site changed at the whim of everyone, lord only knows what it would look like.

Learn the rules, think about what you say, develop a thicker skin when it comes to having your ideas challenged, and everything else is peripheral.

This place doesn't belong to us, so we need to follow the rules, or move on.

edabbs44
05-30-2006, 09:33 AM
1. I couldn't care less about what is done with rep points, but I use them.

2. Game threads are great, and are the meat and potatoes of the board during the season. It's not really all that hard to be civil.

3. Different forum or not, the concept you've outlined still goes against the reason for Redszone's existance. How many different forums does one site need anyway?

Every time a new influx of posters occurs, this happens.

Every time the older posters get fed up with the junk that's floating around and start getting vocal about it, the newer posters start making a push to enact change even though they've essentially just joined the board.

If the owners of this site changed at the whim of everyone, lord only knows what it would look like.

Learn the rules, think about what you say, develop a thicker skin when it comes to having your ideas challenged, and everything else is peripheral.

This place doesn't belong to us, so we need to follow the rules, or move on.
I think this post made a lot of sense. There are a lot of newer posters (myself included) and I never saw any gamethread ground rules posted. This, to me, is one of the roots of the "problem" at hand.

Raisor
05-30-2006, 10:06 AM
:

1. You have the right to have an opinion.
2. You do not have the right to have an unopposed opinion.




I don't think this can be said enough, so I'm quoting Steel.

I'm also going to give Steel some negative rep points. Just because.

:evil:

remdog
05-30-2006, 10:17 AM
.....I would love to see more people involved in chat. I only get in there on the weekends. Sometimes a decent crowd, sometimes not. All are welcome new and old ...... and the rules are less restrictive. We even get a little naughty in there on occasion. ;)

:laugh: I was there that night and I have to say I was....well....shocked! (In a good way :D ) After that session I can't wait for the next 'Ladies of Redszone' calender! :evil:

Rem

registerthis
05-30-2006, 10:55 AM
How bout separate forums for optimists and pessimists.

I don't think there's any way that could ever work.


;)

Raisor
05-30-2006, 11:02 AM
I still think we need Thunderdome. We could ask Tina Turner to moderate it!

RBA
05-30-2006, 11:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyer85
How bout separate forums for optimists and pessimists.


How about adding a bi-polar forum too. ;)

GridironGrace
05-30-2006, 11:03 AM
Have only made it to like page 4 of this thread so far........

I agree with the problem of New members making threads that have already been covered. And love the idea of a "Beaten to death Thread"

I dont like hiding the Rep points. If they are gonna be a part of the forums they need to be KNOWN. Not fair to have them without knowing whats going on IMO. Atleast you should be able to see your Rep when posting.. Dont see a need in seein OTHER peoples rep.


My own Ideas:

A Newbie Welcoming Section. A place where they can see all the rules, then post that they are HERE, and we can all go in and say thank you for joining... give some words of incouragement and WELCOME them properly.

Not to mention they could ask questions in thier thread on whats right and wrong, or if they wanna start a thread they could ask if its been covered 1000 times already or not.

Just a newbie Forum where the older members could help newbies learn thier way around here... possibly have an adoption program of some sort where the older memebers could take on one or 2 newbies who can PM them and get answers to questions they have about the board.

Thats about all i got right now til I read the rest of the pages..

Raisor
05-30-2006, 11:06 AM
Just a newbie Forum where the older members could help newbies learn thier way around here... possibly have an adoption program of some sort where the older memebers could take on one or 2 newbies who can PM them and get answers to questions they have about the board.




Only way I want to be involved with a mentor program is if the newbie has to come over and wash my car.

Sorry, I guess I'm extra snarky today. :devil:

GridironGrace
05-30-2006, 11:15 AM
Only way I want to be involved with a mentor program is if the newbie has to come over and wash my car.

Sorry, I guess I'm extra snarky today. :devil:

LOL I just hope your being sarcastic. Ive not been around here no where near as long as alot of you, however, im not a newbie anymore lol.

I just feel you can eliminate alot of the problems as soon as someone gets here with a mentor program. The more veteran members that would help out the better, this way you teach before they make a mistake, intead of having to explain to them in the 1000th Dunn ks alot thread.

savafan
05-30-2006, 11:27 AM
LOL I just hope your being sarcastic. Ive not been around here no where near as long as alot of you, however, im not a newbie anymore lol.

I just feel you can eliminate alot of the problems as soon as someone gets here with a mentor program. The more veteran members that would help out the better, this way you teach before they make a mistake, intead of having to explain to them in the 1000th Dunn ks alot thread.

The option for them to do it is already there. I had two posters pm me when they first joined the board asking me questions, and I was very willing to help them out. I'd say that now, both of them are better at the quality of posts they have here now than I am. I'm not taking credit for that, just saying that if new posters have questions, they are always capable of pming longtime posters and picking their brains.

Ltlabner
05-30-2006, 11:30 AM
Not to mention they could ask questions in thier thread on whats right and wrong, or if they wanna start a thread they could ask if its been covered 1000 times already or not.

I don't want to sound whiny, but I've posted several questions in different threads, on different topics, and they've mostly been ignored. I posted in the game thread for a clarification between posting in the thread vs. in the chat room. Again, it was ignored. I don't mind all these ideas but everybody has to live up to their end of the bargin for it to work.

I've rethought my position on the rep. I think I'd like to continue to see it posted. SteelSD said it well in his post for the reasoning. I think the key to the system, however, is that all participate. This includes negitive reps. If people are dilligent about handing out good rep for what they think are good posts then "newbies" will quickly figure out the types of posts appreicated on the site. This means, however, that all the vets have to do it so that their is an equal distribution of opinions on what qualifies as "a good post".

Equally important, is the handing out of negative reps for VALID reasons. If vets are equally dilligent about handing out negative reps when people are attacking, refuse to listen, unduly negitive, etc etc they too will quickly figure out the sorts of posts not appriciated on the site. Again, the vets have to be dilligent about handing out the neg reps so that people aren't ganged up on and a uniform sense of what a "bad post" can be gained.

The whole idea of the rep system, as I understand it, is that it is a "self monitoring" system. Well, if vets only occasionally hand out reps, good or bad, then how can it work? From my side, we "newbies" need to be open to the feedback we reiceve, wether it be in thread, via reps, or PM's. Just because a vet asks us to conisder another option doesn't mean we should gear up for war.

I reciently abandoned the cincinnati.com forum. It is up and running and let me tell you, it is HORRIBLE. We should all be greatfull for this site and the effort that goes into it. The other site is nothing but name calling, recitation of XYZ player sucks (of course, with no evidence other than a recient bad outing or play), goofy posts that only list obsucre player names, and a few posters who bully the others and refuse to hear anybody elses ideas (unless it agrees with their "the Reds are a blight on humainty" retoric).

remdog
05-30-2006, 11:30 AM
To address some of the issues of this thread:

--Seperate boards: I was against this when it was proposed and I'm still opposed. I think everyone should be allowed to post freely and segregating people only leads to resentment or a 'kiss-butt' attitude designed to get 'called-up' (which is a totally silly concept).

--Mods: sorry but, personally, I don't think the mods on this board do a particullarly good job. There are certain mods on this board that abuse and break the rules consistantly but are never disciplined for it. They come to think of themselves as 'bullet-proof' and get even more out of line with their responsibilities. Someone else suggested that there be term-limits on their authority and I would certainly support that.

--Rep system: I didn't like it when it was proposed and I still don't like it. I feared it would lead to abuse by certain groups and, IMO, it has. It should be eliminated all together.

--Game thread: I was hopeful that creating a game thread in ORG would lead to a thread that would be primarily comments about the action on the field. While it has gotten better, it still contains too many inane, frivioulous comments. It's still treated like a chat room so my suggestion is this: it's treated like a chat room so move it to the chat room and make it available there and only there. Let the use fit the location.

--Stats vs. Opinion: By nature of the medium, stats seem more viable when posted on the internet because they are posted in 'black and white' and are finite. Opinion, OTOH, is more fluid and not easily expressed in finite terms. We've seen things like, 'I like his range to his left but not his right' being disputed by someone quoteing a stat to back up his opposition to the statement. Frankly, the opinion may be more correct, or they may actually both be in agreement and simply expressing the same viewpoint in different manners but black and white numbers, in this medium, will always seem more creditable (even if they are not). Some people trust their observation and some people trust the numbers. Their opinions, based upon the tool(s) they use are not necessarilly different. However, because stats appear in a very finite, definitive form there is a bias by some and they tend to dismiss observation as not being valid. When somone says 'back it up with numbers' they haughtily dismiss someones observation as not being valid simply because they use a different tool to form an opinion.

Rem

Puffy
05-30-2006, 11:41 AM
I'd say that now, both of them are better at the quality of posts they have here now than I am.

Thats like saying Pam Anderson is a hotter girl after the breast implants. In other words, who isn't a better quality poster than you, Sava.

:evil: :evil: :evil:

MikeS21
05-30-2006, 11:41 AM
I apologize for the length of this post, but I’ve read through this entire thread, and like to weigh in with a few thoughts.

As one of the “old timers” around here, I remember what RedsZone used to be like and what it is now. In the beginning, RedsZone was like a neighborhood bar where “everybody knew your name.” Even during game threads, we’d follow the game, and because we didn’t want to switch to the non-baseball forum during the game, we’d catch up on family stuff and even toss in some current affairs/political stuff. There were just a few of us and game threads would only be 8-10 pages.

And if a Reds hitter struck out, we ragged on him simply because the pitcher made him look foolish. At least, if the hitter made contact, he didn’t look so incompetent. We didn’t know too much about OBP and OBS. We figured that since BA and RBI were good enough for the backs of the baseball cards we grew up with, then they were good enough for us, too. And WHIP was either something my dad did to me because I sassed him, or something you bought at your local ice cream stand. We were just Reds fans who got together and became friends because of our love for the Reds. We had folks who would be privy to “inside scoops” and we’d share Reds news and discuss Jim Bowden’s latest antics.

And, I might add, the team was worse then than now, but somehow we managed to express our “frustration” with the team, front office, etc. without ticking off everyone else in the forum. And if we disagreed, no one felt the need to “convince” everyone to our way of thinking. No one needed to feel like they needed to be an expert in the art of debate techniques, before they felt free to express their opinion. Most of us did not join RedsZone because we enjoyed debate. We just wanted someplace to hang out with friends who were Reds fans, and get away from strife and turmoil that most of us face everyday with our lives.

But RedsZone is no longer the quiet neighborhood bar. It has grown and nobody even cares about your name. It’s a shame, but some of those friends who used to frequent here are long gone. I don’t know if they are on other boards or have snuck back in under new screen names or what. And I must say that I have been tempted to follow them.

I don’t know that RedsZone can be “fixed” to every one’s satisfaction.

The reputation point system has really not solved anything. It was a good attempt by those in charge, but it is far too subjective to really do any good. I communicated with one poster a couple months after the rep system started. He told me that someone had given him five positive rep points for a comment he made, and someone else gave him five negative rep points for the same exact comment. Let’s face it, regardless of what the rules are for giving rep points, ultimately, if you agree with somebody, you’re going to give them positive rep points, and if you disagree, you’re going to give negative rep points.

We old-timers need to understand that it will never go back to the way it used to be. We can adapt and learn. I have found out what OBP and OBS means. And I discovered that WHIP doesn’t actually involve my dad’s belt. As long as the Batting Average fans can keep their BA without being criticized, and the OBP fans can keep their OBP without being criticized, RedsZone will remain the premier choice of Reds fans everywhere. :thumbup:

BRM
05-30-2006, 11:49 AM
I vote for Raisor's Thunderdome idea.

Puffy
05-30-2006, 12:04 PM
Only way I want to be involved with a mentor program is if the newbie has to come over and wash my car.

Sorry, I guess I'm extra snarky today. :devil:

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/916060/raisor.jpg

pedro
05-30-2006, 12:04 PM
I think we should just change the name of Redszone to MollycoddleZone and blow sunshine up each others backsides like we were Chip N' Dale. Then when anyone was a big meanie everyone could report your bad bad posts to the mods or better yet start another thread whining about it.

M2
05-30-2006, 12:04 PM
Many times things aren't proven wrong and the fight goes on. For example someone saying that Rich Aurilia is a better 1B than Hatteberg. Someone might feel very strong about Hatteberg, then a rebuttle is that Aurilia has more range. Hatte picks better though, Aurilia positions himself better....these types of things can't be proved. Even some stats that are used in hitting situations and stuff still create arguments.

If all opinions could be solved, they wouldnt be opinions, they would be facts, or wrong.

My take is that far more often it's someone using the word "opinion" as a shield against the facts that have been presented to them. Numerous times in the past week I've run into posters making claims that are simply contrary to some rather basic evidence and instead of using that evidence to alter their opinion they've griped that they should be allowed to have an opinion without having numbers thrown at them. Sorry, but (and this is a made-up example) if you want to claim the Reds are the best triples hitting team in history and there's a quick and easy numerical test that proves you wrong, then it's for you to recognize that they keep score in baseball and that your perception doesn't trump what's actually happened.

This gets back to some of the topics that might be fodder for "beaten to death" forum. For instance, we've been through an incredibly tedious discussion over the years about whether the Reds strike out too much to have a good offense. As it turned out, they were able to lead the league in scoring while also leading it in Ks (just like BRM). It also turned out the team had one of the more consistent offenses in baseball. Now that doesn't mean there aren't things the team could do in order to score more, but it does mean that as board we've seen these arguments tested and a definitive answer has been given -- as long as you get on base and hit for power, whiffing like crazy won't prevent you from scoring gobs of runs. We KNOW this. It's no longer needs to be a matter for opinion on this board and having to give equal weight and credit to the opinions of the folks who haven't learned it shatters the boundaries of common sense.

I mentioned this in another thread and I'll repeat it here. We've covered a lot of ground in six years. In general it shouldn't be the job of the board to repeat itself for newer posters, it should be the job of the newer posters to catch up to where the board has progressed to. There's almost an endless supply of topics out there and we don't need to keep running over the same ones or spinning our wheels because someone doesn't understand when they've formed a half-baked opinion.

