PDA

View Full Version : Quality of Posts in the Sun Deck



Reds Freak
05-30-2007, 01:53 PM
My fellow Sun Deck posters, as some have noted in other forums, I have noticed a decline in the quality of posts in the Sun Deck since the big changes. In no way am I saying that the posters here are inferior to those at the ORG, but the quality of some posts seems to be missing. For example, I believe I count four threads that were started and are currently on the first page of the SD that are one line comments about the what happened during the specific game. I don't believe one line observations merit their own thread. Reds44 has started posting post game observation threads in which I think those type of posts are more appropriate.

Two reasons I think this hurts the quality of the Sun Deck board. One, it is hard to have a meaningful baseball discussion in a thread that only contains one sentence. If you are going to start a thread, put some thought behind it and make it a solid post. If you have a one sentence comment or observation try to find the thread in which it might belong. Secondly, the threads that have been started that are well-thought out and solid get lost in the mess and I have a hard time finding them. This hurts the quality of the conversation and the posters who are making good posts.

So I guess my point is I don't think a thread should be started unless you have a developed and well thought out point or question. Right now I see a lot of "useless" threads that are hard to comment on. Am I off base here, what do others think?

bucksfan2
05-30-2007, 01:59 PM
My fellow Sun Deck posters, as some have noted in other forums, I have noticed a decline in the quality of posts in the Sun Deck since the big changes. In no way am I saying that the posters here are inferior to those at the ORG, but the quality of some posts seems to be missing. For example, I believe I count four threads that were started and are currently on the first page of the SD that are one line comments about the what happened during the specific game. I don't believe one line observations merit their own thread. Reds44 has started posting post game observation threads in which I think those type of posts are more appropriate.

Two reasons I think this hurts the quality of the Sun Deck board. One, it is hard to have a meaningful baseball discussion in a thread that only contains one sentence. If you are going to start a thread, put some thought behind it and make it a solid post. If you have a one sentence comment or observation try to find the thread in which it might belong. Secondly, the threads that have been started that are well-thought out and solid get lost in the mess and I have a hard time finding them. This hurts the quality of the conversation and the posters who are making good posts.

So I guess my point is I don't think a thread should be started unless you have a developed and well thought out point or question. Right now I see a lot of "useless" threads that are hard to comment on. Am I off base here, what do others think?

I joined a few months ago and have enjoyed the now called "Sun Deck". I enjoy the debate, competitive banter, and people posting in the reds. I dont see anything wrong with the way it is now. I also do see a whole lot of chance since it was the reds live section.

bounty37h
05-30-2007, 02:02 PM
I think this thread is useless ;)

muethibp
05-30-2007, 02:36 PM
I don't understand the complaining about stupid threads. The internet is fantastic for 1000 reasons, one of them is that true market principles apply to thread creations. If the thread is worthless, it quickly plunges to the bottom as superior postings generate interest and discussion and stay at the top. If your gripe is that other threads are getting in the way of quality, this one does that too.

That's why I have little understanding of the structured hierarchy at this site. Rather than allowing good posts and bad posts to be rated by market principles on one collective board, with the good posts staying up top and the bad ones getting pushed away, this site relies on an inefficient popularity contest. While the goal is to have the highest quality posts (and don't get me wrong, the site owners can do whatever they want), the irony is that it forces good conversation into multiple places, bars people from responding to posts in ORG where they have something of value to say (or forcing the creation of a parallel Sun Deck thread), relegates strong posters to second class status, and generally stifles the quality of the site.

Moosie52
05-30-2007, 02:46 PM
It's apparent to me that we are deemed to be second class posters, not good enough to be included (actually retained) in the Old Guard. I understand the desire to weed out immature posts, but it seems to me that the baby was thrown out with the bath water. There is more to life than baseball statistics. In fact, there is more to baseball than baseball statistics. There is humor, inspiration, and comraderie. There is tragedy, passion, and joy. There are many ideas that have the makings of a great post. Right now I agree, this forum could use some imaginative posts.

muethibp
05-30-2007, 03:04 PM
It's apparent to me that we are deemed to be second class posters, not good enough to be included (actually retained) in the Old Guard. I understand the desire to weed out immature posts, but it seems to me that the baby was thrown out with the bath water. There is more to life than baseball statistics. In fact, there is more to baseball than baseball statistics. There is humor, inspiration, and comraderie. There is tragedy, passion, and joy. There are many ideas that have the makings of a great post. Right now I agree, this forum could use some imaginative posts.

