PDA

View Full Version : Any interest in a game thread on another forum tonight?



REDREAD
04-16-2008, 03:18 PM
I hope this doesn't break the rules of the forum, but since we can't have game threads on Redszone, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in an alternate site at least for tonight. I'm going to be on the site below unless anyone has a better suggestion (I'm open).

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?webtag=ml-reds

Again, not trying to cause trouble, but I was really looking forward to a game thread tonight and it looks like there won't be one here.

Well, I'll be there, even if I am talking to myself. :lol:

Heath
04-16-2008, 03:19 PM
RedsManRick had a good idea I failed to mention. Use the chat feature below.

It's pretty cool.

WMR
04-16-2008, 03:24 PM
What about lastperson/peanut gallery?

klw
04-16-2008, 03:24 PM
If game threads are brought back, would it be helpful for bandwith issues for the thread to be split in two. Namely after the end of the 5th, the old thread gets jettisoned so that way when the thread is being refreshed by those looking to find out what happens next in the bottom of the 9th are not refreshing such a large thread. Thought I would throw that out there in case it helps.

REDREAD
04-16-2008, 03:28 PM
I don't like chat so much because sometimes I do other things, and I like to go back and read the prior innings. I also like to read them the next day if I miss the game.

As I understand, the problem is that the mods are tired of dealing with behavior issues. That's understandable. I'd rather go to an unmoderated forum than have no game thread at all.

If they let us go to the peanut gallery forum, we can go there.. Is there a link to that place? I've never gone there (or if I have, I forgot). I assume SunDeck people could also come to the peanut gallery too? Correct?

WMR
04-16-2008, 03:29 PM
We had a game thread there a couple weeks back when RZ was down. There's a peanut gallery link on the front page of RZ.

KronoRed
04-16-2008, 03:31 PM
Someone should ask Mr.O about game threads over there, they are big bandwidth hogs you know.

flyer85
04-16-2008, 03:33 PM
everyone should consider themselves spanked.

REDREAD
04-16-2008, 03:34 PM
I'm also thinking that if all the game thread people move to chat, the same issues will happen there, considering that it's the same people. Therefore, I don't think chat is a viable solution...

KronoRed
04-16-2008, 03:36 PM
Nah, in chat people can't go back 3 pages to find a post they don't like then quote it 4 times.

It flows better.

Tommyjohn25
04-16-2008, 03:36 PM
Well crap. Just found out about this. Understandable though. Can someone tell me where to find the lineups prior to the game?

Reds Fanatic
04-16-2008, 03:39 PM
Well crap. Just found out about this. Understandable though. Can someone tell me where to find the lineups prior to the game?

Either John Fay or Trent usually have the lineup on their blogs.

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/

http://www.thelotd.com/ctrent/blog

CTA513
04-16-2008, 03:51 PM
C. Trent and other people do game threads on the lot d forums:

http://www.thelotd.com/forum/viewforum.one?id=211783


Im not sure how good the game threads are, but Im sure its 100x better than anything on the Reds.com forums.

Heath
04-16-2008, 03:56 PM
We had a game thread there a couple weeks back when RZ was down. There's a peanut gallery link on the front page of RZ.

And that's the purpose of Mr. O's site. RZ is down. The site's down. Not when RZ has made a procedural change.

ochre pays the BW bill without anyone else's financial assistance. We need to respect that.

KronoRed
04-16-2008, 04:15 PM
And that's the purpose of Mr. O's site. RZ is down. The site's down. Not when RZ has made a procedural change.

ochre pays the BW bill without anyone else's financial assistance. We need to respect that.

Let it be written, let it be done.

Chip R
04-16-2008, 04:16 PM
Let it be written, let it be done.


Quit stealing my shtick. :thumbdown

REDREAD
04-16-2008, 04:25 PM
Would Trent want his game thread to be 70 pages longer? :lol:

I orginally suggested the MLB page because King Bud is footing the bill for it.
But I'll go whereever you guys think is best.

