PDA

View Full Version : Survey of RedsZone



RFS62
08-01-2006, 01:14 PM
Here's a poll to allow everyone comment on their overall satisfaction with the level of discourse here at RedsZone.

Question:

What's your opinion of the current tone of the board?

shredda2000
08-01-2006, 01:18 PM
I believe the tone is a bit heated. However, I think this stems of everyone's PASSION for their REDS. The Reds have not been in a playoff race in a while, and I think everyone (me included) wants everything to go perfectly to make sure the REDS reach the playoffs!!!

Falls City Beer
08-01-2006, 01:18 PM
I believe the tone is a bit heated. However, I think this stems of everyone's PASSION for their REDS. The Reds have not been in a playoff race in a while, and I think everyone (me included) wants everything to go perfectly to make sure the REDS reach the playoffs!!!

The man's nailed it.

Mr Red
08-01-2006, 01:24 PM
Its been awhile since I have posted but I'm on here everyday single day...several times a day and I don't have any issues with the tone of the board. You learn real quick who the legit posters are and likewise you learn who the blowhards are. I read those posters who are legit and ignore the others.
Probably one of the greatest features of this messageboard is the ability to preview a message before pulling it up.

TOBTTReds
08-01-2006, 01:28 PM
It's goint to be heated. Think about when you go to a game in August this year compared to last. If we lose tonight, won't you be more dissapointed than you were last year when we lost a game in August? You'll be more upset about bad lineups too or poor coaching decisions. Winning doesn't solve everything for fans, it makes things more important.

ThornWithin81
08-01-2006, 01:40 PM
I went with the first option. I bounce back and forth between the first and the second options on this one. For a team that hasn't had a winning record in the better part of a decade, everyone seems rather negative. Also, I'm getting really sick of the Clayton-bashing and the "PLAY EE!" stuff. It's quickly become repetitive for me, and the EE related posts are rather silly in my book. Early in the year, EE and Lopez were an error-mess. Aurillia is the veteran, and the kind of guy that I want on the field in August in a season that counts. EE will likely start for us next year, or at worst, be traded for a valuable player.

As for Clayton, his numbers at the time of the trade were very similar to those of Felipe Lopez, with slightly better fielding. If Clayton is the weak point of our team...we're in pretty good shape.

I love the forum though, don't get me wrong. It's just more critical than I was expecting when we're having a good year. But I guess that's the nature of a fanbase.

SunDeck
08-01-2006, 01:44 PM
There are trolls and people with poop in their pants everywhere. It's never really bothered me here- I prefer to converse with those who's attitudes I admire. The others can pound sand with an oar for all I care, but they'll never get a rise out of me.

MississippiRed
08-01-2006, 01:46 PM
I voted in the middle. I see the points of the negative posters and the optimism of the happy posters. I think you need both sides to have a good message board. I don't skip posts because of the poster (maybe I haven't been around long enough).

If everyone agreed with everything that was said, wouldn't it be very boring here?

Chip R
08-01-2006, 01:46 PM
I think it smells very nice but I prefer Speed Stick since it is a little cheaper.

KittyDuran
08-01-2006, 02:26 PM
I think it smells very nice but I prefer Speed Stick since it is a little cheaper.a big :thumbup: for noticing the missing "s"...!:)

ochre
08-01-2006, 02:27 PM
I think there aren't nearly enough options in this poll.

DeadRedinCT
08-01-2006, 03:03 PM
I was told there would be free beer if I joined. Man... I'm thirsty.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 04:32 PM
I was told there would be free beer if I joined. Man... I'm thirsty.

Years ago, creek promised us unclothed women if we left the EZboard version of Redszone for this site.. She still hasn't delievered :laugh:

KittyDuran
08-01-2006, 04:50 PM
Years ago, creek promised us unclothed women if we left the EZboard version of Redszone for this site.. She still hasn't delievered :laugh:You haven't been to chat...sometimes me and TeamCasey go topless. Or for the ladies, GAC takes his pants off...:devil:

KronoRed
08-01-2006, 05:13 PM
Balance rocks, koolaid lovers would get annoying :devil:

Heath
08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
You haven't been to chat...sometimes me and TeamCasey go topless. Or for the ladies, GAC takes his pants off...:devil:

In fact, KittyDuran always types topless.