My point is that the way message boards are set-up is the perfect tool for self-wedding out of bad posts. The bad posts don't get responses and go to the bottom. By breaking up the board, the effect that responding to good posts has is actually cut in half. If a terrible post is made at ORG (and we all know there are plenty), it actually stays up far longer than it otherwise would because there is an artificially created scarcity of posters there. If the full collection of Redszoners could post there, it would quickly be beat down by the activity on the good threads.

Reds Freak
05-30-2007, 06:18 PM
I don't understand the complaining about stupid threads. The internet is fantastic for 1000 reasons, one of them is that true market principles apply to thread creations. If the thread is worthless, it quickly plunges to the bottom as superior postings generate interest and discussion and stay at the top. If your gripe is that other threads are getting in the way of quality, this one does that too.

That's why I have little understanding of the structured hierarchy at this site. Rather than allowing good posts and bad posts to be rated by market principles on one collective board, with the good posts staying up top and the bad ones getting pushed away, this site relies on an inefficient popularity contest. While the goal is to have the highest quality posts (and don't get me wrong, the site owners can do whatever they want), the irony is that it forces good conversation into multiple places, bars people from responding to posts in ORG where they have something of value to say (or forcing the creation of a parallel Sun Deck thread), relegates strong posters to second class status, and generally stifles the quality of the site.

That's a very good point, A survival of the fittest posts type thing. However, I don't know if that's happening yet in the Sun Deck. Maybe it just needs time, but at the time that I posted this we had threads at the top that included the announcement of Dunn's sac fly, whether a runner was safe or out last night, and narron picking his lineup out of his hat...

WMR
05-30-2007, 06:21 PM
I don't see why you would want to complain over someone starting a thread over a play that they wish to discuss. There's no game thread available where such a discussion would normally be held.

Furthermore, I'm glad whoever made the thread about Narron's quote about picking his line-ups out of a hat took the time to do so. I probably would have missed that quote otherwise.

FlightRick
05-30-2007, 06:48 PM
I don't understand the complaining about stupid threads. The internet is fantastic for 1000 reasons, one of them is that true market principles apply to thread creations. If the thread is worthless, it quickly plunges to the bottom as superior postings generate interest and discussion and stay at the top.

If "true market principles" applies, then there'd be two major differences with how the internet operates versus the way it does now:

(1) You'd require "capital" (i.e. ideas, intellignece) before launching your "start-up" (thread). The internet does not require you have either. Any fricking clown of subnormal intelligence has the same exact tools and opportunities as somebody who might have something worthwhile to contribute. On the internets, EVERYbody has rich parents who'll loan you $500,000 to buy your own bar, as long as it keeps you from moving back in with them. Viva la unjustified senses of entitlement!

(2) Once somebody failed miserably with their first "start-up" (thread), they'd fade away and take a long time before they mustered up the resources to try another one. If they ever tried another one. Not so here, where you can try, fail, and generally make an ass of yourself in public as many times per day as you want with pointless threadstartery (and pointless posting of vapid replies), without the looming threat of bankruptcy or other public humiliation.

If fact, the way things are structured now, posting is incentivized ("you must have X number of posts before receiving benefit Y"). With no negative incentivization for Idiotic Posting (be it a loosening of the rules to allow for outright mockery and personal insults of dumb posts/posters, or some sort of top-down moderation in which awful threads/posts are deleted and users suspended), the motivation for members to police the quality of their own posts/threads is greatly reduced, too. So say hello to even more poorly-punctuated one-line stupidfests that contain more emoticons than cogent thoughts! And granted, at some level "market forces" will move those threads down the page.... but it hardly matters when there are enough of them present that they kind of gum up the works and make it tougher to find the quality than it needs to be.