Speaking of wheels:


Every time the older posters get fed up with the junk that's floating around and start getting vocal about it, the newer posters start making a push to enact change even though they've essentially just joined the board.

Amen.

Falls City Beer
05-30-2006, 12:04 PM
I don’t know that RedsZone can be “fixed” to every one’s satisfaction.



Truer words were never written on this board.

My recommendation: folks need to get thicker skin. And use the ignore feature.

dabvu2498
05-30-2006, 12:08 PM
A "newbie" gives his 2 cents:

As a "newbie," I felt obligated to read and respond to this topic. Especially since I'm probobly one of the newbies some of the vets are complaining about. I apologize for any newbie mistakes I may have made or will make, but I do want to sound off from my perspective on a few of the issues raised in this topic.

The Reds Live portion of this site is an open forum. You get what you get. Some good, some not so good. If you don't want to read or respond to any of it, don't. Fairly simple I think.

I've enjoyed all of the discussions that I have had with "veteran" members of this board, even ones where my opinion has been discounted. I expected that. It happens everywhere, not just the world of the internet. People disagree. No harm, no foul.

Repeated topics are also inevitable. For example: until Adam Dunn hits .600 (.999 with RISP) with no strikeouts, people are going to complain. I realize it causes excess "noise," but as I stated before, you can choose what you read and respond to.

No forum of this nature will be perfect. I think this one is pretty darn good and I'm glad I found it.

M2
05-30-2006, 12:16 PM
I think this one is pretty darn good and I'm glad I found it.

And that's an excellent point. We've got a big baby here and only a little dirty bathwater.

rdiersin
05-30-2006, 12:29 PM
The Reds Live portion of this site is an open forum. You get what you get. Some good, some not so good. If you don't want to read or respond to any of it, don't. Fairly simple I think.

I've enjoyed all of the discussions that I have had with "veteran" members of this board, even ones where my opinion has been discounted. I expected that. It happens everywhere, not just the world of the internet. People disagree. No harm, no foul.

Repeated topics are also inevitable. For example: until Adam Dunn hits .600 (.999 with RISP) with no strikeouts, people are going to complain. I realize it causes excess "noise," but as I stated before, you can choose what you read and respond to.

No forum of this nature will be perfect. I think this one is pretty darn good and I'm glad I found it.

I think this is a pretty good post. Didn't this same sort of situation happen last year, and IIRC people then said that it happened the year before etc. Last year there was the split of the two forums, and IIRC the discussion at the Reds Live forum was still somewhat the same with some "this player sucks" threads and the ORG got a lot of attention. Over the past year it seemed that the Reds Live board got better and the ORG received less and less attention. So now we are back a little bit like last year, even though I don't think it is that bad, personally. Before making any changes shouldn't we see if the discussion in ORG picks up and then see if there is any corresponding change in RL?

redsfan30
05-30-2006, 12:43 PM
Well, I've finally made my way through this thread and I think I've got some thoughts organized, so here goes.

1) This is the most important aspect of all of what I'm about to say. *We're all Reds fans!* We all have different ways of going about things, but in the end we are all rooting for the same thing. Whether you're a stat guy, a naked eye viewer, casual fan or anything else, we are all rooting for the game thing, and that's for the Reds to win that night's game.

Black or white, we're all Americans. Stathead or visual observer, high post count or low post count, we're all Reds fans.

2) My main question (rather than observation) in this whole thing is who determines what is "beaten to death" and what isn't? Thread after tire-less thread has been closed on Adam Dunn because it is a subject that has been "beaten to death." Yet thread after thread bashing on Marty Brenneman or George Grande...they're allowed to stay open more often than not. You don't have to have been a resident of this place for very long to understand that Adam Dunn is the Redszone Goldenchild. Whenever a thread is started about some of his weakness', the same group of posters come out of the woodwork to shut the thread down because it's already been ran into the ground, yet many of these same posters are the ones keeping Marty and/or George threads going.

We're not allowed to harp on the goldenboy, but we can bury Marty and/or George into the ground because it's the fashionable thing to do? I'm not saying we should keep the Dunn threads open because many of them are beyond rediculous. I just think some consistancy needs to be shown in regards to what's "beaten to death" and what's not.

3) I proposed this a month or so back, and it wasn't taken to too well, and that's fine, but I'll throw it out there once more. I think gamethreads on both boards is a mistake...a big one. Not allowing a person to participate in a game thread because his rep isn't high enough is not right.

I think two seperate game threads are needed, but along a different route. I think a "play by play" only thread and a "color comentary" thread should be instituted. Many people have stated that it's hard to go through the game thread if you're using that for updates and surf through all the filler. I think a thread with a designated play by play guy and another thread where you can shoot the breeze with everyone else would be a good thing. It'd be your call completely as to which thread you join. If you're at work and just want updates, you'd go to the play by play and if you're home watching the game and just want to interact with others during the game, you go into the comentary thread.

4) For the new members issue, when they register and have to say that they read the rules, what's keeping them from just checking that they read the rules and going on? It's like when you add new software to your computer and the licensing agreement comes up. There is a box to check to you agree or not. Who in their right mind actually sits there and reads through that? Nobody. They just check the box saying that they agree and go right on.

I'm willing to bet the same thing happens with the rules when the new members register. To prevent this from happening, maybe force them to take a rules quiz after they've read through. If they pass, they can come on in, if they fail, they're gone.

I don't know if that could work or not, just throwing something out there.

Again folks, we need to stop categorizing people. Most of the fights on this board are "stats vs. non stats" based. If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer, and the non stat guys would step back and realize that stats do play an important part of the game this place would be alot better off.

Whether the people that do it like to admit they do it or not, there is a definete tone that if you don't have stats to back up what you're saying, whatever it is you're saying is not valid. That has to stop.

In closing, just respect people. We're all (for the most part) grown men and women and lately we've all been behaving like small children. We're all Reds fans, and we are all rooting for the same cause.

pedro
05-30-2006, 12:50 PM
We're not allowed to harp on the goldenboy, but we can bury Marty and/or George into the ground because it's the fashionable thing to do? I'm not saying we should keep the Dunn threads open because many of them are beyond rediculous. I just think some consistancy needs to be shown in regards to what's "beaten to death" and what's not.


In the last three months there have been 8 threads with "Marty" in the title, 8 threads with the "George" in the title, and 45 with "Dunn" in the title. I hardly think it's equal.

redsfan30
05-30-2006, 12:54 PM
In the last three months there have been 8 threads with "Marty" in the title, 8 threads with the "George" in the title, and 45 with "Dunn" in the title. I hardly think it's equal.
But I can't even begin to recall how many gamethreads have been hi-jacked with "Marty sucks" or "George Sucks."

It's like many threads that start on something but turn into "Dunn sucks."

It just seems to me that the Dunn threads get closed alot more often than the announcer threads.

pedro
05-30-2006, 01:00 PM
But I can't even begin to recall how many gamethreads have been hi-jacked with "Marty sucks" or "George Sucks."

It's like many threads that start on something but turn into "Dunn sucks."

It just seems to me that the Dunn threads get closed alot more often than the announcer threads.

But just look at the sheer number of threads started about Dunn. The volume of Dunn bashing on this board greatly outweighs the bashing of anything else, except of course the bashing of people who actually want to do a little research before they state their opinions as fact.

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 01:08 PM
But just look at the sheer number of threads started about Dunn. The volume of Dunn bashing on this board greatly outweighs the bashing of anything else, except of course the bashing of people who actually want to do a little research before they state their opinions as fact.I think the question is not the quantity but how far the bashing goes (and who's doing it).

M2
05-30-2006, 01:12 PM
If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer ...

There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

TOBTTReds
05-30-2006, 01:14 PM
My take is that far more often it's someone using the word "opinion" as a shield against the facts that have been presented to them. Numerous times in the past week I've run into posters making claims that are simply contrary to some rather basic evidence and instead of using that evidence to alter their opinion they've griped that they should be allowed to have an opinion without having numbers thrown at them. Sorry, but (and this is a made-up example) if you want to claim the Reds are the best triples hitting team in history and there's a quick and easy numerical test that proves you wrong, then it's for you to recognize that they keep score in baseball and that your perception doesn't trump what's actually happened.


M2, there is no doubt that is the case. If someone would start to refuse stuff like that, then do whatever. But obviously there are many arguments that don't get solved (which catcher should go?....). People get brutal on threads like that is what I was getting at.

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 01:16 PM
There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.:laugh: I knew when I read rf30 post that someone would jump at that part of the sentence. That's the problem we're addressing...

pedro
05-30-2006, 01:18 PM
There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

Now don't go over board with that hateful language and suggest (oh my!) that someone might not have "good sense" because then someone will complain to a mod about you.

Honestly, the narrow breadth of "acceptable" language on RZ makes it impossible to even have a discussion anymore.

"when you say bad things about Adam Dunn it makes me feel like you might not like him" is about all you can apparently say in retort to all this BS these days.

Puffy
05-30-2006, 01:20 PM
There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

Yup - and my other favorite is "if you stepped away from the computer and actually watched the game...."

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 01:24 PM
Yup - and my other favorite is "if you stepped away from the computer and actually watched the game...."Hey guys, can we get back to the topic at hand and try to find some solutions and not add to the problem? :angry:

RANDY IN INDY
05-30-2006, 01:24 PM
:laugh: I knew when I read rf30 post that someone would jump at that part of the sentence. That's the problem we're addressing...

:laugh: Agree! It is exactly the problem. The newbies come and go, and if they get out of hand, they are easy enough to get rid of.:laugh:

M2
05-30-2006, 01:26 PM
M2, there is no doubt that is the case. If someone would start to refuse stuff like that, then do whatever. But obviously there are many arguments that don't get solved (which catcher should go?....). People get brutal on threads like that is what I was getting at.

I'm from the East Coast. Far as I'm concerned this board has never seen brutal. BTW, I do think cultural norms (regional, generational, class) play a role in this.

My experience on the board has been that larger matters of opinion get treated mostly with respect. Guacarock broached the "which catcher should go?" the other day and there was plenty of civil disagreement. It's over matter like a patently false statement about one of the catchers (and maybe he should go, but don't invent fictional reasons why) where you'll see an eruption occur.

Cyclone792
05-30-2006, 01:32 PM
Before making any changes shouldn't we see if the discussion in ORG picks up and then see if there is any corresponding change in RL?

IIRC, the ORG has picked up quite a bit since the thread discussing the game threads, and the most recent blow up that occurred on Sunday was a reaction to game threads being allowed in the ORG. It seems that some posters got offended when ORG posters made suggestions last week (or whenever it was) to re-open game threads in the ORG and post more in the ORG. Then again, that's just my interpretation of what happened, and I wasn't even on the board when it all happened so I may be mistaken.

Anyhow, (and the rest of this is stated in general to everyone, not rdiersin), when people get upset usually the first complaint to surface is about reputation points, which frankly boggles my mind why people are so infatuated and frustrated with rep points.

I see rep points much like Steel sees them: an appreciation for insight, research, analysis, evidence, etc. There is no favortism involved, at least not from me and not that I've seen.

If you want rep points, the formula is pretty simple for posters to do at least one of the following: Give the board excellent insight on a topic and include some evidence to back it up, make the readers think on a topic, approach each topic with an open mind, provide the board with a great/humorous story, post your opinions in an articulate manner with a logical thinking process, and by golly just aim to provide a positive and worthwhile contribution to the board.

The new posters who exemplify those excellent traits will reach 200 points and beyond very quickly. And if any of those traits are difficult for a poster to provide on the board, well then they're going to have a difficult time accumulating rep points.

All that said, I do think it would be a major benefit if the board aimed to provide examples of some high quality threads and posts to be more readily available to read since I don't think The Archives does an adequate job at all with that. For one, that forum section is buried in the bottom, and secondly, half the threads in there seem to deal with policy changes or contain threads where there was some snippy fighting. IMO, if you asked the board to come up with a small contingent of threads and posts that shined through on what RedsZone stands for in a quality measure, you'll find many threads that are not listed in The Archives. Make those threads easily accessible for everyone to read and be reminded of the quality RedsZone aims to provide, and it would benefit the board, IMO.

Puffy
05-30-2006, 01:35 PM
Hey guys, can we get back to the topic at hand and try to find some solutions and not add to the problem? :angry:

So now I'm adding to the problem?

Well then, OK, I won't say another word. Sorry.

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 01:46 PM
If you want rep points, the formula is pretty simple for posters to do at least one of the following: Give the board excellent insight on a topic and include some evidence to back it up, make the readers think on a topic, approach each topic with an open mind, provide the board with a great/humorous story, post your opinions in an articulate manner with a logical thinking process, and by golly just aim to provide a positive and worthwhile contribution to the board.Luckily I was "grandfathered" in to the ORG - otherwise I'd never would have made it. :(

macro
05-30-2006, 01:50 PM
Thread after tire-less thread has been closed on Adam Dunn because it is a subject that has been "beaten to death." Yet thread after thread bashing on Marty Brenneman or George Grande...they're allowed to stay open more often than not. You don't have to have been a resident of this place for very long to understand that Adam Dunn is the Redszone Goldenchild. Whenever a thread is started about some of his weakness', the same group of posters come out of the woodwork to shut the thread down because it's already been ran into the ground, yet many of these same posters are the ones keeping Marty and/or George threads going.

We're not allowed to harp on the goldenboy, but we can bury Marty and/or George into the ground because it's the fashionable thing to do? I'm not saying we should keep the Dunn threads open because many of them are beyond rediculous. I just think some consistancy needs to be shown in regards to what's "beaten to death" and what's not.

For what it's worth, all three Grande-bashing threads that hit this forum in the month of April were closed pretty quickly.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/search.php?searchid=113031

I'll give you that one was started and allowed to run its short course this month, and several on this topic were on the board last summer, however. While it would do no good to go back and close threads that have now gathered dust on the shelf, we have at least addressed the issue recently, the latest thread notwithstanding.