Well, so she says anyway.

What's the question again?

Spring~Fields
08-01-2006, 06:06 PM
Redszone one of the most informative with an anbundance of intelligent, thinking posters and management type personalities always ready to analyze.

The tone is fantastic, people who think, people who care, people who are not afraid to say what is on their minds.

George Grande types come across as shallow and pretentious to me, I love it when the fans tell it like it is. Without them, Jimmy Haynes and Bob Boone would still be here.

MaineRed
08-01-2006, 06:07 PM
I never understand why so many are so quick to predict the future. The comments that things will eventually fall apart are what get to me.

I was shocked reading the comments in the Cormier thread. We get the guy with the best ERA in baseball (out of the bullpen) and a lot of the talk was about how he is due for a major slump to get back to his career norms.

Gabe White stunk for us, may have cost us a play-off berth in 99 and 99.9% of Reds fans wanted his useless butt gone. But he goes to Colorado of all places and shines. He even made an All MLB team one year after leaving the Reds. Guys can pitch better than their career norms. It happens all the time.

I understand not being 100% optimistic but the doom and gloom makes me gloomy.

creek14
08-01-2006, 06:16 PM
Years ago, creek promised us unclothed women if we left the EZboard version of Redszone for this site.. She still hasn't delievered :laugh:
Darlin, now that I've lost weight there isn't much left worth seeing.

But I did flash bucksfan and his buddies Todd:luvu: and Corey when they were here for a game a couple months ago. :devil:

GOREDSGO32
08-01-2006, 06:17 PM
I notice a lot of hate on ridiculous things. It's like 'oh play so and so youngster', and if they suck - no response. Any veteran does anything bad its, oh they are washed up why did we sign this guy. The amount of hate for certain players is ridiculous. I remember all the hate of signing Rich Aurilia in the first place, and then again this year, and he's done a heck of a job.

Too much hate on veterans, and front office quarterbacking IMO.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 06:55 PM
You haven't been to chat...sometimes me and TeamCasey go topless. :

In that case, we definitely need to get you up to Columbus for the next Columbus Redszone get together :laugh:


Or for the ladies, GAC takes his pants off...:devil:

Please :( , I was trying to eat dinner at my desk...

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 06:59 PM
Gabe White stunk for us, may have cost us a play-off berth in 99 and 99.9% of Reds fans wanted his useless butt gone.


Not trying to be argumentive, but Jack McKeon buried White at the end of the bullpen that year. He was ineffective because he wasn't used enough. White was hardly used enough to blame him for losing a playoff spot.

It was no surprise to me that White had a good year after he left. He needed more use. He even said so during the 99 season.

For the most part, White had a real nice career. Of course, at the end, he crashed hard, as most pitchers do.

Crash Davis
08-01-2006, 07:14 PM
Here's a poll to allow everyone comment on their overall satisfaction with the level of discourse here at RedsZone.

Question:

What's your opinion of the current tone of the board?

It's all in your head, remember?

Every other post isn't really about how half the spots in the lineup card are wrong on a nightly basis. It just seems that way.

Rich Aurilia isn't hitting .190...it just seems that way.

Scott Hatterberg clearly isn't washed up...that must have been just our imagination.

Wayne Krivsky is a joke. First Bronson Arroyo. Then Brandon Phillips. David Ross, are you kidding me? Everyday Eddie Guardado. Please. I know many here who could have done so much better than that.

How long, Oh Lord? How Long?

westofyou
08-01-2006, 07:32 PM
He needed more use. He even said so during the 99 season.

What's his excuse for 2001?

MaineRed
08-01-2006, 09:40 PM
In 2002, White posted an ERA below 3, pitching 54 innings.

Now consider what REDREAD said:

"He was ineffective because he wasn't used enough. White was hardly used enough to blame him for losing a playoff spot."

He was pretty effective in the 54 innings he pitched in 2002. How many did he pitch in 1999 you ask? 61!

So he was garbage in 61 innings and the excuse is that he wasn't used enough to be effective. But 3 years later he was pretty good and he was used less. Please explain?