All that said: this is not a new problem, it's not unique to RedsZone, and it's not gotten all that worse just because they changed the rules a week ago. So I'm not sure it bears too much further discussion. And if it does, isn't that what the "Comments and Feedback" section is for?

Reds Freak
05-30-2007, 06:50 PM
I don't see why you would want to complain over someone starting a thread over a play that they wish to discuss. There's no game thread available where such a discussion would normally be held.

Furthermore, I'm glad whoever made the thread about Narron's quote about picking his line-ups out of a hat took the time to do so. I probably would have missed that quote otherwise.

I'm not complaining, I'm simply offering suggestions to make the Sun Deck a better board. I know the poster is new to the board but we have one thread here titled "Dunn with a rarity" and the post says "Dunn with a sac fly!". WilyMo, do you think that deserves its own thread? Why not try to improve the posts by including maybe Dunn's career sac fly numbers or some other sac fly stats? I know some (including myself) don't have time to look up stats and such so if not why not post that comment in the game's observation thread? I'm not bashing any particular poster or complaining about the board, I just think we could be having better baseball discussions and the good posts and threads shouldn't be lost...

RedsRFreel
05-30-2007, 07:41 PM
As the guy who posted the thread regarding Adam Dunn's sac fly I must say I thought it more interesting than this thread. To write a thread to complain about a thread is pretty ridiculous. You are taking this stuff way too seriously. I didn't realize I had to check in with you and get your approval to make a post. I didn't realize this was supposed to be such high quality journalism. Wow! I apologize to all of you for ruining your evening with such a frivolous post. I guess I won't do that again! I wouldn't want to waste a second (literally) of your precious time.

WMR
05-30-2007, 07:48 PM
Don't sweat it bro, if it moves you enough to want to discuss it with RZers, make the thread if you don't see another thread that it would fit into.

I would give you one piece of advice though: it's always worth the couple seconds it takes to do a search and maybe just bump that thread with your comment/thought.

WMR
05-30-2007, 07:52 PM
I'm not complaining, I'm simply offering suggestions to make the Sun Deck a better board. I know the poster is new to the board but we have one thread here titled "Dunn with a rarity" and the post says "Dunn with a sac fly!". WilyMo, do you think that deserves its own thread? Why not try to improve the posts by including maybe Dunn's career sac fly numbers or some other sac fly stats? I know some (including myself) don't have time to look up stats and such so if not why not post that comment in the game's observation thread? I'm not bashing any particular poster or complaining about the board, I just think we could be having better baseball discussions and the good posts and threads shouldn't be lost...

Maybe, maybe not, Reds Freak. I just know that I'd rather encourage people to post their thoughts, although I think that my advice in the previous post is sound.

Reds Freak
05-30-2007, 08:11 PM
As the guy who posted the thread regarding Adam Dunn's sac fly I must say I thought it more interesting than this thread. To write a thread to complain about a thread is pretty ridiculous. You are taking this stuff way too seriously. I didn't realize I had to check in with you and get your approval to make a post. I didn't realize this was supposed to be such high quality journalism. Wow! I apologize to all of you for ruining your evening with such a frivolous post. I guess I won't do that again! I wouldn't want to waste a second (literally) of your precious time.

Come on now, don't take this over the top, I never said you had to consult me before posting or obtain an English degree to start a thread. I am simply giving advice for the betterment of the board and the quality of posts. Apparently some felt like I was off base but remember the mission of the board straight from Boss and GIK: "quality discussion and civility toward your fellow members are musts for posting here. We don’t look favorably upon topics that state little more than you think a player “sucks” or the like. It’s encouraged that you have opinions, but you should be able to back them up before convincing others." Welcome to the board, I hope you continue to voice your opinions. I don't think this discussion is going anywhere though and I'm done "complaining". :rolleyes:

RedEye
05-30-2007, 08:19 PM
My point is that the way message boards are set-up is the perfect tool for self-wedding out of bad posts. The bad posts don't get responses and go to the bottom. By breaking up the board, the effect that responding to good posts has is actually cut in half. If a terrible post is made at ORG (and we all know there are plenty), it actually stays up far longer than it otherwise would because there is an artificially created scarcity of posters there. If the full collection of Redszoners could post there, it would quickly be beat down by the activity on the good threads.