As for Marty-bashing threads, this search...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/search.php?searchid=113033

...turns up plenty of threads with "marty" in the title, but I honestly don't see any (based on thread titles and my recollections of what those threads were about) that were bashing him and that were allowed to stay open. There may be cases where he comes up in threads where his name isn't in the title, I don't know.


I now would like say that I think this board is over moderated...Is talking about the Dixie Chicks not wanting certian people to buy their cd political?

I really enjoy coming here and reading the posts but am dissappointed that the non-baseball board has become reduced to whats for dinner and who is you favorite band threads. When any good discussion starts the mods come in a close it, its just over done.

Talking about the Dixie Chicks not wanting certain people to buy their CD is not political, per se, but when the thread evolves into one that is political, it will be closed. This decision was made, after much discussion and deliberation, some time ago. It's not over-moderating. It's simply enforcing a policy that has been put in place.


My problem is certain topics that are deemed "beating the horse to death" are still topics of interest. Some issues will not go away. People complain about the same things everyday: taxes, traffic, Iraq, their job, etc. But nonetheless, they always have an audience because those are common issues that are important to a lot of people. Same with Dunn's Ks, George Grande, Dan O'Brien et al. Logically, people should have an outlet for these topics, even if they are redundant. If you want to have a separate forum or whatever, that's your call, but it shouldn't be outlawed or looked down upon. As mentioned, some new posters like to discuss these issues for the first time and other experienced posters like to rehash the same issues because they are important.

People do have an outlet for these topics. They can do a search of existing threads and add their unique contributions to the threads already in existence. Why the need to start a new thread? If someone else has already said it in recent weeks or months, why is anyone owed the privilege of saying basically the same thing again? Yes, this board serves an individual need (for those doing the speaking) to have one's voice be heard on topics. But it also serves a greater and broader purpose for those doing the listening (or reading, in this case). A person's privilege to say something does not supercede the greater community's privilege to not have to read the same things over and over.


Lastly, sometimes I like to vent. I'm not a great writer and don't usually put things very eloquently. As you can tell, I sometimes ramble. However, I don't understand why people can't have a place to vent when frustrated about things associated with the Reds. It makes me feel better to vent with others who feel the same way. Is it possible to have a rant forum or special section where people can just say "Larue sucks" or " George Grande loves Edmonds" without having to go into a big, long explanation?

That is not what this site was set up for. Not at all.

Falls City Beer
05-30-2006, 01:51 PM
Hey guys, can we get back to the topic at hand and try to find some solutions and not add to the problem? :angry:

While I agree that it's best that sniping and ganging up should stop, it's the passive aggressive assaults like "step away from the computer" couched in conciliatory language that tick people off. It's unfair, dishonest, and does the very thing that the author purports to be contemning.

And it's the very thing Boss asked everyone NOT to say at the very outset of this thread.

westofyou
05-30-2006, 01:54 PM
While I agree that it's best that sniping and ganging up should stop, it's the passive aggressive assaults like "step away from the computer" couched in conciliatory language that tick people off. It's unfair, dishonest, and does the very thing that the author purports to be contemning.

And it's the very thing Boss asked everyone NOT to say at the very outset of this thread.
Yep.. and it even comes from someone who isn't new to RZ.

Just plain sad.

Of course after I wrote the above this shows up

Warn: (20%)

So much for stressing an opinion that might be your own.

RedsBaron
05-30-2006, 01:55 PM
I actually not too upset about anything here right now. What's wrong with me?:confused:

Sham
05-30-2006, 01:58 PM
I used to post here as 1990worldchamps, and when the board went to the rep system I saw the problems with it and decided that I would read but not post anymore. My concern was that some people would neg rep other people who they did not agree with and this would cause obvious problems.

Well, I soon found out that I had to register to view the site, so I chose the name Sham and never intended to post. I have posted from time to time, and I can see where new posters are coming from. I had the gall to suggest that Adam Dunn was a good athlete and should work on his defense, and was blasted (and neg repped) by a few veterans as a know nothing newcomer. Other newcomers were piling on to suck up to the veterans, comparing me to some "badfundamentals" guy.

Since then I really don't post very much. This board used to be great, but IMO took on a new personality when the rep system was instituted.

Just one man's opinion, take it for what it's worth.

edabbs44
05-30-2006, 01:59 PM
How about forcing everyone who signs up to read the RedsZone ground rules and attest to following those rules? Then there can be a 3 strikes and some sort of penalty policy. Whether it be losing rep points, suspension, banished to the Reds Live game thread forever, etc.

I truly think that there are many people here (myself included) who don't know all the rules and that just sign up and start posting. It might be a way to get people off on the right foot.

edabbs44
05-30-2006, 02:00 PM
I actually not too upset about anything here right now. What's wrong with me?:confused:
That could be a whole other thread. :)

TStuck
05-30-2006, 02:00 PM
First of all, I agree mostly with the "just chill out" crowd. This is a message board after all, and I think most of these "problems" could be solved if people just didn't get their panties in such a bunch over such silly things.

But if we were to make a hard-fast rule, here would be mine:

Eliminate "Reds Live" altogether. I think having the two separate forums has created a sort of cast system that naturally brings division. It also brings confusion-- sometimes I'm not sure where to post my thoughts.

To me, Redszone is Redszone. There should be ONE community. Of course, you could still keep the non-baseball forum, etc... but there should be one "big board."

I believe you will continue to see petty arguments and board degeneration as long as there are two main boards-- especially seeing one board is considered a "call up" from the other.

Perhpas we could install a "time" rule upon registering at the site? Maybe a newbie would have to wait a certain number of days or weeks before they could post-- even after signing up. That way, they could still follow the board, see how things work, and post once they've become a little more acclimated?

Amen and Hallelujah!! I agree totally Ed. As long as 1 board is viewed as a "step up" from the other, there will be those who strive only to be promoted (and do whatever it takes to get there) and there will be those who neg to maintain a closed society. To expand on a concept presented - possibly limit the number of posts a new poster is allowed per day or week (for some designated period). This might help promote a bit more thought before willy-nilly posting of meaningless drivel or pointless comments (basicly "talking" to hear oneself talk). I have always subscribed to the notion that unless I have something to say which I feel actually contributes something new or fresh to a thread, I am content to sit on the sidelines and observe.

RedsBaron
05-30-2006, 02:18 PM
That could be a whole other thread. :)
Good point!:laugh:

redsfan30
05-30-2006, 02:24 PM
Well, since I'm being taken to task over something I said...I'd just like to point out the second part of that statement that nobody seems to think was important.


Again folks, we need to stop categorizing people. Most of the fights on this board are "stats vs. non stats" based. If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer, and the non stat guys would step back and realize that stats do play an important part of the game this place would be alot better off.

I did not single one group out so please don't treat me like I did.

MikeS21
05-30-2006, 02:34 PM
My take is that far more often it's someone using the word "opinion" as a shield against the facts that have been presented to them. Numerous times in the past week I've run into posters making claims that are simply contrary to some rather basic evidence and instead of using that evidence to alter their opinion they've griped that they should be allowed to have an opinion without having numbers thrown at them. Sorry, but (and this is a made-up example) if you want to claim the Reds are the best triples hitting team in history and there's a quick and easy numerical test that proves you wrong, then it's for you to recognize that they keep score in baseball and that your perception doesn't trump what's actually happened.

If only it were that cut and dry. What one person may view as straight fact, another person sees the same "fact" as open to other interpretations.

It's not enough to simply spout off a stat like, "Albert Puljos leads the majors in HR's." True, that's a cold hard fact that no one can dispute. But my impulse is to put the stat into context. "Who has he hit all those HR's off of?" If (hypothetical) Puljos has hit fifteen of his 20+ homers off guys like Eric Milton and Brandon Claussen - the gopherball kings, then his status as the HR leader - despite what the stats say - is not as cut and dry as we would like to believe.

Would Albert Puljos be the great young hitter everyone hails him as, if he didn't get to face horrible Reds pitching 20 games every season over the last three or four seasons? How much has poor Cincinnati pitching helped inflate Puljos's stats over the last three years? What about all the time that good inter-division pitchers like Woods, Prior, and Oswalt have spent on the DL, and Puljos didn't have to face them? And how about the fact that Puljos gets to pad his stats every season for six games against the KC Royals? How has that affected his stats? Suddenly, all his impressive stats aren't so impressive. I'm not trying to dis Albert Puljos, but this is why I say that stats have to be taken in context.

Let me illustrate it this way: To use the tired old Adam Dunn striking out debate, (hypthetical) if Adam Dunn strikes out five times while facing Pedro Martinez, I'm not going to sweat it too much. Martinez strikes out a lot of guys out - not just Adam Dunn. So if Pedro rings Dunn up, so what? But if Dunn whiffs five time against a below average pitchers like Brian Moelher or Dave Williams, who have one of the lowest K/9 rates in the majors, and probably couldn't K their own mother, then I think it is not unreasonable for someone to at least question Adam Dunn and his strikeouts. Statistically, there is no difference in five strikeouts against Martinez and five strikeouts against Moehler. But based on Moehler's ERA and WHIP statistics, there are lots of hitters who are not striking out when they face Brian Moehler. I believe it's fair to ask why Dunn is not among them (hypothetically).

I'm not trying to start the Adam Dunn debate over again. But I am trying to point out that not everyone agrees on how to interpret all these stats.

jimbo
05-30-2006, 02:47 PM
In fact, many of the original and longtime posters around here came from cincinnati.com.

That board was a mess and they eventually killed it. I haven't been there since they brought it back but if I were to guess, it's more of the same.

You guessed right. I just came from there a few weeks ago. It has basically turned into one big Griffey-Dunn-Narron bash board and if you don't go along with that ideaology, you are called an "idiot" on a daily basis. It was actually a good board during the offseason, but once the season started and the trolls came out of the woodwork, it went down the crapper real quick.

I don't think I've been here long enough to comment too much on the topic at hand, but I have read through all of it and have found it very informative. All I will comment on is that I always try to remind myself that you should treat others, on a forum such as this, as you would like to be treated. Attacking or attempting to refute an opinion is one thing, attacking the person is another and something we should all avoid, no matter how much the opinion is wrong in your eyes or has been torn down by facts. It is better to skip it altogether rather than making condescending remarks towards a poster.

I will say though that this site is 100 times better than where I came from and I'm glad I've found it.

SteelSD
05-30-2006, 02:53 PM
Again folks, we need to stop categorizing people.

You were doing well there. Categorizing people is bad because it creates unnecessary division.


Most of the fights on this board are "stats vs. non stats" based. If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer, and the non stat guys would step back and realize that stats do play an important part of the game this place would be alot better off.

Whether the people that do it like to admit they do it or not, there is a definete tone that if you don't have stats to back up what you're saying, whatever it is you're saying is not valid. That has to stop.

And there ya' just categorized people; creating an unnecessary (and quite harmful) division. So as not to be misunderstood, let me break it down for everyone...

I have the right to have an opinion. However, because I also understand that I have no right to an unopposed opinion, I use every last bit of information I can get my hands on before forming said opinion. The quality and volume of that supporting data determines the quality of the opinion. That's crucial because the closer an opinion is to fact, the less likely it will be that the opinion will be opposed and the more likely it is that said opinion will be accurate.

What does that paragraph have to do with stats? Nothing, because it's a truism that transcends baseball conversation.

Now go back to that paragraph and erase all but the first sentence. Then imagine an environment where that sole sentence takes precedence over all else. Well, it's not all that tough to imagine it. Just go to mlb.com and follow the links to the Reds message board over there.

Every single time that simply having an opinion is more important to some folks than having an informed opinion, we see one of these threads. And every time we see one of these threads people make the mistake of thinking that it's a rep point problem or a board division problem or a privilege problem or a "stats vs. non-stats" issue. All red herrings.

Plainly stated, it's an issue of some folks who don't want to bring their "A" game to an "A" game community and/or who have no interest in developing an "A" game once here. When told that more is expected via logical debate, they grump about it because they seem to feel that simply having an opinion is good enough regardless of whether or not that opinion makes any sort of rational sense. We've even seen examples of some folks who want to use the word "opinion" as an insulatory shield against opposition. And we've seen that very recently. Funny, because I've always thought that just having an opinion doesn't protect me from being 100% completely wrong.

Luckily many figure out in short order that the expectation is different because this is not your garden variety internet message board. Those who don't figure it out end up behaving in such a way that action is mandated. So another one of these threads pops up. Boss is a pretty diplomatic guy but I'd wager he's getting pretty sick of having to post the same topic about every six months.

Excepting personal attacks, if someone doesn't like the "tone" of the board there's a simple solution. Adjust or leave. If a poster doesn't like having an opinion challenged then that poster has every right to go elsewhere for their baseball conversation. No one is being held here against their will. Everyone has access to the rules. Everyone is held to the same standard. And no one is immune to having their position challenged. If someone is afraid of posting an opinion for fear of being opposed, then PM a veteran poster before typing word one into the very fashionable post window and they will help.

I don't say any of that to demean anyone or to tell anyone to go away. I say it because it's true. If I don't like it here, I can go away. If I don't want to go away, then I have some responsibility to myself and to the board to figure out what I need to be doing in order to stay. No reason to sugarcoat any of that because it's not just the way Redszone works- it's how life works.

If folks want to stay, then contribute. If they're unhappy that their contribution appears to be unappreciated, then I might suggest that the contribution is unworthy of appreciation. Sorry, but that's another truth. Posters who type sound, expressive, educated, informative posts get rep points faster than others. Way it goes. No reason to tell anyone any different. If someone wants rep points all they need to do is type something profound, eminently enjoyable, or consistently entirely accurate. If someone wants appreciation, then they need to type something that's actually appreciable. Seems simple enough.

There's no slight intended if posters are't getting rep points. There's no conspiracy to keep posters out of the ORG board. There's no "Redszone 10" gladhanding or high fiving for the "beatdown" (a silly concept) of a poster who types an invalid opinion and then ends up sinking with it when he/she could be swimming.