Maybe I have a selective memory, I didn't have directv or XM in 99 so I didn't see or hear many games, just followed the team thru Baseball Tonight and the rare occasions they were on national tv. But I recall a lot of Gabe White implossions that season. From my perspective that is the season he got the nickname Gasoline Gabe and it wasn't because of his fastball.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 11:14 PM
In 2002, White posted an ERA below 3, pitching 54 innings.

Now consider what REDREAD said:

"He was ineffective because he wasn't used enough. White was hardly used enough to blame him for losing a playoff spot."

He was pretty effective in the 54 innings he pitched in 2002. How many did he pitch in 1999 you ask? 61!

So he was garbage in 61 innings and the excuse is that he wasn't used enough to be effective. But 3 years later he was pretty good and he was used less. Please explain?
l.

He was used once a week in long relief in 1999 (in general). With Col, he was a one inning guy. That's a different usage pattern.. Long relief vs short. Should've clarified.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 11:17 PM
Gabe pitched in 50 games in 1999 (most in the beginning of the season) and 69 games in 2001.

He pitched in 62 games in 2002, the year you cherry picked to try to make your case.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 11:20 PM
What's his excuse for 2001?

Gabe also had a lifetime WHIP of 1.22 and an ERA+ of 103.

He had an 11 year career, so by the same logic that says Clayton hasn't always sucked, Gabe had a nice career.

westofyou
08-01-2006, 11:34 PM
so by the same logic that says Clayton hasn't always sucked, Gabe had a nice career.
4.51 ERA (league 4.36) and 573 innings is an OK career, however I do remember that whne he came back to the Reds he had an excuse... I just can't remember it.

Guess I'll have to dig it up.

MaineRed
08-01-2006, 11:55 PM
I didn't cherry pick it. I looked at his stats and it stood out. You said he stunk in 99 because he wasn't used enough. I found an example of him being pretty good when he was used less and I thought it was worth mentioning. Then again I'm not the one making excuses for the guy.

By the way, the Reds needed one more win to make the play-offs in 99. I think a guy who pitched 60 innings could be more than responsible for blowing it.

Did anyone play more than Gabe White on that 99 team and do less?

If I'm lining up scapegoats for the team failing to get in in 99, I'm starting with White. But as I fully admitted, I was following the team from afar in those days.

Redsland
08-02-2006, 10:42 AM
And with that, a thread surveying the tone of RedsZone devolved into an argument.

:)

KittyDuran
08-02-2006, 10:44 AM
And with that, a thread surveying the tone of RedsZone devolved into an argument.

:)But of course! :thumbup: I'm just amazed that it was an argument about Gabe White, of all people, and not Dunn or Marty...;)

RFS62
08-02-2006, 11:04 AM
But of course! :thumbup: I'm just amazed that it was an argument about Gabe White, of all people, and not Dunn or Marty...;)


It shows our versatility

REDREAD
08-02-2006, 11:14 AM
4.51 ERA (league 4.36) and 573 innings is an OK career, however I do remember that whne he came back to the Reds he had an excuse... I just can't remember it.

Guess I'll have to dig it up.

Ok, I didn't realize you meant he had an excuse, I thought it was a rhetorical question.

I'm not saying that Gabe was the greatest reliever ever. Most quality relievers have off years (especially if they last 11 years). IIRC, Gabe came up with Montreal as a starter, that partially explains some of his bad earlier years, not to mention that he was called up fairly young (around 24 years old).

REDREAD
08-02-2006, 11:19 AM
By the way, the Reds needed one more win to make the play-offs in 99. I think a guy who pitched 60 innings could be more than responsible for blowing it.

Did anyone play more than Gabe White on that 99 team and do less?

If I'm lining up scapegoats for the team failing to get in in 99, I'm starting with White. But as I fully admitted, I was following the team from afar in those days.

Gabe was the fourth or fifth guy out of the bullpen on the depth chart that year. That's like saying if we don't make the playoffs this year, that it's Mercker's fault.

You could pick any player on the 1999 team and find a mistake that they made and say that it cost us the one game to make the playoffs. Williamson and Graves blew a couple saves. Every position player probably made an error and/or failed with runners in scoring position at least once.