I disagree. This might be true if all posters read all posts with equal attention, but that's simply not the case. As the original poster argues, the Sun Deck is often a flood of one-line comments masquerading as threads. While I have nothing against people posting their ideas of whatever sort, part of fruitfully participating in a group like this is understanding that some ideas are better as part of a pre-existing conversation that is already taking place elsewhere (e.g., the Reds44 game comments threads) and that some of them require their own thread.

I guess that while I agree that the so-called "market principles" are good for some activities on the internet, I actually think that many sports fan forums would do well to require posters to operate according to a basic set of posting principles as well.

FlightRick
05-30-2007, 08:22 PM
As the guy who posted the thread regarding Adam Dunn's sac fly I must say I thought it more interesting than this thread. To write a thread to complain about a thread is pretty ridiculous. You are taking this stuff way too seriously. I didn't realize I had to check in with you and get your approval to make a post. I didn't realize this was supposed to be such high quality journalism. Wow! I apologize to all of you for ruining your evening with such a frivolous post. I guess I won't do that again! I wouldn't want to waste a second (literally) of your precious time.

Yes, some people will tend to take things too seriously. Especially when you take away their membership to The Secret Club and they're looking for somebody to blame.

No, you don't *have* to check with anybody before you post. 'Tis the magical nature of teh internets~!

And no, this isn't supposed to be High Quality Journalism. I really don't even know where you'd go for that, these days.

But please, just as one Reds fan to another, this also is not supposed to be retarded sports talk radio where a caller phones in, makes a statement almost completely devoid of insight, and forces the hosts to say "thanks for calling" and hang up before trying to find an interesting tangent to go off on to bail out the caller. I believe the "in-joke" to make around here would involve the phrases "banana phone" and "pink shirt," but it pretty much applies to the entire braindead genre of talk radio. More to the point: it's something we should all be proud enough to not willingly duplicate here at RedsZone. Either have something new to contribute, or have the eloquence to at least say it in an amusing way and with a clever turn or five of phrase. It's not snotty elitism, it's just -- you know? -- having standards.

And as the previous poster noted: the "hosts" of the show in this case would be far more likely to step in and bail you out with additional information/analysis if you post your fairly trite and unoriginal thoughts in an appropriate existing thread rather than starting an all new one.




[Addendum: If this is going to be an ongoing issue/topic of discussion, I vote for ditching "The Sun Deck" forum name, and just go ahead and call this place "The Banana Phone." Seriously. That'll show 'em!]

RedEye
05-30-2007, 08:23 PM
So say hello to even more poorly-punctuated one-line stupidfests that contain more emoticons than cogent thoughts! And granted, at some level "market forces" will move those threads down the page.... but it hardly matters when there are enough of them present that they kind of gum up the works and make it tougher to find the quality than it needs to be.

What a great sentence and a great post in general!

I also just realized that I should have obeyed my own instructions and read the entire thread before posting my (hackneyed and less well-articulated) thoughts on the subject. Oh well... at least I didn't start a whole new thread!

joshnky
05-30-2007, 08:24 PM
I think the issue at hand here is just a general perception of the board. Some feel a sense of pride in this community and want to see it be the best possible while others treat this just as they would any other board. I agree with Reds Freak about the quality of threads on the decline and this seems to be the result of removing the ORG posters (many of whom take pride in this board) and leaving a discussion group of primarily newer and less frequent posters, such as myself. I don't know that there is a remedy (although some type of game thread access might help) other than just reading the quality posts and ignoring the rest.

RedEye
05-30-2007, 08:26 PM
I think the issue at hand here is just a general perception of the board. Some feel a sense of pride in this community and want to see it be the best possible while others treat this just as they would any other board. I agree with Reds Freak about the quality of threads on the decline and this seems to be the result of removing the ORG posters (many of whom take pride in this board) and leaving a discussion group of primarily newer and less frequent posters, such as myself. I don't know that there is a remedy (although some type of game thread access might help) other than just reading the quality posts and ignoring the rest.