WVRedsFan
04-16-2008, 06:08 PM
I guess I missed the "nastiness" when I took a breakabout the 6th inning. I've often wonderted why people of differing opinions cannot be civil with one another, but the Reds are stressful, that's for sure. And polarized. The pro Dunn crowd, the Pro-Krivsky crowd, the pro-Junior crowd all get bent out of shape when the opposite of their opinion gets expressed. I know I get really tired of the constant "Griffey is washed up" posts because we've heard it since he came here at age 30 or something.

But, no matter. We'll live without a game thread. I think.

cumberlandreds
04-16-2008, 06:19 PM
Why not just ban or suspend the folks that are making personal attacks and not punish the others that play nice? I thought that was the rule that if you make personal attacks the violator gets punished not all the other innocent one's. Oh well.....

*BaseClogger*
04-16-2008, 07:04 PM
Why not just ban or suspend the folks that are making personal attacks and not punish the others that play nice? I thought that was the rule that if you make personal attacks the violator gets punished not all the other innocent one's. Oh well.....

:thumbup:

Cedric
04-16-2008, 07:13 PM
I can't believe that the people who ruined the game threads aren't embarrassed and apologizing for ruining something which could be so much fun. We've all been aggravated before but it's beyond bad now and hopefully the few bad apples are ashamed. I've posted probably five times in game threads this year because of the level of mean and disrespectful posters in those threads. I don't know if it's anonymity or what but I'm always shocked at how petty some of the fights are and how often the same posters are involved.

I guess I'm just shocked this happened after Boss and GIK completely changed the site and made some people get voted in. A certain few obviously didn't realize that there was a reason they weren't brought back in the first place and I hope like hell they realize it now. It's just frustrating, IMO.

Screwball
04-16-2008, 07:22 PM
I can't believe that the people who ruined the game threads aren't embarrassed and apologizing for ruining something which could be so much fun. We've all been aggravated before but it's beyond bad now and hopefully the few bad apples are ashamed. I've posted probably five times in game threads this year because of the level of mean and disrespectful posters in those threads. I don't know if it's anonymity or what but I'm always shocked at how petty some of the fights are and how often the same posters are involved.

I guess I'm just shocked this happened after Boss and GIK completely changed the site and made some people get voted in. A certain few obviously didn't realize that there was a reason they weren't brought back in the first place and I hope like hell they realize it now. It's just frustrating, IMO.

I apologize for my part. I've always tried to contribute positively to the game threads, but last night I let my frustration with a certain poster get in the way of that. I should have just bit my tongue like I usually do, or taken it private, but what's done is done and, like I said, I regret my part in it. It won't happen again.

BTW, I agree with cumberlandreds. I don't really see why everyone else should be punished for the actions of a few.

redsrule2500
04-16-2008, 07:28 PM
Yeah. I'm really getting sick of the super uptight feeling on this board, and I would love if there was somewhere we could just chat about the game without worrying. I guess I'll check out the peanut gallery if anyone else is going there.

In other news my college decided to take away the ALT FSN channel so I only have the cavs here :( booooooooo

It's a freaking game thread....ugh.

MrCinatit
04-16-2008, 07:29 PM
The game threads have been getting embarrassing to the extreme, and not because of the performance of the Reds. Watching what are supposed to be fellow fans tear at each other and berate each other is rather depressing.

Matt700wlw
04-16-2008, 07:31 PM
If I did anything, I appologize, but I can't imagine what I could have done...

Falls City Beer
04-16-2008, 07:38 PM
The ignore function rules. If you don't like a poster, hit it. It works. Just spare folks the personal attacks.

Screwball
04-16-2008, 08:07 PM
I agree. Stay away from personal attacks. It's good advice.