To say that the fourth/fifth option out of the pen cost us the playoffs is just plain silly. If you want to point the finger, how about Jack McKeon starting Parris in the tie breaker game, when Neagle was fit enough to go 3 innings and the pen was deep? Or how about the goats in the losses in that final Milwaukee series?

REDREAD
08-02-2006, 11:19 AM
But of course! :thumbup: I'm just amazed that it was an argument about Gabe White, of all people, and not Dunn or Marty...;)


We wouldn't want to beat a dead horse.. It was time to find a new topic :laugh:

TeamCasey
08-02-2006, 12:53 PM
I think it smells very nice but I prefer Speed Stick since it is a little cheaper.

:nono:

TeamCasey
08-02-2006, 12:55 PM
You haven't been to chat...sometimes me and TeamCasey go topless. Or for the ladies, GAC takes his pants off...:devil:

What happens in chat stays in chat !!!!! :rant2:

(BTW, that little rant smiley is awesome! Krono add it to the peanut gallery, please.)

Reds Nd2
08-02-2006, 01:01 PM
In fact, KittyDuran always types topless.

Well, so she says anyway.

What's the question again?

If the answer is, "KittyDuran always types topless".

Who cares what the question is? :)

MaineRed
08-02-2006, 01:18 PM
Gabe was the fourth or fifth guy out of the bullpen on the depth chart that year. That's like saying if we don't make the playoffs this year, that it's Mercker's fault.


If the Reds miss the play-offs because they lose a one game play-off and someone explains to me that they didn't follow the team that much but whenever they did, it seemed Merker would come in and blow a lead, I won't argue if they blame Merker for the team not making the play-offs. There are bigger things to worry about. Well for some of us.

Of course you can blame anyone when you miss it by one game. I was not disputing that. I don't believe I said White was solely responsible. He's just the guy I, "blame", the most.

If the Reds miss it by one game this year, everyone will have their own take on who is most responsible. Some will say Weathers, some will say Clayton, others will say a guy like Merker because by coincidence they were paying attention more when he stunk. Its life dude.

REDREAD
08-02-2006, 01:30 PM
Of course you can blame anyone when you miss it by one game. I was not disputing that. I don't believe I said White was solely responsible. He's just the guy I, "blame", the most.


Ok, you are certainly entitled to blame White for 1999. Really, I don't blame anyone for 1999 (although I was furious at Jack for starting Parris in the tie breaker game). But now, I realize that everyone on that team really overachieved and did their best. They just came up a bit short.

Likewise, if this team fails to make the playoffs, I'm not really sure I'd blame anyone specifically. This team wasn't expected to contend. It's only contending due to the mediocrity of the rest of the league. I'm not even going to blame Wayne that the Wash trade killed our contention chances, because overall, he's moved this team forward. I don't agree with some of Narron's moves, but I'm not going to blame him (or Clayton) if we miss the WC. We've made good progress this year overall, and with the right moves we can get better next year.

Chip R
08-02-2006, 01:30 PM
I don't agree with RedsZone's Bart-killing policy, but I do approve of RedsZone's Selma-killing policy.

M2
08-02-2006, 01:33 PM
The board's just like any other place.

It's got a mix of folks. Some back and attempt to rationalize every single move the team makes while others offer reasoned support for the team's decisions. Some congenitally complain about the Reds while others look to provide reasoned criticism.

When I posted in favor of the Arroyo-Pena trade, there were a lot of people I respect making valid points on the other side of it. When I posted against the recent blockbuster there were a lot of folks I respect making valid points on the other side of it.

So I picked option B because in a public forum you've got to learn to filter out the noise and allow for the fact that not everyone's genteel. Perhaps there are those who are making a reasonable point too often or too vociferously, but it beats leaving the stone half-turned.

What I have noticed over the years is the "gO rEdZ" faction tends to lump valid criticism in with incessant complaint and grouse about both while the "hater" faction tends to be more self-obsessed and concerned more about the next fusillade than the responses drawn by the last one.

M2
08-02-2006, 01:38 PM
If any one player on the Reds roster cost the team an automatic playoff berth in 1999, it was Brett Tomko. If he doesn't disintegrate that season, the Reds would have won 100 games easy.

15fan
08-02-2006, 02:04 PM
Fire In The Hole! Tomko.