Perhaps we can create our own forum called "Younger Old Red Guard" and then kick out all of the bad posters? :D

RedEye
05-30-2007, 11:23 PM
Let's get this puppy back to the top of the heap for a minute, shall we?

redsupport
05-30-2007, 11:44 PM
I think the quality of disquisition in this niche is superior. These posters are the ne-plus-ultra of all internet commentators. They are sui generis, unparalleled in their abilities to dissect the inner machinations of the Reds decisionmaking apparatus.

WMR
05-30-2007, 11:52 PM
I think the quality of disquisition in this niche is superior. These posters are the ne-plus-ultra of all internet commentators. They are sui generis, unparalleled in their abilities to dissect the inner machinations of the Reds decisionmaking apparatus.

I might've just found my new signature. :D

RedEye
05-31-2007, 12:07 AM
I think the quality of disquisition in this niche is superior. These posters are the ne-plus-ultra of all internet commentators. They are sui generis, unparalleled in their abilities to dissect the inner machinations of the Reds decisionmaking apparatus.

I'm confused. Either it has just become very cool to use latin words... or it is so un-cool that redsupport is mocking their very existence by spouting nonsense. Or perhaps I have just entered the desert of the real?

WMR
05-31-2007, 12:10 AM
I'm confused. Either it has just become very cool to use latin words... or it is so un-cool that redsupport is mocking their very existence by spouting nonsense. Or perhaps I have just entered the desert of the real?

Just approach redsupport's posts with the following type of background in mind and they'll be much less troubling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi#Oracle

;)

Sean_CaseyRules
05-31-2007, 12:21 AM
I don't understand the complaining about stupid threads. The internet is fantastic for 1000 reasons, one of them is that true market principles apply to thread creations. If the thread is worthless, it quickly plunges to the bottom as superior postings generate interest and discussion and stay at the top. If your gripe is that other threads are getting in the way of quality, this one does that too.

That's why I have little understanding of the structured hierarchy at this site. Rather than allowing good posts and bad posts to be rated by market principles on one collective board, with the good posts staying up top and the bad ones getting pushed away, this site relies on an inefficient popularity contest. While the goal is to have the highest quality posts (and don't get me wrong, the site owners can do whatever they want), the irony is that it forces good conversation into multiple places, bars people from responding to posts in ORG where they have something of value to say (or forcing the creation of a parallel Sun Deck thread), relegates strong posters to second class status, and generally stifles the quality of the site.

Its not that at all I don't think. I think he is trying to help people who want to make it up to the ORG by helping them with their posting and maybe show something to Boss or whoever that they can contriubute good posts to the site.

Natty Redlocks
05-31-2007, 06:15 AM
I don't understand the complaining about stupid threads. The internet is fantastic for 1000 reasons, one of them is that true market principles apply to thread creations. If the thread is worthless, it quickly plunges to the bottom as superior postings generate interest and discussion and stay at the top. If your gripe is that other threads are getting in the way of quality, this one does that too.

That's why I have little understanding of the structured hierarchy at this site. Rather than allowing good posts and bad posts to be rated by market principles on one collective board, with the good posts staying up top and the bad ones getting pushed away, this site relies on an inefficient popularity contest. While the goal is to have the highest quality posts (and don't get me wrong, the site owners can do whatever they want), the irony is that it forces good conversation into multiple places, bars people from responding to posts in ORG where they have something of value to say (or forcing the creation of a parallel Sun Deck thread), relegates strong posters to second class status, and generally stifles the quality of the site.

I really like this post, just because I really like it any time someone talks about letting market principles do their thing. But the reality is that the guys who run the site have a vision for it, and when they just left people alone to do as they pleased, the site got away from that vision, so it's not difficult to understand why they did it.

Ironically, between you and FlightRick, this thread contains some of the highest quality posts on the entire site right now.

RedEye
05-31-2007, 07:52 AM
I really like this post, just because I really like it any time someone talks about letting market principles do their thing. But the reality is that the guys who run the site have a vision for it, and when they just left people alone to do as they pleased, the site got away from that vision, so it's not difficult to understand why they did it.