In fact, there's nothing wrong with this board that can't be fixed by thinking a bit before clicking on the "Submit Reply" button. Yet we've got a multiple-page thread talking about all the issues that aren't when all that needs to be done is type good posts that say smart things.

NastyBoy
05-30-2006, 02:59 PM
Here are my suggestions for improving the forum.

1. Eliminate reps points. Make ORG posting by invitation only.
2. Eliminate game threads. The whole concept of a game thread and a forum are opposed. A game thread is a stream of thought event. A forum post is a well thought out response to a topic. To hold both to the same standards is ridiculous. Create a live game chat and let the comments and emotion of the moment flow.
3. Set up a new forum called "the Crapper" or "the Toilet" or "the Dump" or "the Abyss". Here you can have all the Dunn HOF vs. Dunn SUX and Marty HOF vs. Marty SUX banter, RRS vs. RC, ROY vs. CYA, RISP vs. RSVP... etc. you want. And make it a free for all... anything goes.

4. Ban use of term "Newbie" n00b when refering to any poster. Term is often used as a form of insult. 30 years of being a Reds fan does not make one a "Newbie".

Raisor
05-30-2006, 03:03 PM
There's no "Redszone 10" gladhanding or high fiving for the "beatdown" (a silly concept) of a poster who types an invalid opinion and then ends up sinking with it when he/she could be swimming.




First rule of the RZ10: Don't talk about the RZ10!!

:devil:

Steel gets post of the year for the rest of that stuff though.

I'm still giving him another neg, because he's smarter then me.

SteelSD
05-30-2006, 03:06 PM
I'm still giving him another neg, because he's smarter then me.

Maybe, but you're still the purtiest.

savafan
05-30-2006, 03:06 PM
4. Ban use of term "Newbie" n00b when refering to any poster. Term is often used as a form of insult. 30 years of being a Reds fan does not make one a "Newbie".

I agree. I don't like the term "newbie". Calling new posters "new posters" is one thing, but "newbie" seems to have a negative connotation.

BRM
05-30-2006, 03:07 PM
I'm still giving him another neg, because he's smarter then me.

I'd become a hated man if I starting negging everyone smarter than me on this board. That's all I'd end up doing is passing out neg rep. :)

Raisor
05-30-2006, 03:08 PM
Maybe, but you're still the purtiest.


Son, you ain't lying.

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 03:38 PM
Maybe, but you're still the purtiest.
He's also got more minions then you

registerthis
05-30-2006, 03:53 PM
He's also got more minions then you

That may be, but I lead the board in Attendant Imps.

RBA
05-30-2006, 03:53 PM
Again, I call for Moderator rotation. Replace 2 every 2 months. I think there are some great posters here who can step up to the plate and do the job. Nothing against the current moderators, and after a year of rotations, they should be able to become a moderator again.

guttle11
05-30-2006, 04:02 PM
My only question about the moderators is this: What are the qualifications for being a mod? Do Boss and GIK just pick people whom they like/respect, or do Redszone members make suggestions?

Overall I think the mods, Boss, and GIK do a great job here.

remdog
05-30-2006, 04:07 PM
Again, I call for Moderator rotation. Replace 2 every 2 months. I think there are some great posters here who can step up to the plate and do the job. Nothing against the current moderators, and after a year of rotations, they should be able to become a moderator again.

I agree completely.

Rem

M2
05-30-2006, 04:08 PM
4. Ban use of term "Newbie" n00b when refering to any poster. Term is often used as a form of insult. 30 years of being a Reds fan does not make one a "Newbie".

If you're new to a place, then you're a newbie. We don't work on some sort of Redsfan seniority system here. Every year we get an influx of newbies who turn out to be great additions to the board. We even have a board awards thread at the end of the year where Best New Poster is one of the categries.

There's only two ways around being a newbie: Don't show up in the first place or hang around long enough to establish yourself.

In the meantime, I've noticed more than a few people who've joined in the past three months (read: newbies) who seem to think this board should conform to them and not vice versa. I could be wrong, but I'm reasonably sure that's not going to happen.

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 04:11 PM
My only worry about rotating mods is that you'll end up with posters confused by what is allowed and not allowed due to new mods having a different take on the rules, also I see personal grudges getting brought into it if you have a lot of people being mods

Just a thought.

M2
05-30-2006, 04:14 PM
My only worry about rotating mods is that you'll end up with posters confused by what is allowed and not allowed due to new mods having a different take on the rules, also I see personal grudges getting brought into it if you have a lot of people being mods

Just a thought.

I don't like the rotating mod idea either. We've got good mods. It adds stability. I look at them like Supreme Court justices, they serve until they want to retire and only then do you replace them.

Plus, why fix something that ain't broken?

Raisor
05-30-2006, 04:21 PM
I don't like the rotating mod idea either. We've got good mods. It adds stability. I look at them like Supreme Court justices, they serve until they want to retire and only then do you replace them.

Plus, why fix something that ain't broken?


Plus, I'd have to keep buying off new people, and I don't have that kind of money.

M2
05-30-2006, 04:34 PM
If only it were that cut and dry. What one person may view as straight fact, another person sees the same "fact" as open to other interpretations.

Mike, I don't really think there is a problem with people discussing deeper issues like the ones you mentioned. If anything this board welcomes that as much as any place on the Internet.

Where people tend to hit loggerheads is when a poster says X, gets shown evidence that X simply isn't true and then gets in a snit about it. Intelligent other interpretations of the evidence pretty much always get consideration around here. Finding a different logical home for that evidence also rarely turns into much of a conflagration on this board.

Yet sometimes you've just got an empty premise and those may be opinions, but they certainly aren't valid opinions.

One of the things I've come to respect about you over the years is your willingness to think about the things you think. You always make a strong case for your opinions and you don't change them lightly, but you also don't hold onto to them blindly. And, to a degree, a lot of what I'm seeing from the "I've got an opinion" argument is really a case for "Hey, I don't really want to have to think about this stuff."

Well, it's Redszone and, as you know, that's never going to fly very far

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 04:39 PM
Again, I call for Moderator rotation. Replace 2 every 2 months. I think there are some great posters here who can step up to the plate and do the job. Nothing against the current moderators, and after a year of rotations, they should be able to become a moderator again.Sorry, but it's a thankless job - you couldn't pay me enough to take it on... :p:

jredmo2
05-30-2006, 04:48 PM
I'm sure a ten game Reds win streak would help smooth things over.

redsfan30
05-30-2006, 04:59 PM
I'm sure a ten game Reds win streak would help smooth things over.
Best post of this whole thread!

:beerme:

remdog
05-30-2006, 05:01 PM
Yep.. and it even comes from someone who isn't new to RZ.

Just plain sad.

Of course after I wrote the above this shows up

Warn: (20%)

So much for stressing an opinion that might be your own.

To the Mods:

If you really want to air this problem out and you really want people's opinions then this thread has to be a rep-free, warning-free zone. Let people make their feelings known without fear of reprisal. Otherwise you're just giving lip-service to the problem.

Rem

Cyclone792
05-30-2006, 05:03 PM
Steel and M2 - and they have a knack for accomplishing this - pretty much nailed it all as far as I'm concerned.

The one slight addition I might toss in would be to create a setting for newly registered users to get a taste for what the community is like before they post. Included in that may be the idea of a waiting period for new users to post after registering, say a month or so, just like CE and others have suggested. Also, urging new posters to browse through the posts of all the veteran posters, just like Steel suggested, isn't a bad idea for that.

I would also advocate creating a community mission statement visible to all and maybe setting up an updated FAQ that's impossible to miss (I never notice the FAQ button near the User CP button, but maybe I'm just not attentive enough). Similarly, bring the Archives forum up to the top of the main page, and make a concerted effort to make sure the posts and threads that show perfect examples of what RedsZone should be about are plainly visible in the Archives.

remdog
05-30-2006, 05:04 PM
My only worry about rotating mods is that you'll end up with posters confused by what is allowed and not allowed due to new mods having a different take on the rules, also I see personal grudges getting brought into it if you have a lot of people being mods

You already have that.

Rem

redsfanmia
05-30-2006, 05:04 PM
To the Mods:

If you really want to air this problem out and you really want people's opinions then this thread has to be a rep-free, warning-free zone. Let people make their feelings known without fear of reprisal. Otherwise you're just giving lip-service to the problem.

Rem

Right on, just another example of the over moderation of this board.

remdog
05-30-2006, 05:06 PM
Plus, why fix something that ain't broken?Because it is broken. The very existence of this thread is proof of that.

Rem

kbrake
05-30-2006, 05:22 PM
This pretty much has everything to do with Adam Dunn. New posters, myself included when I first got here, seem to almost always think Adam Dunn is overrated. After being here awhile and getting shown through different numbers I learned his value. Now I think the problem is that most of the people who have been here are just getting sick of going through the same arguements every season. When I first got here in Jan. 05' people were extremely nice as they explained things to me and I have really, I think expanded my baseball knowledge. At the same time though I was nice in return and I think alot of the new people now are taking things way to personally and when they come back with a cheap shot or snide remark all hell breaks loose.

I dont know maybe the best thing to to do would be to create a page that is read before someone signs up explaining tired issues. Explaining why Adam Dunn is not as bad as Marty Brennamen would like us all to believe. Or why GABP is not a hitters park, but actually does play neutral. I'm sure there are more, but thats what I think the problem is. The veterans of this board are just fed up with having to defend the exact same subject every single year.

gonelong
05-30-2006, 05:33 PM
My suggestions:

1) Do not allow new registers to post for 30 days. - You have to learn a bit about the board before you are allowed to post - or create a "new poster" forum for them to wade into. Most people that want to talk baseball will weather the period just fine. Those that just want to cause trouble will have to wait for 30 days and then get banned shortly thereafter.

2) State the meaning of the rep, how you would like it used, etc. If a posters mentions rep in any way shape or form, for any reason, throw them under the bus - 1 week suspension. I don't care about your rep point total in the least. I don't care if you got nipped for 5 points or received 15 for a great post. I don't care if you have 5 or 5000 pts. The total doesn't really tell the story IMO, a rate would be better. (See #7)

3) IMO, Old Red Guard should be the safehouse. If you are a long time member in good standing (reputation) then you should be admited. When Live gets unruly, retire to ORG for a few weeks and let Live burn to ground. Once the fires out, rebuild it. There is your incentive for gaining reputation, and making it meaningful.

4) This board didn't build itself. The reputation system gives us a fundamental way to police the board ourselves. IMO its great that the people with higher rep have more power, both positively and negatively. IMO, its not used nearly enough on the negative side. We are failing ourselves and have only ourselves to blame. If you are complaining about the board and are not giving out negative rep to posters, then you are a LARGE part of the problem.

5) RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion Expect people to discuss what you say, not take it for gospel.

6) If I had to run/moderate this site I'd have closed it down a long time ago. What a hassle for what should be such an enjoyable pursuit.

7) Now that I am on a roll ... and another thing. I think what should be shown is not your reputation, but rather your reputation/post ratio. I don't care if you have 700 pts for 25,000 posts. I might care a bit more if you had 700 pts for 500 posts. It would encourage people to post less noise and more substance. Your admitance to ORG should be based on a certain time frame (4 months?) and a certain ratio of points. If you are posting a pile of noise, you might lose your rights for some time, until you can earn your way back. Poster for 5 years or 5 months? Doesn't matter too much. You get what you earn.

GL

Edskin
05-30-2006, 05:38 PM
Not to diss on the validity of having everyone share their opinions, but the results of this thread outline the real problem, IMO. 175 posts, all with a bit of different twist on how things should be. You can't please everyone, and that is the ONLY "mistake" I think that has ever been made at Redszone-- trying to please everyone.

I really believe that with the community growing by leaps and bounds and with more and more opinions flowing daily, simplicity is the only solution.

1. One Board. Eliminate Reds Live. Redszone is Redszone-- no "call ups."
2. A waiting period for posting privlidges. Anyone can sign up and view the board threads at any time, but they must wait _______ before being able to post. I think that would give new members a chance to read the board for awhile to get a "feel" for things.

Edskin
05-30-2006, 05:39 PM
BTW, the "_______" reference above was meant to mean "fill in the blank."

remdog
05-30-2006, 05:51 PM
Not to diss on the validity of having everyone share their opinions, but the results of this thread outline the real problem, IMO. 175 posts, all with a bit of different twist on how things should be. You can't please everyone, and that is the ONLY "mistake" I think that has ever been made at Redszone-- trying to please everyone.

I really believe that with the community growing by leaps and bounds and with more and more opinions flowing daily, simplicity is the only solution.

1. One Board. Eliminate Reds Live. Redszone is Redszone-- no "call ups."
2. A waiting period for posting privlidges. Anyone can sign up and view the board threads at any time, but they must wait _______ before being able to post. I think that would give new members a chance to read the board for awhile to get a "feel" for things.

I agree with a waiting period. Too many newcomers walk in with both guns blazing (maybe trying to make an impression) without reading or getting a feel for the board. I was going to suggest a waiting period for ORG, regardless of points earned but, since I advocate one board also, that didn't make sense.

Rem

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 05:51 PM
I'm sure a ten game Reds win streak would help smooth things over.
I dunno, we won on Sunday when the trouble started :lol:

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 05:53 PM
A totally unmoderated board would be a disaster IMO, how many times would we have to say "Yeah well **** you" before it got old?

TeamCasey
05-30-2006, 05:56 PM
A totally unmoderated board would be a disaster IMO, how many times would we have to say "Yeah well **** you" before it got old?

I'm going to neg you for masked profanity. ;) :laugh:

Puffy
05-30-2006, 06:05 PM
Mike, I don't really think there is a problem with people discussing deeper issues like the ones you mentioned. If anything this board welcomes that as much as any place on the Internet.