Buckeye33
04-16-2008, 08:22 PM
Please bring Belisle up! PLEASE!

flyer85
04-16-2008, 08:25 PM
think they did it because they knew Fogg was pitching

WVRedsFan
04-16-2008, 08:26 PM
I guess it's fair to say that no one started a game thread anywhere, no?

Gainesville Red
04-16-2008, 08:34 PM
I would love if there was somewhere we could just chat about the game without worrying.



Strangely enough, there is just such a place.

Perhaps equally as odd, this place where you go to chat, is actually called "CHAT."

REDREAD
04-16-2008, 08:36 PM
I guess it's fair to say that no one started a game thread anywhere, no?

Just got home.. I'm going to

http://www.thelotd.com/forum/viewforum.one?id=211783

for at least a few innings.. that is until Fogg makes me too nauseous to continue.. I'm registering there now.. Come on over.

flyer85
04-16-2008, 08:41 PM
"I think we'll be venting a little longer"

Matt700wlw
04-16-2008, 08:42 PM
Chat's packed...FCB provided beers, and strippers are on the way!

vaticanplum
04-16-2008, 10:48 PM
I guess I'm just shocked this happened after Boss and GIK completely changed the site and made some people get voted in. A certain few obviously didn't realize that there was a reason they weren't brought back in the first place and I hope like hell they realize it now. It's just frustrating, IMO.

Isn't game thread limited to Old Red Guard posters?

Chip R
04-16-2008, 10:55 PM
Isn't game thread limited to Old Red Guard posters?


It was. :thumbdown

OnBaseMachine
04-16-2008, 11:10 PM
Chat was full tonight (around 45 were in) and it was hilarious. I highly recommend it.

Cedric
04-16-2008, 11:10 PM
Isn't game thread limited to Old Red Guard posters?

Yep. Some people got voted back in even with their past history on game threads. That was my point. It's our fault.

WVRedsFan
04-16-2008, 11:28 PM
Yep. Some people got voted back in even with their past history on game threads. That was my point. It's our fault.

Yep.

Sometimes the politicking was almost brutal, but that's the way it goes.

This board doesn't need a game thread to get a fight started. After reading the board tonight, I just shook my head.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-16-2008, 11:29 PM
Chat was full tonight (around 45 were in) and it was hilarious. I highly recommend it.

I agree, nice change of pace tonight.

MikeS21
04-16-2008, 11:31 PM
The worst thing about the game threads are that they were getting to the point they were getting predictable.

They always begin with a critique of the line-up, specifically where Adam Dunn appears in the batting order, followed by scathing criticism of the manager for not letting Adam Dunn hit BOTH third AND fourth in the line-up, with Adam Dunn batting 5th to give protection to the clean-up hitter . Then we move on to the 40 pages of "____" sucks (insert applicable Reds' player name into blank) posts. We finally conclude with a couple pages of "It's all Krivsky's fault" posts.

The game threads are hilarious because it truly points out how fickle most fans really are. A player can have nine straight good games, but if the tenth game is bad, watch out. He will be flamed for two weeks.

I would prefer game threads to be simple play-by-play, where I don't need to wade through forty pages of "So-an-So is a bum, and if you don't agree with me, you're a bum too!" just to find out the score. If folks want to rant and vent, go to the MLB boards, or ESPN boards, where they can rant and rave to their heart's content. A lot of us came to RedsZone to get away from that (Remember the Fastball.com and Cincinnati.com boards? Shudder!)

I'm not against anyone expressing their opinion. Everyone has a right to an opinion. But I have a real problem with folks who feel the need to convince everyone else that their opinion is the only one that is valid. This is not debate club, and no one ought to feel they need to be trained in classical oratory and debate strategies before they post their opinion.

Of course ... that's just my opinion ... :D

*BaseClogger*
04-16-2008, 11:35 PM
I agree the the Game Threads need to be reserved for more PBP and about 40 pages less of rantvent. Chat is a great place to talk about how much the players suck. Not being able to watch the games I really miss the PBP, but lately I haven't even been able to follow it because of the personal attacks and 40+ pages of rantvent...