Ironically, between you and FlightRick, this thread contains some of the highest quality posts on the entire site right now.

An argument against letting so-called "market principles" run their course is that this often leads to cultural products that cater to the least common denominator. Although they'd like to not have to do so, I think that's what Boss-Hog and GIK are trying to get away from by making this new split between the ORG and the Sun Deck. For whatever reason, sports boards that are unregulated often degenerate into glorified game threads where each observation becomes it's own thread with two or three responses.

IMO, the Sun Deck should aspire to reduce the signal to noise ratio much like its older brother. Unfortunately, this becomes difficult when few of the active posters are also mods with the power to effect change.

muethibp
05-31-2007, 08:55 AM
That's a very good point, A survival of the fittest posts type thing. However, I don't know if that's happening yet in the Sun Deck. Maybe it just needs time, but at the time that I posted this we had threads at the top that included the announcement of Dunn's sac fly, whether a runner was safe or out last night, and narron picking his lineup out of his hat...

I agree, there are bad posts in the Sun Deck. There are also bad threads on page 1 of ORG right now (see, e.g., Jr. commercials, Babe Ruth/women and the same thread three times in rage/waiting/can't take it). And because the board is split in 2, good posts have to work twice as hard to knock out the bad posts. Imagine how long (not long at all) a stupid thread would last on a combined board, as the good threads continued to generate response after response while poor threads got no response and sunk to the bottom. But with the board split as it is, the site owners have guaranteed any thread, no matter how little merit, nearly two full days of page 1 attention (note that the bottom thread on ORG goes back to 5/28, Sun Deck post goes back to 5/29).

Ohioballplayer
05-31-2007, 11:55 AM
No offense guys, and I have been on here for a while, it seems that if you dont have those so-called rep points that you were placed in this forum, so be it. I'd rather be with a better class of losers so to speak, than to look up the noses of the posters in the other forum, we offer insight and opinions, and yes humor, one-liners so to speak, thats what makes us human beings.

I am glad to be on the sundeck where it is quite WARMER, but, I dont think that The old Red guard posters should be allowed to infiltrate the Sun deck with their colored comments or their over valued opinions.

Just call us the rebels, where we offer fair remarks even if they are not Old Red Guard politically correct!!!!

Ludwig Reds Fan
05-31-2007, 11:56 AM
Maybe we should split up more people into more forums....


/end sarcasm

I(heart)Freel
05-31-2007, 12:56 PM
No offense guys, and I have been on here for a while, it seems that if you dont have those so-called rep points that you were placed in this forum, so be it. I'd rather be with a better class of losers so to speak, than to look up the noses of the posters in the other forum, we offer insight and opinions, and yes humor, one-liners so to speak, thats what makes us human beings.

I am glad to be on the sundeck where it is quite WARMER, but, I dont think that The old Red guard posters should be allowed to infiltrate the Sun deck with their colored comments or their over valued opinions.

Just call us the rebels, where we offer fair remarks even if they are not Old Red Guard politically correct!!!!



Yea... kinda feels like high school, all over again, when I was deemed unworthy to attend the cool parties. And I guess like back then, I will just work hard to make the parties I got to go to twice as fun as the cool kids'.

Addendum to that story: I had more hair and a way hotter wife than all those cool kids at our 15th reunion. WaPOW.

Ohioballplayer
05-31-2007, 01:31 PM
Karma is grand!!!!

Caveman Techie
05-31-2007, 03:48 PM
Actually I was going to comment on the fact that the "quality" of the posts here on the Sundeck seems to have gone up.

You may disagree that a certain topic is worthy of it's own thread, but at least the topics that are around stay generally flame-free, or at least the ones I've been reading have. I wonder why that is?

muethibp
06-28-2007, 06:34 PM
I agree, there are bad posts in the Sun Deck. There are also bad threads on page 1 of ORG right now (see, e.g., Jr. commercials, Babe Ruth/women and the same thread three times in rage/waiting/can't take it). And because the board is split in 2, good posts have to work twice as hard to knock out the bad posts. Imagine how long (not long at all) a stupid thread would last on a combined board, as the good threads continued to generate response after response while poor threads got no response and sunk to the bottom. But with the board split as it is, the site owners have guaranteed any thread, no matter how little merit, nearly two full days of page 1 attention (note that the bottom thread on ORG goes back to 5/28, Sun Deck post goes back to 5/29).