:angry: :yikes: :barf: :rant2: :censored: :runawaycr :rant:

:explode: :bash: :thumbdown

10 cent head is being generous by about 9.9 cents...

RFS62
08-02-2006, 02:05 PM
Well, so far we've got 65 people who think we're overrun with whining crybabies and 67 people who are happy with the mix of emotions and analysis.

And somehow, FCB managed to vote 6 times that there is way too much optimism.

Personally, I think M2 nailed it. I don't mind great analysis in a negative vein if there's a thought process behind it. Same with optimism.

But the childish drivel on both ends of the spectrum, or "noise" as I believe WOY first described it a while back, well, that's like sitting at a ballgame and having to listen to a loud, obnoxious fan behind you who can't shut up and doesn't have a clue.

It's not fun. And it detracts from the many great posters here who I really want to read.

KittyDuran
08-02-2006, 02:08 PM
And somehow, FCB managed to vote 6 times that there is way too much optimism.No him and red-in-la split the vote...:devil:

zombie-a-go-go
08-02-2006, 02:13 PM
I don't care for the choices. Half-full, half-empty... I like to hear both sides, but it's the manner in which those sides are presented anymore that prevents me from wanting to do anything more than "scan for bad words" on this site.

:dunno:

REDREAD
08-02-2006, 02:20 PM
It's not fun. And it detracts from the many great posters here who I really want to read.

But as M2 said, you've got to learn to filter it out. Unless you want an uber strict moderated board like JaxRed had a few years ago, you're going to have some noise on any internet site.

gonelong
08-02-2006, 02:28 PM
But the childish drivel on both ends of the spectrum, or "noise" as I believe WOY first described it a while back, well, that's like sitting at a ballgame and having to listen to a loud, obnoxious fan behind you who can't shut up and doesn't have a clue.

It's not fun. And it detracts from the many great posters here who I really want to read.

In all seriousness, how many posters have you negged for this behavior?

I am gearing up to go a negging run. I don't mind a bit of it, but its getting out of hand. I'd go hang exclusively at the Old Red Guard board, but is only slightly better there.

This site has grown so much that its reaching maximum density. IMO its only a matter of time before it explodes.

GL

shredda2000
08-02-2006, 02:37 PM
Don't know if this has been mentioned before...maybe Redszone could have another section called "REDS RANT" where posters could go to get out there frustrations? However, I am not sure separation would be a good thing. Just a thought...

Reds Nd2
08-02-2006, 02:38 PM
But the childish drivel on both ends of the spectrum, or "noise" as I believe WOY first described it a while back, well, that's like sitting at a ballgame and having to listen to a loud, obnoxious fan behind you who can't shut up and doesn't have a clue.

It's not fun. And it detracts from the many great posters here who I really want to read.

Very well put '62. I agree with M2 that it's necessary to filter out the noise. The problem is, the noise has reached such decibels lately, it is nearly impossible to filter out.

M2
08-02-2006, 02:39 PM
One thing to add about game threads, the beauty/problem with baseball is that it moves slow enough to allow for extended conversation. It's great when that conversation interests and annoying when you've hit the "shut up, I get it already" point.

I actually like foks on both ends of the positive/negative extreme in the game threads. For instance, after Rich Aurilia does something right against a RHP you invariably get someone posting that maybe Jerry Narron does know what he's doing and that Rich should be hitting cleanup against RHPs after all. That person is of course wrong about Narron knowing what he's doing in terms of hitting Aurilia cleanup against righties, but I like a good lineup construction debate and usually someone says something intelligent or funny along the way. Plus, as long as Narron keeps writing "Aurilia - 3B" in the 4 slot of the lineup with a RHP on the mound, these things are bound to come up.

On the flipside, premature gloom predictions give you a chance to post about why things might go right. For instance, in the last Astros series FCB opened the door for me to post that one run for Harang was probably enough to beat a Berkman-less Astros lineup. It was. We also got renew our season-long tennis match on Taylor Buchholz (I'm now serving for quadruple match point). For the record, I don't considered FCB negative. He cares more than most here about how the team does and he's descriptively gifted. He's one of my absolute favorite posters because I enjoy it when I disagree with him every bit as much as I do when I agree with him. When I disagree with a negative take of his in a game thread it just gives me something else to root for during the game.