Where people tend to hit loggerheads is when a poster says X, gets shown evidence that X simply isn't true and then gets in a snit about it. Intelligent other interpretations of the evidence pretty much always get consideration around here. Finding a different logical home for that evidence also rarely turns into much of a conflagration on this board.

Yet sometimes you've just got an empty premise and those may be opinions, but they certainly aren't valid opinions.

One of the things I've come to respect about you over the years is your willingness to think about the things you think. You always make a strong case for your opinions and you don't change them lightly, but you also don't hold onto to them blindly. And, to a degree, a lot of what I'm seeing from the "I've got an opinion" argument is really a case for "Hey, I don't really want to have to think about this stuff."

Well, it's Redszone and, as you know, that's never going to fly very far

Thats a beautiful post. That is the problem - anyone who comes here with an open mind never has the "condesending tone" problem. If you are willing to openly debate, think, and have your opinions challenge while challenging back you will immediately be respected. Its that simple. Guys like myself, Stormy and RFS are not true Statheads and we agree with the so called statheads 95% of the time, and where we have disagreed its never been a challenge and there was never any namecalling (except between me and RFS - but thats because he is an old, old, old, old, old, old, old codger) because of presentation and articulation.

As Steel said, this is an "A" board and you can disagree all you want, but bring your "A" game and you'll be fine.

Of course, all my opinion - hopefully I don't get yelled at again for this post, especially cause I stated I wouldn't say anything else.

Tommyjohn25
05-30-2006, 06:26 PM
A totally unmoderated board would be a disaster IMO, how many times would we have to say "Yeah well **** you" before it got old?


Why would saying "love you" get old? There is never too much love to go around! ;) :D :p:

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 06:28 PM
I'm going to neg you for masked profanity. ;) :laugh:
Tattle tale!!

M2
05-30-2006, 06:31 PM
Guys like myself, Stormy and RFS are not true Statheads and we agree with the so called statheads 95% of the time, and where we have disagreed its never been a challenge ...

Good point. Wish Stormy would come back, because I've never known anyone who can predict what's going to happen next in a ballgame like Stormy. He was a freak of nature with that.

Also, it's fairly comedic who gets labelled a stathead. I probably do by lots of folks. I haven't taken a math course since I graduated high school 21 years ago. I make my living off the written word. If I'm what goes for a stathead/mathlete in these parts then that's just sad. It would be like calling me a professional mountain climber because sometimes I go on hikes with the family.

paintmered
05-30-2006, 06:36 PM
To the Mods:

If you really want to air this problem out and you really want people's opinions then this thread has to be a rep-free, warning-free zone. Let people make their feelings known without fear of reprisal. Otherwise you're just giving lip-service to the problem.

Rem

The ability to give rep is a user-group based option. Therefore, we do not have the ability (without some hack I don't know about) to make it thread-based. Also, to the best of my knowledge, nobody has been warned in this thread and everyone has been free to air their grievances without fear of reprisal. If you are referring to WOY's comment, that was not due to anything said in this thread.

Puffy
05-30-2006, 06:54 PM
Good point. Wish Stormy would come back, because I've never known anyone who can predict what's going to happen next in a ballgame like Stormy. He was a freak of nature with that.

Also, it's fairly comedic who gets labelled a stathead. I probably do by lots of folks. I haven't taken a math course since I graduated high school 21 years ago. I make my living off the written word. If I'm what goes for a stathead/mathlete in these parts then that's just sad. It would be like calling me a professional mountain climber because sometimes I go on hikes with the family.

Yeah, sorry bout that - statheads should be in quotes b/c I don't mean to label people.

M2
05-30-2006, 07:10 PM
Yeah, sorry bout that - statheads should be in quotes b/c I don't mean to label people.

That's fine, I didn't read it as you labelling anyone. I just get a kick out of the whole "stathead" concept because I doubt many of the supposed statheads on the site conform to the stereotype ... or even qualify as statheads.

guttle11
05-30-2006, 07:22 PM
Good point. Wish Stormy would come back, because I've never known anyone who can predict what's going to happen next in a ballgame like Stormy. He was a freak of nature with that.

Also, it's fairly comedic who gets labelled a stathead. I probably do by lots of folks. I haven't taken a math course since I graduated high school 21 years ago. I make my living off the written word. If I'm what goes for a stathead/mathlete in these parts then that's just sad. It would be like calling me a professional mountain climber because sometimes I go on hikes with the family.

A "stathead" is someone who only uses stats and has absolutely no opinion whatsoever. To be honest, I see none of that around here.

The only problem with the people labeled "statheads" around here is their blatant lack of respect for others' opinions that don't use stats.

To me, there are ways to state opinion and have it be valid without providing numerous stats that can be twisted and worked in a certain way to make anyone look better.

Spitball
05-30-2006, 07:30 PM
Where people tend to hit loggerheads is when a poster says X, gets shown evidence that X simply isn't true and then gets in a snit about it.

To me, this is a big, big problem, but not for the reason stated in this quote. This attitude is the root of much of what bothers so many of us. Because one poster buys a statistical explanation doesn't mean it proves a thing to the other poster. Sometimes that evidence is clear to one poster but is not clear to the other. Statistics are not the total answer for some of us. You might cross a river that averages a depth of three feet, but I'm not going to do it. Even if you get across, that doesn't prove I will.

As I see it, the problem is when one doesn't see the "evidence". Who gets into the snit? One is a statistical guy and he wants a statistical response from the guy who isn't inclined that way. Who is the bad guy? Probably neither, maybe there just has to be tolerance from both kinds of posters.

The statistics that some believe prove something don't prove a thing to others. I won't get into the strikeout thing, but the "clear-cut evidence" isn't clear-cut to some of us. I really don't appreciate someone throwing a number at me and saying that proves your wrong now go away until you come up with a staistic. I left the board last summer when I was called a 98 pound weakling and a girl by a poster simply because I had no desire to make an in depth statistical analysis to prove a comment, that was actually a side to my point.

saboforthird
05-30-2006, 07:33 PM
A "stathead" is someone who only uses stats and has absolutely no opinion whatsoever. To be honest, I see none of that around here.

The only problem with the people labeled "statheads" around here is their blatant lack of respect for others' opinions that don't use stats.

Not too long ago I gave my opinion that Dunn isn't a great defender and that he could improve on his defense. I was then told my opinion would mean nothing unless I came up with a stat that showed how many runs he "costs" the Reds on defense.

The only problem was that I never said anything of the like. I simply said he could use some improvement. The ego from that poster is really what set me off for a while and made me contemplate leaving Redszone. He twisted every word I said and put me into a crows that I wasn't in.(Anti-Dunn).

To me, there are ways to state opinion and have it be valid without providing numerous stats that can be twisted and worked in a certain way to make anyone look better.

And, I bet $1,000,000 I know who that poster was. Doesn't matter, but it illustrates a point: this site *does* have "statheads" who don't care for opinions without appending numbers. I almost think this RZ needs to be split into separate "Community of Reds Fans" and "Nerds with Beer" forums. I am very much of the abstract type and know that there many things in this world that don't need "numbers" to support the obvious, but I find it incredibly difficult to post anything here with fear of reprisal from those who think otherwise.

pedro
05-30-2006, 07:35 PM
And, I bet $1,000,000 I know who that poster was. Doesn't matter, but it illustrates a point: this site *does* have "statheads" who don't care for opinions without appending numbers. I almost think this RZ needs to be split into separate "Community of Reds Fans" and "Nerds with Beer" forums. I am very much of the abstract type and know that there many things in this world that don't need "numbers" to support the obvious, but I find it incredibly difficult to post anything here with fear of reprisal from those who think otherwise.

With classy posts like that I wonder why.

REDREAD
05-30-2006, 07:35 PM
Just one thought.. Why do people want to hide rep points?

The arguement I see is that some people are getting "promoted" to ORG that don't deserve it. If that's the case, why not just lock down ORG to new members or have some kind of election to get in (as opposed to the rep system)?

I guess I'm saying that if rep points need to be hidden, then the rep system is broken.

Also, I figure that if the points are hidden, there's going to be more begging/discussion about the points.

One point I'd like to add: If there's a poster that consistently annoys you or beats a topic to death, the board does have an ignore feature. It's a great way to customize the board exactly as you like it :)

I do agree that people could be more civil and friendly towards each other. We're all pulling for the same team.

guttle11
05-30-2006, 07:41 PM
And, I bet $1,000,000 I know who that poster was. Doesn't matter, but it illustrates a point: this site *does* have "statheads" who don't care for opinions without appending numbers. I almost think this RZ needs to be split into separate "Community of Reds Fans" and "Nerds with Beer" forums. I am very much of the abstract type and know that there many things in this world that don't need "numbers" to support the obvious, but I find it incredibly difficult to post anything here with fear of reprisal from those who think otherwise.
Please, save the "nerds with beer" stuff. Besides, if they had beer they would have friends, thus ending any possible nerdom.:beerme:

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 07:43 PM
If you don't know what your rep points are you can't really complain about it.

And people who DO complain about it should be dealt with.

Caveat Emperor
05-30-2006, 07:55 PM
Just one thought.. Why do people want to hide rep points?


Same reason they wanted to hide "Subscriber/Non-Subscriber" last go around: people see a big rep number and feel their being pushed around.

I was on the wrong side of that argument as a relative newbie to the board (who was put off by the fact that my knowledge of the game of baseball needed to grow) last go around. I felt threatened by not being the smartest or most clever person in the room and the natural response was to get defensive and blame people who I thought were hiding behind a title (or, in this case, high rep score).

Truth was, when I started reading what they were saying and educating myself, I realized that they weren't hiding behind anything but, rather, putting information out there that I could learn and grow as a fan from.

Hiding rep points is merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. It's not like people are going to stop fighting or stop creating noise and disharmony on the board just because suddenly they can't see the rep score of someone.

REDREAD
05-30-2006, 07:58 PM
My suggestions:

1) Do not allow new registers to post for 30 days. - You have to learn a bit about the board before you are allowed to post - or create a "new poster" forum for them to wade into. GL

I've found some forums like that. The problem is, I don't want a waiting period. I'll just find another forum that doesn't have a waiting period.

In order for the community to remain viable, you need good new posters coming in. Maybe some people will register, bookmark the site, and then return in 30 days (which really doesn't accomplish much), but I'd think most people would give up.

wolfboy
05-30-2006, 08:01 PM
My take is that far more often it's someone using the word "opinion" as a shield against the facts that have been presented to them. Numerous times in the past week I've run into posters making claims that are simply contrary to some rather basic evidence and instead of using that evidence to alter their opinion they've griped that they should be allowed to have an opinion without having numbers thrown at them. Sorry, but (and this is a made-up example) if you want to claim the Reds are the best triples hitting team in history and there's a quick and easy numerical test that proves you wrong, then it's for you to recognize that they keep score in baseball and that your perception doesn't trump what's actually happened.

This gets back to some of the topics that might be fodder for "beaten to death" forum. For instance, we've been through an incredibly tedious discussion over the years about whether the Reds strike out too much to have a good offense. As it turned out, they were able to lead the league in scoring while also leading it in Ks (just like BRM). It also turned out the team had one of the more consistent offenses in baseball. Now that doesn't mean there aren't things the team could do in order to score more, but it does mean that as board we've seen these arguments tested and a definitive answer has been given -- as long as you get on base and hit for power, whiffing like crazy won't prevent you from scoring gobs of runs. We KNOW this. It's no longer needs to be a matter for opinion on this board and having to give equal weight and credit to the opinions of the folks who haven't learned it shatters the boundaries of common sense.

I mentioned this in another thread and I'll repeat it here. We've covered a lot of ground in six years. In general it shouldn't be the job of the board to repeat itself for newer posters, it should be the job of the newer posters to catch up to where the board has progressed to. There's almost an endless supply of topics out there and we don't need to keep running over the same ones or spinning our wheels because someone doesn't understand when they've formed a half-baked opinion.

Speaking of wheels:



Amen.


Isn't this the reason we have ORG and Reds Live? If you want to avoid rehashed topics and "newbies" covering a topic that's been beaten dead, then avoid the Live side of the board. Boss went through the trouble to create a board that would be free of these instances, and it still isn't enough.

The rep system doesn't seem to have done a single positive thing. Those over 200 points still complain that the quality of posts is lacking. Those under 200 are a mix of indifference, resentment, or envy when it comes to reputation. I really like the idea of separate boards.

ORG is a place that should have a higher standard for post content. I don't expect that as much on Live. The problem I have is when people from the ORG side hold the Live board to an ORG standard. I'm sorry, but if that is the case, then why have two separate forums?

REDREAD
05-30-2006, 08:06 PM
Same reason they wanted to hide "Subscriber/Non-Subscriber" last go around: people see a big rep number and feel their being pushed around. .

Hiding Rep points won't fix that. Even if you hide the "join date", people will still know who the old timers are.
I guess if Boss and GIK hide rep points, they are also going to have to either give or remove Avatars for everyone, because then you could see who was a member that way..
If one wants to remove every indication of who is in ORG and who isn't, what's the point of having two forums?






Hiding rep points is merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. It's not like people are going to stop fighting or stop creating noise and disharmony on the board just because suddenly they can't see the rep score of someone.

That's my point.. then why hide them then? I suspect the main reason many people want to hide rep points is to make it even more difficult for people to get promoted to ORG. As I said, if that's the case, let's make ORG the closed forum.

pedro
05-30-2006, 08:08 PM
I'm in favor of hiding Rep points from others (not ourselves - i.e you could see your own rep points) only because it appears some posters are resentful of other posters totals and they get talked about too much IMO.

flynn78
05-30-2006, 08:22 PM
Today is a great example of the exclusion I talked about. No game thread here on Live so I am left to twiddle my thumbs. It is very frustrating.

Raisor
05-30-2006, 08:23 PM
Today is a great example of the exclusion I talked about. No game thread here on Live so I am left to twiddle my thumbs. It is very frustrating.