Two current threads in ORG emphasize the point I was trying to make here. In two cases there are ORG threads created to talk about Sun Deck threads (this happens in reverse as well). And the two groups/classes of people can't discuss with one another. The ORG poster starts a thread to ask a question he can't post in the Sun Deck but the author of the Sun Deck post can't respond in ORG. Seems so silly and counter-productive, with due respect to the site owners, as I've said on numerous occasions.

With many posters and a little bit of moderation, I am convinced that worthwhile threads will be replied to and thus stay up while bad threads go off the first page. Unfortunately the two tier system frustrates peoples ability to have those type of conversations (as I've described above) and gives weak threads longer play by cutting in half the number of posts in a particular forum (increasing the time it takes to move a bad thread off the first page).

CWRed
06-28-2007, 07:01 PM
I blame Adam Dunn for all this! :D

He got it!
06-28-2007, 11:00 PM
Man I feel like I am eating at the kids table at Thanksgiving to begin with and then it turns out we are not even doing that right. We will just never be able to eat at the "adult" table or post meaningful threads such as caption contests and well thought out thread titles such as "Javy" and "Buerhle."

I agree with a previous poster, it is obvious we need to split up into more cliques like in high school. :thumbdown

AmarilloRed
06-28-2007, 11:24 PM
I wonder if all this is a result of seperating the two forums. We have all the new and inexperienced posters in The Sun Deck, and all the good and experienced posters in The Old Red Guard. We will need to develop our posting skills in The Sun Deck before we learn to be good enough at The Old Red Guard. Unfortunately, it is possible that some of our posters may not be interested in improving their posting skills, and just want to post whatever they feel without reflecting on the thread before they post. I have been guilty of this myself in the past, and have made plenty of my own bad threads. I will try to do better in the future, however, and I hope the rest of the Sun Deck posters will follow my example.

big boy
06-28-2007, 11:49 PM
We will need to develop our posting skills in The Sun Deck before we learn to be good enough at The Old Red Guard.

If you want to get in good with the ORG, here is a starter kit:

1) Adam Dunn is awesome
2) Marty Brennaman sux
3) Batting average is bunk
4) If someone doesn't agree with you, bury them with stats that seem to prove your point.

forfreelin04
06-29-2007, 12:02 AM
I love it how the big complaint, which started the change, was the game threads. The game threads, if anything, have gotten worse now that Sun Deckers cannot quote on it. It is basically become the more famous posters sitting around their own computer making comments about the game without actually giving a play by play. It's pretty obvious all the mods wanted was for less people to show up at their game thread party.

AmarilloRed
06-29-2007, 12:04 AM
I would like to join The Old red Guard,yes. I am sure you were being a bit sarcastic and ironic, but I am interested in making good posts and making good points regardless of the forum. I think all of us should do the same regardless of which forum we are in.

bradmu
06-29-2007, 01:20 PM
I love it how the big complaint, which started the change, was the game threads. The game threads, if anything, have gotten worse now that Sun Deckers cannot quote on it. It is basically become the more famous posters sitting around their own computer making comments about the game without actually giving a play by play. It's pretty obvious all the mods wanted was for less people to show up at their game thread party.

Just a thought...why can't we just start a thread while a game is on and use it to comment on the game...a game thread in the Sun Deck forum? or will the mods delete it?

bradmu
06-29-2007, 01:26 PM
I wonder if all this is a result of seperating the two forums. We have all the new and inexperienced posters in The Sun Deck, and all the good and experienced posters in The Old Red Guard. We will need to develop our posting skills in The Sun Deck before we learn to be good enough at The Old Red Guard. Unfortunately, it is possible that some of our posters may not be interested in improving their posting skills, and just want to post whatever they feel without reflecting on the thread before they post. I have been guilty of this myself in the past, and have made plenty of my own bad threads. I will try to do better in the future, however, and I hope the rest of the Sun Deck posters will follow my example.