Falls City Beer
08-02-2006, 02:40 PM
What I'll never understand is why people who get mad at fans for "bailing" on the team turn around and bail on this site. If you don't like the tone, change it. Use your influence to talk about some interesting observation you've made, positive or negative. Or do what Cyclone does--post some stats and facts and see what people can make of them.

dabvu2498
08-02-2006, 02:44 PM
The only thing that I would like to add about the "tone" is that I actually think people root for Rich to fail or Clayton to make an error or Narron to make a bad decision, just so they'll be right.

Exhibit A: Page 1 from last night's ORG game thred.

NJReds
08-02-2006, 02:46 PM
The only thing that bugs me about message boards (in general) is when it seems like someone roots against a player because it proves a point that he/she made in the past. But that's an 'mlb.com' problem, not so much a RedsZone problem.

However, in a gamethread, if someone posts "well, game over" after the Reds allow a run in the top of the first, don't be surprised if there's some backlash from other posters if the Reds come back and win.

Cedric
08-02-2006, 02:46 PM
What I'll never understand is why people who get mad at fans for "bailing" on the team turn around and bail on this site. If you don't like the tone, change it. Use your influence to talk about some interesting observation you've made, positive or negative. Or do what Cyclone does--post some stats and facts and see what people can make of them.

Nobody should get called out for "bailing" on the team. I don't think there is anyone here that dislikes the Cincinnati Reds because they have strong viewpoints against the latest moves. That's why I think the people questioning you about your fanship was way overboard.

I think this type of board flareup was inevitable after all the big moves that just occurred. People are going to have strong feelings on both sides of the issues and with those feelings there will be ego bruising when you are told you are wrong. It used to happen every year during the draft threads. The posters personality get's challenged more than the posters viewpoints, that's wrong but almost inevitable on an open forum.

M2
08-02-2006, 02:48 PM
The only thing that I would like to add about the "tone" is that I actually think people root for Rich to fail or Clayton to make an error or Narron to make a bad decision, just so they'll be right.

Exhibit A: Page 1 from last night's ORG game thred.

I read the comment in question as fairly blatant sarcasm.

ochre
08-02-2006, 03:06 PM
However, in a gamethread, if someone posts "well, game over" after the Reds allow a run in the top of the first, don't be surprised if there's some backlash from other posters if the Reds come back and win.
but even that isn't really the problem. The problem is the follow on Tsunamai of outcries about the spur of the moment comment(s).

NJReds
08-02-2006, 04:24 PM
but even that isn't really the problem. The problem is the follow on Tsunamai of outcries about the spur of the moment comment(s).

Isn't a gamethread all about spur of the moment comments?

Ltlabner
08-02-2006, 06:34 PM
We wouldn't want to beat a dead horse.. It was time to find a new topic :laugh:


Yea, Dunn and Marty are so passe. We need to argue over fresh new things like EE vs Ra, or Clayton vs Castro or Paper vs Plastic. ;)

KronoRed
08-02-2006, 06:39 PM
What happens in chat stays in chat !!!!! :rant2:

(BTW, that little rant smiley is awesome! Krono add it to the peanut gallery, please.)
Done :D

DeadRedinCT
08-02-2006, 07:56 PM
Yea, Dunn and Marty are so passe. We need to argue over fresh new things like EE vs Ra, or Clayton vs Castro or Paper vs Plastic. ;)

Tastes great!

RFS62
08-02-2006, 08:05 PM
In all seriousness, how many posters have you negged for this behavior?

I am gearing up to go a negging run. I don't mind a bit of it, but its getting out of hand. I'd go hang exclusively at the Old Red Guard board, but is only slightly better there.

This site has grown so much that its reaching maximum density. IMO its only a matter of time before it explodes.

GL


You know, you're right. I negged someone the first day we had the rep system, and nobody else ever since then.

And a 16 year old kid negged me the other day for saying on the game thread that Narron left Milton in too long the start before last.

I've got socks older than that kid, and he's negging me, not that I care a whit about rep points.

But I've always felt bad about negging anyone, and maybe I should rethink that approach.