Game hasn't started yet, and you COULD start one you know.

flynn78
05-30-2006, 08:29 PM
Game hasn't started yet, and you COULD start one you know.
I'm 0-1 as a starter of threads, but I will. You are right, I was looking for a 7:05 Ohio start. Kneejerk reaction. I will start the thread and risk it, but I guarantee nobody will show. Unless the want to prove me wrong.:)

jredmo2
05-30-2006, 08:31 PM
In my experience, and trust me I care very little about rep points or anything, the thing that bothers me as a newbie is that every time I even casually make a point it is met with arrogance. I mean, when I want to simply point out that, say, I like Felipe Lopez and think he is valuable, is it really necessary for five people to groan "Well, duh.. here is the link to the regression analysis we made last year which proved his run-share totals are exemplary."

I appreciate statistics, I mean hell they are the foundation of Liberal Arts (though remember they usually lack the empirical power to prove anything), but just because you are good at statistics doesn't mean they are part of every discussion, and certainly doesn't give you a right to arrogantly demean other people.

And for the newbies who are frustrated, I guess just keep in mind that this is an internet board, and if some people want to feel better about themselves because they spend five hours of their waking lives on an internet board... well, that's not really a very big deal, is it? Nothing here is worth getting especially heated about, unless you are a very bored person.

TeamCasey
05-30-2006, 08:32 PM
I started one. :) We'll see if I'm good luck for them tonight.

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 08:42 PM
In order for the community to remain viable, you need good new posters coming in. Maybe some people will register, bookmark the site, and then return in 30 days (which really doesn't accomplish much), but I'd think most people would give up.
Just a question here, but viable for what? this isn't a big business, it's not dependent on a lot of customers stopping in, a lot of posters register and don't say much for weeks and even months.

Making people see what is and is not the norm isn't a bad thing, RZ isn't like the rest of the Reds forums that major on insults and "HE IS SUXR"

KronoRed
05-30-2006, 08:42 PM
TC is a solid vet at game threads, she knows how to play the game.

M2
05-30-2006, 08:50 PM
To me, this is a big, big problem. Maybe the root of much of what bothers so many of us. Because one poster buys a statistical explanation doesn't mean it proves a thing to the other poster. Sometimes that evidence is clear to one poster but is not clear to the other. Statistics are not the total answer for some of us. You might cross a river that averages a depth of three feet, but I'm not going to do it.

There's always degrees of relativism, but if you think Rich Aurilia should play 3B against RHPs because he's been a better hitter against them this season than Edwin Encarnacion then you're wrong. If you claim Paul Wilson was a really good pitcher for a few years, you're wrong. If you say batting average is the key percentage stat for an RBI man, you're wrong. If you say the GAB was a great hitters park in 2004, you're wrong.

Sure, there are statistical "explanations," but there are also statistical statements. They've played the games and here's what happened regardless of what you 'buy." It's not even a stats argument. It's a recorded history argument. Sometimes people are just flat wrong and there's no getting around it. I'm not going to pretend wrong is an opinion. I'm not going to mollycoddle wrong. If you write something that just doesn't line up with the facts then that's on you, not the person who pointed out your mistake.

The stats may not be the total answer, but if the definitive record of what's actually happened runs counter to your opinion then it's incumbent upon you to figure out how to reconcile that conflict.


As I see it, the problem is when one doesn't see the "evidence". Who gets into the snit? One is a statistical guy and he wants a statistical response from the guy who isn't inclined that way.

I sincerely doubt many, if any, "statistical guy(s)" expect a statistical response from someone who isn't inclined that way, but it would be nice if the non-statistical person could acknowledge when a gaping hole in his/her perception has been found. I mean, if you claim that hitch in a player's swing prevents him from hitting lefties well and then it's pointed out that said player actually hits lefties pretty well, then it's time to reconsider your stance.


The statistics that some believe prove something don't prove a thing to others. I won't get into the strikeout thing, but the "clear-cut evidence" isn't clear-cut to some of us. I really don't appreciate someone throwing a number at me and saying that proves your wrong now go away until you come up with a staistic. I left the board last summer when I was called a 98 pound weakling and a girl by a poster simply because I had no desire to make an in depth statistical analysis to prove a comment, that was actually a side to my point.

Well, I will get into the strikeout thing. The Reds strikeout a lot. They also score a lot. One does not prevent the other. Whether you're a good offense runs along lines that are totally irrelevant to your strikeout totals. Whether you're a good offensive player runs along lines that are totally irrelevant to your strikeout totals. It is clear-cut. We've seen it put in action in front of our very eyes in recent years. The evidence couldn't more overwhelming. I'm not going to act like that's not the case because it's a concept that you haven't embraced. I don't care if you don't have an in-depth statistical response to it because there is no in-depth statistical response to it. There's no in-depth any kind of response to it. It just is.

We all understand that hitters attempt to make meaningful contact as a function of their job, but outs happen. You can stick strikeouts in a big pile with popouts (my personal peeve), groundouts, lineouts and flyouts. Outs is outs. It's how many you make (or really don't make) that counts, not what kind you make (with the exception of double plays, those are evil). Don't go away. Don't come up with a statistic. Just understand that for the simple truth it is. Are there corollaries off of that worth discussing? Sure and have at it, but don't tell me a player or a team is no good at the plate because he/it whiffs too much. That dog don't hunt.

I also think it should be noted that a lot of what we see on this board isn't stats vs. no stats. A lot of the no stats crowd, I find, is oddly and obsessively reliant on a handful of rudimentary stats. Batting average is an important component of the things that drive an offense (OB and SLG), but telling me one guy is a .281 hitter and therefore better than this other guy who is a .267 hitter isn't going to go very far. You could be talking Jeff Treadway (.281) and Mike Schmidt (.267) for all I know and I am going to care intensely about the vast universe outside of their BA totals. You can claim BA is the end-all, be-all for summing up an offensive, but that IS a statistical argument you're making and I've got the sum total of baseball history backing up my contention that you're wrong. In that case I'm not looking common ground or to make you feel good about your opinion. That's a you-get-it-or-you-don't moment.

And don't take that to mean BA is a totally worthless topic. If you want to make the case that Player J, given his secondary offensive skills, needs to hit .280 in order to be a plus at the plate, then that's a perfectly worthwhile point to make.

Just as an addendum, if you're going to talk about a player's offensive performance, you can expect statistics to enter into the discussion. If you're going to compare players against their positional counterparts in the rest of the league, you can expect statistics to enter in the discussion. And if you're going to talk about statistics (e.g. runs scored, RBI, pitcher's wins, team W-L) then you probably ought to expect statistics to enter the discussion.

KittyDuran
05-30-2006, 08:58 PM
Come on guys, get back to the thread topic...:)

RFS62
05-30-2006, 09:03 PM
RedsZone has been in a constant state of evolution since the day it was born.

It started as a refuge, an oasis of intelligent baseball talk in a desert of crap. The founders provided for a huge need in the Reds internet community..... a place where intelligence ruled and empty smack talk didn't last long.

The quality of the content drew people from all over, and we've gone through phase after phase of growing pains. The one constant since the first day Boss and GIK opened the doors here has been the intent of the owners.

Their "intent", or what might be a "mission statement" if we were a corporation, has been to provide a quality environment for intelligent baseball discussion and debate. And they've been far more concerned with freedom of speech considerations than I'd ever have been. They've always erred on the side of giving even the biggest loudmouths ample time and numerous chances before banning anyone. Again, far longer than I'd have ever been able to were I making the calls.

They always listen to the voices of the community when problems arise, and they never fail to do their best to modify whatever they can to improve the content.

They never fail in that regard.

They are, in essence, a constant victim of their success. The more traffic, the more problems with which to deal.

Personally, I trust them to work it out. I know where their hearts are, and I trust them. They'll listen to all the comments and concerns, and life will go on.

Such drama. And in a year in which the Reds are overachieving on a monumental scale. These things don't happen every day, you know. To expend any energy at all in negative thinking when the Reds are playing over their heads like this, what a waste of time.

We're playing far better than even the most optimistic of us would have ever dared predict. What a silly waste of time with all these judgments and labeling and yapping.

M2
05-30-2006, 09:05 PM
Isn't this the reason we have ORG and Reds Live? If you want to avoid rehashed topics and "newbies" covering a topic that's been beaten dead, then avoid the Live side of the board. Boss went through the trouble to create a board that would be free of these instances, and it still isn't enough.

The rep system doesn't seem to have done a single positive thing. Those over 200 points still complain that the quality of posts is lacking. Those under 200 are a mix of indifference, resentment, or envy when it comes to reputation. I really like the idea of separate boards.

ORG is a place that should have a higher standard for post content. I don't expect that as much on Live. The problem I have is when people from the ORG side hold the Live board to an ORG standard. I'm sorry, but if that is the case, then why have two separate forums?

This topic was raised when the initial split happened, but the whole point of Reds Live!, as I understand it, is that older posters are supposed to interact with the newer posters as they get used to the board and bring the best ones up to the ORG via the rep system. We've gotten a lot of great posters over the past year, so I disagree that nothing good has come from the system.

IMO, if what people want is for Reds Live! to be a MLB.com forum equivalent. If that's what it's going to be then I say burn it to the ground and don't resurrect it and let people apply for membership like SOSH. We can form a membership committee. If Reds Live! isn't striving for a high standard then it has no business being a part of Redszone, at least that's my take. I can't imagine the moderators or Boss or GIK want to be overseeing a tsunami in a cauldron like that.

SandyD
05-30-2006, 09:20 PM
Perhaps we could develop a "welcome" statement that would be automatically e-mailed or PM'd to a new registrant that would include guidelines, explain the how the board is set up, etc. The rules would be stated here, and guidelines for handling questions/problems.

Just a thought.

GAC
05-30-2006, 09:24 PM
I really agree with some who have suggested that we do away with Reds Live and just have the one baseball related forum.

I would think that having to monitor/moderate (and even, at times, "babysit") two forums that often have same articles/topics is burdensome for the mods we have.

I fully understand the purpose of initiating Reds Live and have new members basically "prove" themselves and earn the right to post on the main one.

But it has, IMO, created as Ed has said, a caste system (unintentional).

I would rather see one baseball forum, with possibly a few more moderators, and taking a hardline stance (a 3 strike system) for those who flaunt the rules and don't want to show the respect and behavior that we would all expect.

Instead of having to watch 2 rooms of children (at times), you isolate them into one. ;)

When a new member joins, they must read and sign/agree with a disclaimer that lists the rules, and also the possible disciplinary steps taken if they violate them.

How can anyone argue with that?

You need a set disciplinary system that "draws a line in the sand" so to speak that all understand and agree with.

I think we all understand that there are going to be disagreements. And at times, those disagreements can get personal.

That is what moderators are for.

And just as there is a set of rules for forum behavior.... there should also be a set of rules established that lay out a determined and objective "plan of attack" for mods. That way peple can't say they are being treated unfairly if a step by step process is being fairly utilized.

Finally - knowing a few of the mods on here personally, I feel for them knowing the volume of emails they get that basically involve alot of whining and crying about various posters

What are they suppose to do in these situations? Get real folks!

I'd turn my email off! :lol:

These mods have lives too.

But regardless of how large this forum has grown (and it is a great forum)... I think we should go back to the basic approach we had before, with just more mods, and rules for everyone that are enforced.

But no matter what we do, it's not gonna please everyone.

And we have to learn to accept and live with that.

GullyFoyle
05-30-2006, 09:31 PM
wow... finally finished the whole thread... here are some thoughts on my experiences...

I came to the RedZone last year looking for a quality Baseball forum dealing with the Reds. I had done some looking around and heard this site had a good reputation for high quality posts. I poked around, liked the site, the people seemed good so I went about coming up with some ideas for some good posts. I did some research and put up a post about how GAB was trending statistically. I got a lot of good feedback and a lot of good rep in a short amount of time. There was (and still is, I assume) a minimum amount of time and number of posts before you could join the ORG forum, so I went about my business, coming up with what I hoped was some good posts. Eventually I was able to join the ORG forum and I have enjoyed posting in both Live and ORG since then. Because of my job there was / is long periods of time when I can't be around, but I always enjoy lurking even if I don't have the time to post.

Here are some thoughts on my experiences:

1) I thought the rep system worked well... I purposely thought about making posts that informed and presented information so I could become a "full" member

2) I go back and fourth about hiding rep. When I first came I found myself reading what people write and then looking at their rep. I didn't assume they where right about a subject based on their rep, but I was / am more likely to think twice about what they say if they have a high reputation. For better or worst it gives those who seek out information to present to the board a higher standing than those who just lurk (I write that as one who appreciates both).

3) I don't think there needs to be an apology for for having a tiered system. It seems to be doing what it was designed to do and that is getting posters to add to the community in order to become a member of the community.

Let me finish by saying that as is the case with many here, I have learned a lot from these boards and I think a yearly cycle of growing pains is worth the effort for the outcome.

Gully

BuckeyeRedleg
05-30-2006, 09:44 PM
IMO, if what people want is for Reds Live! to be a MLB.com forum equivalent. If that's what it's going to be then I say burn it to the ground and don't resurrect it and let people apply for membership like SOSH. We can form a membership committee. If Reds Live! isn't striving for a high standard then it has no business being a part of Redszone, at least that's my take. I can't imagine the moderators or Boss or GIK want to be overseeing a tsunami in a cauldron like that.

I totally agree with this.

wolfboy
05-30-2006, 09:52 PM
This topic was raised when the initial split happened, but the whole point of Reds Live!, as I understand it, is that older posters are supposed to interact with the newer posters as they get used to the board and bring the best ones up to the ORG via the rep system. We've gotten a lot of great posters over the past year, so I disagree that nothing good has come from the system.

IMO, if what people want is for Reds Live! to be a MLB.com forum equivalent. If that's what it's going to be then I say burn it to the ground and don't resurrect it and let people apply for membership like SOSH. We can form a membership committee. If Reds Live! isn't striving for a high standard then it has no business being a part of Redszone, at least that's my take. I can't imagine the moderators or Boss or GIK want to be overseeing a tsunami in a cauldron like that.