I think its interesting that everyone not in the Red Guard club immediately assume its better. It may be composed of the higher and mightier members who have a ton of posts, and have been around for a while..but does that mean that they are any better? If the Red Guardians really want to have their own little club, who cares that their "Quality of Posts" is apparently through the roof and the Sun Decker's aren't? Personally, I don't want to have to do research to paste in a big telling statistic every time I submit a response just to make sure my Quality is acceptable. Its kind of nice to jump on, read a few comments on a Reds current event and if you have something to add..then be able to add.

My 2 cents. I'm perfectly fine with this split. Anything beats the Reds.com forum.

Moosie52
06-29-2007, 01:26 PM
I want to blame Juan Castro, but I'm sure that would not be considered a good post.

tsj017
06-29-2007, 01:36 PM
Red Guardians

:laugh:

Joseph
06-29-2007, 01:53 PM
Just a thought...why can't we just start a thread while a game is on and use it to comment on the game...a game thread in the Sun Deck forum? or will the mods delete it?

It would be locked yes. No we aren't monsters. It's not an 'us vs you' thing. There is nothing personal about any of it. Just trying to keep RZ as the best Reds site and not have it end up like Reds.com or Cincinnati.com.

bengalsown
06-30-2007, 01:34 AM
My fellow Sun Deck posters, as some have noted in other forums, I have noticed a decline in the quality of posts in the Sun Deck since the big changes. In no way am I saying that the posters here are inferior to those at the ORG, but the quality of some posts seems to be missing. For example, I believe I count four threads that were started and are currently on the first page of the SD that are one line comments about the what happened during the specific game. I don't believe one line observations merit their own thread. Reds44 has started posting post game observation threads in which I think those type of posts are more appropriate.

Two reasons I think this hurts the quality of the Sun Deck board. One, it is hard to have a meaningful baseball discussion in a thread that only contains one sentence. If you are going to start a thread, put some thought behind it and make it a solid post. If you have a one sentence comment or observation try to find the thread in which it might belong. Secondly, the threads that have been started that are well-thought out and solid get lost in the mess and I have a hard time finding them. This hurts the quality of the conversation and the posters who are making good posts.

So I guess my point is I don't think a thread should be started unless you have a developed and well thought out point or question. Right now I see a lot of "useless" threads that are hard to comment on. Am I off base here, what do others think?

This is the most useless thread I've read on here since I joined.

Can you say smug?

:thumbdown:

What are the other reds forums on the net?

Ludwig Reds Fan
06-30-2007, 01:28 PM
I for one like the separation.

One thing though. I feel that there should be 3 Reds forums here.
1. Baby Red - Unmoderated forum. This is where all the really crummy posters (like myself) are allowed to interact. ORG members aren't allowed to even access this forum, thus eliminating most of the potential complaining about "quality of threads." Also, if a poster wants to get promoted from Baby Red to the Sun Deck, all they have to do is whine to any Mod or post any thread about "quality of posts" and they are instantly "promoted" to the Sun Deck, losing their "Baby Red" posting rights in the process.

2. Sun Deck - This is where all the posters go who are just kissing butt, making posts that they feel will give them the best chance to make it to ORG. This is where the true "Pre-ORG-Quality-Threads" are. Think "George Grande" and you are getting warmer.

3. The ORG - This is where the cool kids hang out. You better be a long time poster, kiss some serious butt, or be really close with a Mod, or don't even bother asking. To keep numbers down, every month, 5 ORG members will be demoted to the Sun Deck. Each member may then write a 500 essay explaining what a privilege it is to be an ORG member. Only 2 essays accepted per month, no exceptions. Except for the exceptions.


The only way to keep RedsZone the best Reds forum out there, is to protect us from our own crummy posts. This is for our own good, people. I would encourage everyone to read every post in ORG. Study them. Know them. Become one with them. Only then will there even be a chance to hope to even come close to the quality of posters with ORG and the solid gold that spews from their keyboards.