I think you're right, GL. It's just a numbers thing. Endless waves of well meaning newbies going through all the old debates for the first time.

It's pretty hard to see all the same old fights over and over. But I was part of the original war, so I have to respect their growth and give them time to learn.

But it clutters up the board. Makes it much harder to find content you want to read.

To plan for the future, you have to decide if you accept the notion that at some point, too many posters will ruin the board..... make it no fun for the people who built it and sustained it over the years. If you accept the idea that at some point that will happen, then all that's in question is where is that point.

If you don't accept that, and think that we can handle unlimited growth and still be an elite forum for baseball discussion, then do nothing.

But if you do, as I do, determining what number is acceptable is the only question.

The mission statement of RedsZone seems to evolve to suit the conditions of the day.

Just for the record, I'm completely OK with analysis that I don't agree with, as long as there's a thought process involved. It's all the "he sucks" crap that's adding a large percentage of the noise. And it seems like a lot of people agree. That's why I posted that poll. I thought a lot of people were tired of the sniveling.

I'm never tired of analysis like Cyclones. I love it.

I'm completely sick of the mindless yapping that really waters down a tremendous resource.

gonelong
08-03-2006, 11:35 AM
You know, you're right. I negged someone the first day we had the rep system, and nobody else ever since then.

I am probably starting to sound like a broken record, but I think the Old Red Guard members are seriously failing this board in that regard. IMO its a total dereliction of duty. Negligence if you will.


And a 16 year old kid negged me the other day for saying on the game thread that Narron left Milton in too long the start before last.

I've got socks older than that kid, and he's negging me, not that I care a whit about rep points.

Get 100 people together anywhere and some of them will be knuckleheads. Get a 1000 of them together and you'll have more than a handful.


But I've always felt bad about negging anyone, and maybe I should rethink that approach.

I don't feel the least bit bad about negging anyone when all they add to the board is "Narron sucks". This board runs on donations. When I see drivel such as that I feel bad for the people who have donated time and money over the years to keep this board running. I feel bad for the people that helped build this board by providing thoughtful comments, enlightening debate, research, theories, etc.


I think you're right, GL. It's just a numbers thing. Endless waves of well meaning newbies going through all the old debates for the first time.

I had high hopes for the Old Red Guard. I had hoped that the majority of posters would post 80% of their content there, forcing a newcomer to mind his Ps and Qs in order to earn their way into the conversation.


It's pretty hard to see all the same old fights over and over. But I was part of the original war, so I have to respect their growth and give them time to learn.

But it clutters up the board. Makes it much harder to find content you want to read.

IMO the answer is to post on ORG almost exclusively. Leave the old debates to the guys that haven't had them yet. Chip in on Live occasionally when the topic interests you.


To plan for the future, you have to decide if you accept the notion that at some point, too many posters will ruin the board..... make it no fun for the people who built it and sustained it over the years. If you accept the idea that at some point that will happen, then all that's in question is where is that point.

Maybe I just need a break from the board, I used to take a few months off to recharge the batteries, but I haven't done that lately.

I think people have already reached this conclusion ... its why ORG was created.


Just for the record, I'm completely OK with analysis that I don't agree with, as long as there's a thought process involved. It's all the "he sucks" crap that's adding a large percentage of the noise. And it seems like a lot of people agree. That's why I posted that poll. I thought a lot of people were tired of the sniveling.

I prefer the analysis I don't agree with. It forces me to examine why I believe what I believe. Might I be missing something? What have I not accounted for? I came here a 100% "baseball guy" ... eventually I evolved into a 90% "numbers guy". I'd say I'm sitting at 80% numbers guy and 20% baseball guy at the moment.

The "he sucks" stuff has went way to far. IMO its time for the ORG members to step to the plate and do something about it. Get the bat off the shoulder if you will.


I'm never tired of analysis like Cyclones. I love it.

Absolutely.


I'm completely sick of the mindless yapping that really waters down a tremendous resource.

Agreed.

I have been wondering if it might make sense to create another board that is nothing but game theads. I don't read them on this board and find it a bit annoying to have to skip over them on a day to day basis. Plus, if you put them on their own you'd have a nice place to group them and it'd be easy to find a specific game if you wanted to.

GL