Reds Live has never approached a level equivalent to the mlb.com forum. Those who run the forum attempt to make sure of that. I've seen mlb.com quality posters come and go very quickly on this board, and I don't expect that to change. I understand that Redszone should strive for the highest standard. However, if you refuse to accept that the two boards will have a varying degree in quality, then why have two boards?

You are correct in saying that Reds Live is a place for ORG posters to interract with other posters. In a perfect world, posters from ORG would share their insight and experience with newer posters. What I see a lot of lately is ORG posters trying to police Reds Live.. We have very capable moderators to do that job. The two boards will have varying degrees of quality. My belief is that an ORG poster should take the responsibility to mentor those in Live, not police them. If that distinction could be made, we might not have these pissing matches every night.

Many have raised the point time and time again that some people come here without an open mind. I agree. Those posters usually take care of themselves. Unfortunately, when every "Dunn Sucks" thread turns into the worlds largest pissing match, the whole board suffers. As long as there is open registration, the "Dunn Ks too much" threads are bound to appear from time to time. Maybe moderators need to close those threads immediately, and post a link to a previous post covering that topic. Maybe a "been there, done that" forum is the answer. Until that time, if those threads are annoying and tiresome, then read some stuff on the ORG. Reply there. Realize that a negative reply doesn't have a positive effect on the board. Take solace in knowing that problem posters eventually find the door. It doesn't take a group of a five page thread of bickering for this to happen.


edit: I have to correct myself on what I said earlier about the reputation system. I do feel that it has done some good. What GullyFoyle said reminded me of that. I guess my statement was directed at the separate boards, and this post summarizes my feelings towards that.

Spitball
05-30-2006, 10:22 PM
There's always degrees of relativism, but if you think Rich Aurilia should play 3B against RHPs because he's been a better hitter against them this season than Edwin Encarnacion then you're wrong. If you claim Paul Wilson was a really good pitcher for a few years, you're wrong. If you say batting average is the key percentage stat for an RBI man, you're wrong. If you say the GAB was a great hitters park in 2004, you're wrong.

Sure, there are statistical "explanations," but there are also statistical statements. They've played the games and here's what happened regardless of what you 'buy." It's not even a stats argument. It's a recorded history argument. Sometimes people are just flat wrong and there's no getting around it. I'm not going to pretend wrong is an opinion. I'm not going to mollycoddle wrong. If you write something that just doesn't line up with the facts then that's on you, not the person who pointed out your mistake.

The stats may not be the total answer, but if the definitive record of what's actually happened runs counter to your opinion then it's incumbent upon you to figure out how to reconcile that conflict.



I sincerely doubt many, if any, "statistical guy(s)" expect a statistical response from someone who isn't inclined that way, but it would be nice if the non-statistical person could acknowledge when a gaping hole in his/her perception has been found. I mean, if you claim that hitch in a player's swing prevents him from hitting lefties well and then it's pointed out that said player actually hits lefties pretty well, then it's time to reconsider your stance.



Well, I will get into the strikeout thing. The Reds strikeout a lot. They also score a lot. One does not prevent the other. Whether you're a good offense runs along lines that are totally irrelevant to your strikeout totals. Whether you're a good offensive player runs along lines that are totally irrelevant to your strikeout totals. It is clear-cut. We've seen it put in action in front of our very eyes in recent years. The evidence couldn't more overwhelming. I'm not going to act like that's not the case because it's a concept that you haven't embraced. I don't care if you don't have an in-depth statistical response to it because there is no in-depth statistical response to it. There's no in-depth any kind of response to it. It just is.

We all understand that hitters attempt to make meaningful contact as a function of their job, but outs happen. You can stick strikeouts in a big pile with popouts (my personal peeve), groundouts, lineouts and flyouts. Outs is outs. It's how many you make (or really don't make) that counts, not what kind you make (with the exception of double plays, those are evil). Don't go away. Don't come up with a statistic. Just understand that for the simple truth it is. Are there corollaries off of that worth discussing? Sure and have at it, but don't tell me a player or a team is no good at the plate because he/it whiffs too much. That dog don't hunt.

I also think it should be noted that a lot of what we see on this board isn't stats vs. no stats. A lot of the no stats crowd, I find, is oddly and obsessively reliant on a handful of rudimentary stats. Batting average is an important component of the things that drive an offense (OB and SLG), but telling me one guy is a .281 hitter and therefore better than this other guy who is a .267 hitter isn't going to go very far. You could be talking Jeff Treadway (.281) and Mike Schmidt (.267) for all I know and I am going to care intensely about the vast universe outside of their BA totals. You can claim BA is the end-all, be-all for summing up an offensive, but that IS a statistical argument you're making and I've got the sum total of baseball history backing up my contention that you're wrong. In that case I'm not looking common ground or to make you feel good about your opinion. That's a you-get-it-or-you-don't moment.

And don't take that to mean BA is a totally worthless topic. If you want to make the case that Player J, given his secondary offensive skills, needs to hit .280 in order to be a plus at the plate, then that's a perfectly worthwhile point to make.

Just as an addendum, if you're going to talk about a player's offensive performance, you can expect statistics to enter into the discussion. If you're going to compare players against their positional counterparts in the rest of the league, you can expect statistics to enter in the discussion. And if you're going to talk about statistics (e.g. runs scored, RBI, pitcher's wins, team W-L) then you probably ought to expect statistics to enter the discussion.

There is a problem on this board or this thread wouldn't have been started.
I'm not talking about who is right or wrong in an argument. That isn't the problem. The problem is the lack of dignity and respect that is often not afforded another poster...and if that is not clear, then things won't change around here. If I can be a total jerk because I'm right, then we will continue to have problems.

The Baumer
05-30-2006, 10:37 PM
There is a problem on this board or this thread wouldn't have been started.
I'm not talking about who is right or wrong in an argument. That isn't the problem. The problem is the lack of dignity and respect that is often not afforded another poster...and if that is not clear, then things won't change around here. If I can be a total jerk because I'm right, then we will continue to have problems.

I agree. I believe you have summed up a strong, important idea which some have missed in their suggestions.

M2
05-30-2006, 11:14 PM
However, if you refuse to accept that the two boards will have a varying degree in quality, then why have two boards?

I fullly understand there are and will be differences between the two forums. What I think needs to be avoided though is a fundamental disconnect between them.


Take solace in knowing that problem posters eventually find the door.

Agreed completely, shelf-life ain't their strong suit.

saboforthird
05-30-2006, 11:30 PM
Hiding Rep points won't fix that. Even if you hide the "join date", people will still know who the old timers are.
I guess if Boss and GIK hide rep points, they are also going to have to either give or remove Avatars for everyone, because then you could see who was a member that way..
If one wants to remove every indication of who is in ORG and who isn't, what's the point of having two forums?






That's my point.. then why hide them then? I suspect the main reason many people want to hide rep points is to make it even more difficult for people to get promoted to ORG. As I said, if that's the case, let's make ORG the closed forum.

I disagree with your theory on why you think most people want rep points hidden. Having read this thread, I think it's obvious that most here feel that rep points cause nothing but problems. Getting promoted to ORG being the least of them, by far. There is really no point in explaining it again, but in a nutshell having post counts and join dates NEVER serves a good purpose. They only serve to classify posters. As far as avatars, it's a coolness factor but I bet few (if any) here would feel bad because they don't have an avatar. Donate to the website, get an avatar. Avatars serve as an aesthetic. Post counts and join dates being made visible serve to stroke egos.

SteelSD
05-30-2006, 11:35 PM
There is a problem on this board or this thread wouldn't have been started. I'm not talking about who is right or wrong in an argument. That isn't the problem. The problem is the lack of dignity and respect that is often not afforded another poster...and if that is not clear, then things won't change around here. If I can be a total jerk because I'm right, then we will continue to have problems.

Spitball, with all due respect, when someone who's wrong doesn't like being told they're wrong in any form or fashion the tone with which they're addressed is almost completely irrelevant.

That doesn't give anyone the right to be a jerk, but when telling someone they're wrong in any manner qualifies you as a jerk, that's the ultimate catch-22. And this board has improved tenfold over the past couple of years as to how emotional escalation is handled during debates. Yet we still here complaints about it. That's telling because Boss, GIK, and the mods have done an excellent job identifying thread breaking points; which are actually lower in many cases than they used to be due to some topics being beaten completely to death.

Knowing that, the only thing left is what M2 aptly addressed- being wrong without wanting to be told that you're wrong. Yes, there are different degrees of being wrong but many things we didn't accept as facts two or three years ago are now beyond contestation. I'm not sure what environment on Earth allows a reasonable expectation of being able to position the unreasonable as fact without contention, but a high-level internet message board isn't that place.

saboforthird
05-30-2006, 11:42 PM
Same reason they wanted to hide "Subscriber/Non-Subscriber" last go around: people see a big rep number and feel their being pushed around.

I was on the wrong side of that argument as a relative newbie to the board (who was put off by the fact that my knowledge of the game of baseball needed to grow) last go around. I felt threatened by not being the smartest or most clever person in the room and the natural response was to get defensive and blame people who I thought were hiding behind a title (or, in this case, high rep score).

Truth was, when I started reading what they were saying and educating myself, I realized that they weren't hiding behind anything but, rather, putting information out there that I could learn and grow as a fan from.

Hiding rep points is merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic. It's not like people are going to stop fighting or stop creating noise and disharmony on the board just because suddenly they can't see the rep score of someone.

I agree mostly with what you are saying; however, I do feel that even though there will always be bad apples in the barrel, there's no point in splitting the community with separate forums and post counts. If something is going to be done about this 'rep point' system, I feel it ought to be looked at what effect the system has in terms of encouraging divideness amongst posters, rather than trying to make it silence those who abuse the system (which will never happen).

saboforthird
05-30-2006, 11:48 PM
Spitball, with all due respect, when someone who's wrong doesn't like being told they're wrong in any form or fashion the tone with which they're addressed is almost completely irrelevant.

That doesn't give anyone the right to be a jerk, but when telling someone they're wrong in any manner qualifies you as a jerk, that's the ultimate catch-22.

I don't believe Spitball said that telling someone they're wrong ALWAYS makes one a jerk, but that there are those here (often with large post counts, an entirely different issue altogether) that somehow manage to come across as jerks on a consistent basis when correcting others. It's now what you say, or how often you say it, but HOW you say it.

M2
05-30-2006, 11:50 PM
There is a problem on this board or this thread wouldn't have been started.
I'm not talking about who is right or wrong in an argument. That isn't the problem. The problem is the lack of dignity and respect that is often not afforded another poster...and if that is not clear, then things won't change around here. If I can be a total jerk because I'm right, then we will continue to have problems.

Frankly, I don't think any one group or side or clique has a monopoly on getting jerky around here. It comes from all directions and suggesting that there is one such subset responsible for it is, IMO, a combination of disingenuous and self-serving.

I'll be the first to admit, I can mix it up pretty good. IIRC, you're no slouch at it either. Baumer, who was just slapping you on the back there, launched himself quite the fusillade the other day. Team Casey, who is famously nice, can knock a person sideways with a good one-liner. I'm not judging anyone on that. I'm just noting that on this board we have a lot of, uh, talent in that regard. It's not going to go away. People aren't going to be nicey nice all the time.

It's a baseball board. We jaw about baseball. Sometimes it gets a bit unruly. Could people, including myself, tone some things down a bit? Sure.

But if anyone came here for a personal affirmation, I'll suggest their quest is misguided. Even if you make a good point around here, you should be prepared to defend it and you ought not to be surprised if others don't treat your feelings like they're made of egg-shell crystal. To paraphrase Tom Hanks, "There is no crying on Redszone."

FCB made a good suggestion a while back and I'll parrot it: This is probably as simple as everyone try to be a little less snotty and a lot less wounded.

griffeyfreak4
05-30-2006, 11:51 PM
Actually, I don't find much different in the ORG and the Reds Live game threads. Not much of any action being reported in either. It would be better if we had something in "real time" like a chat feature. Than people who want to post "he gone", "multi-tasking", and "Deno would of caught that", etc. would have a place to release it without cluttering up the game thread.
There's not much of anything being reported in the Reds Live game thread. It's deserted, no fun, and I don't even know why there are two game threads. They are supposedly getting "hijacked" and the "old timers" decide to ditch us "new comers" because that would solve the problem. You've got to be kidding me. It's completely unfair to us.

Throughout this thread people have said the problem is the lack of respect, but the fact there are two game threads shows absolutely ZERO respect for the people who aren't qualified to post in ORG. Sure, you all like the idea of two game threads, but you aren't restricted to just one. Ask someone who has under 200 rep and we'll see how much they enjoy it.

If that is how you guys feel, then what's the point of having a Reds Live forum? Just get rid of all of us in it, and restrict membership to the site. If all we do is hijack threads, why are we here? Cut the bull and think about it for a second, the "new comers" aren't creating the problem, the "old timers" are, and I'm sick of it. I'm not saying we are completely innocent, but this is garbage.

Start showing us some respect.

saboforthird
05-30-2006, 11:53 PM
There's not much of anything being reported in the Reds Live game thread. It's deserted, no fun, and I don't even know why there are two game threads. They are supposedly getting "hijacked" and the "old timers" decide to ditch us "new comers" because that would solve the problem. You've got to be kidding me. It's completely unfair to us.

Throughout this thread people have said the problem is the lack of respect, but the fact there are two game threads shows absolutely ZERO respect for the people who aren't qualified to post in ORG. Sure, you all like the idea of two game threads, but you aren't restricted to just one. Ask someone who has under 200 rep and we'll see how much they enjoy it.

If that is how you guys feel, then what's the point of having a Reds Live forum? Just get rid of all of us in it, and restrict membership to the site. If all we do is hijack threads, why are we here? Cut the bull and think about it for a second, the "new comers" aren't creating the problem, the "old timers" are, and I'm sick of it. I'm not saying we are completely innocent, but this is garbage.

Start showing us some respect.

Folks, we have a winner! This is the VERY THING that has been occuring since RedZone's conception. :beerme:

M2
05-31-2006, 12:03 AM
There's not much of anything being reported in the Reds Live game thread. It's deserted, no fun, and I don't even know why there are two game threads. They are supposedly getting "hijacked" and the "old timers" decide to ditch us "new comers" because that would solve the problem. You've got to be kidding me. It's completely unfair to us.

Then start posting in the Reds Live! game thread and make it worthwhile or go into the chat room.

In the meantime, people have voted with their feet on this and the ORG game threads have been a pleasure to read. Say what you will about the decision, but the larger board has made its feelings on the subject quite clear.

wolfboy
05-31-2006, 12:06 AM
There's not much of anything being reported in the Reds Live game thread. It's deserted, no fun, and I don't even know why there are two game threads. They are supposedly getting "hijacked" and the "old timers" decide to ditch us "new comers" because that would solve the problem. You've got to be kidding me. It's completely unfair to us.

Throughout this thread people have said the problem is the lack of respect, but the fact there are two game threads shows absolutely ZERO respect for the people who aren't qualified to post in ORG. Sure, you all like the idea of two game threads, but you aren't restricted to just one. Ask someone who has under 200 rep and we'll see how much they enjoy it.

If that is how you guys feel, then what's the point of having a Reds Live forum? Just get rid of all of us in it, and restrict membership to the site. If all we do is hijack threads, why are we here? Cut the bull and think about it for a second, the "new comers" aren't creating the problem, the "old timers" are, and I'm sick of it. I'm not saying we are completely innocent, but this is garbage.

Start showing us some respect.


I understand you are venting some frustration, but finger pointing isn't a constructive way to do that. It's like M2 said, there isn't one group responsible for the problems around here.

Also, whether there's a reputation system or not, respect is always earned around here, not demanded.

SteelSD
05-31-2006, 12:10 AM
I don't believe Spitball said that telling someone they're wrong ALWAYS makes one a jerk, but that there are those here (often with large post counts, an entirely different issue altogether) that somehow manage to come across as jerks on a consistent basis when correcting others. It's now what you say, or how often you say it, but HOW you say it.

There is no issue with large post counts or large rep point totals. None. The system works, almost without exception, exactly as it should. If you post appreciable items you will gain rep. That's an indisputable fact. If you're not gaining rep, that's a "you" issue. Again, my apologies for being direct in telling you that but it needs to be both said and understood.

Secondly, "how" things are being said is not the current issue. If it were, you would have been banned immediately for your dramatically misplaced "Nerds with Beer" comment in post #193 in this thread. It's curious that you ask for respect but can't give it even when folks are trying to help you out. I'm also curious as to why you feel the forum should change to suit you rather than you changing to suit the forum. Again, that's a "you" issue, not a "board" issue.

If you don't like how the board works, you have an option- leave. Or you could adapt. Your choice, and I'd be happy to mentor you in order for you to stay. You can, of course, refuse that assistance but you need to understand that doing so completely invalidates your opinion as an offer of mentoring is a dramatic show of respect. Do with it what you will but if it's not to your liking then you need to stop complaining immediately.

griffeyfreak4
05-31-2006, 12:11 AM
Yup, your feelings are clear:

We are worthless, you guys are superior, we should bow to you, why bother talk to us?

That's what your feelings on the subject are. But you're saying:

"Lack of respect, everyone calm down, hide rep, quit being sensitive"

Try being reduced to Reds Live. It creates a real sense of a community on this board. You get ripped on, and ditched by a "veteran" for the sole fact that you are new. This is what it feels like: :bang: :bang: :bang: :angry: :angry: :angry:

M2
05-31-2006, 12:12 AM
Also, whether there's a reputation system or not, respect is always earned around here, not demanded.

Another excellent point.

I mentioned this in another thread last week. It's a community. Respect happens and it's got nothing to do with your reputation score.

SteelSD
05-31-2006, 12:15 AM
Also, whether there's a reputation system or not, respect is always earned around here, not demanded.

That's the best point made thusfar. Exceptionally well stated.

griffeyfreak4
05-31-2006, 12:17 AM
Also, whether there's a reputation system or not, respect is always earned around here, not demanded.
So you're telling me that we start out with absolutely no respect. Good to know next time I expect to be treated like a human being.

Maybe I should've asked for some respect, but when you haven't done anything to deserve any disrespect, I don't know why it's being fed to me. It's bull.

SteelSD
05-31-2006, 12:19 AM
Yup, your feelings are clear:

We are worthless, you guys are superior, we should bow to you, why bother talk to us?

That's what your feelings on the subject are. But you're saying:

"Lack of respect, everyone calm down, hide rep, quit being sensitive"

Try being reduced to Reds Live. It creates a real sense of a community on this board. You get ripped on, and ditched by a "veteran" for the sole fact that you are new. This is what it feels like: :bang: :bang: :bang: :angry: :angry: :angry:

What's holding you back from gaining the rep points necessary to post on the ORG board? Think about it because there's only one correct answer.

paintmered
05-31-2006, 12:20 AM
There is no issue with large post counts or large rep point totals. None. The system works, almost without exception, exactly as it should. If you post appreciable items you will gain rep. That's an indisputable fact. If you're not gaining rep, that's a "you" issue. Again, my apologies for being direct in telling you that but it needs to be both said and understood.

I would also like to point out that there have been a few posters that have gained their 200 rep points after just a handful of posts simply because their posts were that outstanding. GullyFoyle comes to mind. It can be done. It has been done.

griffeyfreak4
05-31-2006, 12:20 AM
Another excellent point.

I mentioned this in another thread last week. It's a community. Respect happens and it's got nothing to do with your reputation score.
If that's the truth, then why is it that us with the lower reps are being isolated. It's a community where you are citizens and we are nothing, insignificant. Sure makes it feel like a community.

gonelong
05-31-2006, 12:20 AM
Cut the bull and think about it for a second, the "new comers" aren't creating the problem, the "old timers" are, and I'm sick of it. I'm not saying we are completely innocent, but this is garbage.

You don't just get to walk into someones house, pee on the carpet, and demand things work the way you want them ... yet we see it here on a continual basis.

This board was built by members that have contributed to it for years. It is what it is because of those people, and they deserve a bit of special consideration for what they have contributed in time, money (yes money), and content to build this community. The community is here because it was built, its not here to specifically serve you.

You don't just get to hop on the train and have full membership and ownership from day one. No where else in life does anyone expect this or flat out demand it, however, lots of people act like its a right here.


Start showing us some respect.

Respect can only be earned.

GL

saboforthird
05-31-2006, 12:26 AM
Steel, this thread was never titled "SteelSD, only your opinion counts". Was it? Please, keep your personal attacks to yourself. Also, many here do not care for your condescending attempts at "helping" others. Nobody needs your "help".

This is an Internet forum. Not a crisis center. Seriously, I never said I wanted to leave, YOU said that. Please stop trying to put words in the mouths of others. You've been doing that for as long as I can remember.

Want the truth? I don't think you do. I bet you will respond with yet another personal attack along the lines of pointing a finger and saying "bad boy". No one here needs your mentoring, either.

This is a community forum, SteelSD, not your forum for soliciting your all-worldly Internet counseling services. Sorry, but Boss-Hog CLEARLY said that there would be no names mentioned in this thread (both you and I managed to do that to one another), but your post really got my goat.

I believe that until the rep point system is rectified -- it needs repair as many here have more than sufficiently stated (and supported) -- the best remedy I can come up with is putting you on ignore. That's a much better form of action to change my perspective on the community around me, then running around trying to play Father RedsZone to posters that don't agree with me. Happy posting! :D

griffeyfreak4
05-31-2006, 12:27 AM
You don't just get to walk into someones house, pee on the carpet, and demand things work the way you want them ... yet we see it here on a continual basis.

This board was built by members that have contributed to it for years. It is what it is because of those people, and they deserve a bit of special consideration for what they have contributed in time, money (yes money), and content to build this community. The community is here because it was built, its not here to specifically serve you.

You don't just get to hop on the train and have full membership and ownership from day one. No where else in life does anyone expect this or flat out demand it, however, lots of people act like its a right here.

GL

When I first came here I completely understood the idea of having to earn your rep. It made sense to me, and I don't have a problem with it. It's just now we (the board) are beginning to have a problem, and we one Reds Live are taking the blame when I don't see why we should. I don't expect to walk in here and be able to run the place, but until recently I never felt this feeling of insignificance.

pedro
05-31-2006, 12:27 AM
My my, this is going well.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-31-2006, 12:30 AM
The reputation system and "date joined" works.

I'm even more convinced of it now after reading the last couple pages of this thread.

saboforthird
05-31-2006, 12:34 AM
The reputation system and "date joined" works.

I'm even more convinced of it now after reading the last couple pages of this thread.

Good for you. Doesn't make it any more right than those that disagree with you, though. In fact, this thread indicates there ARE problems with both of those things you mentioned. Seems the old-timers (and those that want to be) here have a problem with the truth getting out.

M2
05-31-2006, 12:35 AM
If that's the truth, then why is it that us with the lower reps are being isolated. It's a community where you are citizens and we are nothing, insignificant. Sure makes it feel like a community.

I think you're taking it overboard more than a little bit. The only thing that's been done is two separate game threads have been created. Literally that's been the only change.

It's been done because a lot of folks who've been around long enough to know thought the quality of the game threads would improve that way. They were right. This hasn't been done to excluded you or to make you feel insignificant. It's an online baseball site, it really shouldn't have that kind of power over you anyway.

As for respect, I don't not respect you, but I don't really know you. If you stick around long enough, people will get to know you better. I mean, when you move to a new town you don't expect to get invited to every party as soon as you show up. It's the same here.

pedro
05-31-2006, 12:37 AM
Good for you. Doesn't make it any more right than those that disagree with you, though. In fact, this thread indicates there ARE problems with both of those things you mentioned. Seems the old-timers (and those that want to be) here have a problem with the truth getting out.

It seems to me that you might be being a little presumptuous being that you've only been a member for 25 days.

Caveat Emperor
05-31-2006, 12:38 AM
Steel, this thread was never titled "SteelSD, only your opinion counts". Was it? Please, keep your personal attacks to yourself. Also, many here do not care for your condescending attempts at "helping" others. Nobody needs your "help".

This is an Internet forum. Not a crisis center. Seriously, I never said I wanted to leave, YOU said that. Please stop trying to put words in the mouths of others. You've been doing that for as long as I can remember.

Want the truth? I don't think you do. I bet you will respond with yet another personal attack along the lines of pointing a finger and saying "bad boy". No one here needs your mentoring, either.

This is a community forum, SteelSD, not your forum for soliciting your all-worldly Internet counseling services. Sorry, but Boss-Hog CLEARLY said that there would be no names mentioned in this thread (both you and I managed to do that to one another), but your post really got my goat.

I believe that until the rep point system is rectified -- it needs repair as many here have more than sufficiently stated (and supported) -- the best remedy I can come up with is putting you on ignore. That's a much better form of action to change my perspective on the community around me, then running around trying to play Father RedsZone to posters that don't agree with me. Happy posting! :D

This post adds nothing to the discussion and seeks only to inflame other posters. This is a textbook example of why threads get closed, why people get angry, and why mods get frustrated.

This should've been a Private Message to Steel that would allow you two to work things out. Instead, you've brought discussion to a screeching halt because you have a personal issue with another poster.

Posts like these are what necesstiated this thread. Stop, please.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-31-2006, 12:38 AM
Sabo, you seem to have a ton of issues with this board for someone that hasn't been here a whole month. What's the deal?

Were you under another handle during the RedZone's "conception" or have you really only been here for 25 days and have all these issues?

Because if it's really only been 25 day, man, I don't know what to say.

griffeyfreak4
05-31-2006, 12:38 AM
There is no issue with large post counts or large rep point totals. None. The system works, almost without exception, exactly as it should. If you post appreciable items you will gain rep. That's an indisputable fact. If you're not gaining rep, that's a "you" issue. Again, my apologies for being direct in telling you that but it needs to be both said and understood.

Secondly, "how" things are being said is not the current issue. If it were, you would have been banned immediately for your dramatically misplaced "Nerds with Beer" comment in post #193 in this thread. It's curious that you ask for respect but can't give it even when folks are trying to help you out. I'm also curious as to why you feel the forum should change to suit you rather than you changing to suit the forum. Again, that's a "you" issue, not a "board" issue.

If you don't like how the board works, you have an option- leave. Or you could adapt. Your choice, and I'd be happy to mentor you in order for you to stay. You can, of course, refuse that assistance but you need to understand that doing so completely invalidates your opinion as an offer of mentoring is a dramatic show of respect. Do with it what you will but if it's not to your liking then you need to stop complaining immediately.

First, I gotta say :clap:

Secondly, you did an excellent job of making yourself appear to be extremely superior to sabo, and showed him the ultimate sign of respect by basically telling him you're better than him.

Thirdly, the second point I made is the problem of lately, "old timers" letting us know we mean nothing, are insignificant, and showing us how WE are the problem.

wolfboy
05-31-2006, 12:39 AM
So you're telling me that we start out with absolutely no respect. Good to know next time I expect to be treated like a human being.

Maybe I should've asked for some respect, but when you haven't done anything to deserve any disrespect, I don't know why it's being fed to me. It's bull.

Look, what I said wasn't a judgement statement. It's fact around here. If you want respect, you'll have to earn it Start by taking the time to learn what this place is about. Redszone is very much about the personalities that exist within it. If you ever learn anything about this place, that is of the utmost importance.

If you post a rash, off the top of your head post, certain members won't care for it. They'll usually let you know about it. That's part of their "redszone personality" if you will. Once you understand that, you can avoid it completely. If you bring well reasoned, thought out posts, you will earn respect quickly. It has nothing to do with being a "stathead" or anything else. It's simple. Take the time to learn a bit about how the board works, and bring your best when you post. I'll just about guarantee that if you take that approach, you won't be demanding respect, you'll be earning it.