WVRedsFan
04-16-2008, 11:53 PM
The game threads are hilarious because it truly points out how fickle most fans really are. A player can have nine straight good games, but if the tenth game is bad, watch out. He will be flamed for two weeks.

Fans are fans, but I agree. Fans have their favorties or, if you will, non-favorites, and there's no compromise to the point of calling the other an idiot or worse for not agreeing.


If folks want to rant and vent, go to the MLB boards, or ESPN boards, where they can rant and rave to their heart's content. A lot of us came to RedsZone to get away from that (Remember the Fastball.com and Cincinnati.com boards? Shudder!)
That's the impossible dream, I'm afraid. If you limited the board to reasonable fanatics, you'd have about 25 folks here, but we can improve the lot by self policing. Insulting is not self policing.


I'm not against anyone expressing their opinion. Everyone has a right to an opinion. But I have a real problem with folks who feel the need to convince everyone else that their opinion is the only one that is valid. This is not debate club, and no one ought to feel they need to be trained in classical oratory and debate strategies before they post their opinion.
Totally agree. I can be part of the problem like anyone else. In fact, I know I've irritated some here. And I never meant to irritate anyone, but I did. It goes over the line when the exasperted resort to name-calling whether it be your fellow poster or one of the players. I don't like Wayne Krivsky, but I should never call him an idiot. We just disagree. Unfortunately, someone calls a player or FO person an idiot and the argument is on and no one will compromise. That's what happened to the game thread before the split and after. It may be inevitable because on tonight's ORG, I saw two arguments almost break out for the same thing.

Good post, Mike.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-16-2008, 11:53 PM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.

Cedric
04-17-2008, 12:06 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.

I would think the same way if it wasn't for Boss and GIK. They obviously have a problem with the game threads and the way people are representing Redszone. Just my two cents.

VR
04-17-2008, 12:08 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.

Well said. I don't have the opportunity to talk baseball at home or work, and certainly not Reds. I love hearing others opinions on different situations during the game. When the Reds are winning....that's typically what they consist of.
The personal attacks....or inability to have a discussion w/o taking something personal can be ridiculous...but...as FCB stated, the ignore feature was created for that purpose. Everyone gets frustrated and occasionally rants or
lets those frustrations get the best of them for a post or two....but this is a baseball community, and I look forward to great in-game dialogue with other Reds fans, often with very different perspectives than I have.

reds44
04-17-2008, 12:15 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.
Agreed. It's a game thread, and people get emotional while watching a game. I think they need to be treated differently as normal threads.

Screwball
04-17-2008, 12:31 AM
as FCB stated, the ignore feature was created for that purpose.

Yeah, but the problem with the ignore button is two-fold...

One, the user's posts (which you have on ignore) still show up, with only what they typed deleted. For some reason you're still told they made a post, but that you have them on ignore. If the poster makes several/frequent posts, the flow of the thread gets choppy and (much) less enjoyable.

Two, if the user's posts are inflammatory enough, several other posters will quote it and respond. This pretty much defeats the entire purpose of ignoring that poster in the first place.

Personally, I like the ignore feature in chat. Everything about the user you want to ignore is completely removed so you can, ya know, actually ignore the poster.

klw
04-17-2008, 06:14 AM
Even with the flaws of the game thread, I miss it being there. As an out of towner without EI or MLB TV I only get to see the nationally televised games. The game thread helps me be able to get a feel for the game that I can't get anywhere else. It is often emotional and the attacks are a big drawback but I can read over the game and get more details than I can from the AP article afterwards or from trying to follow it on Gameday or Foxsports.com. I hope it returns and that people are able to maintain the expected standards.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 08:55 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.


I'm not going to complain with the mod's decision, but I feel the same way.
The game thread is going to be like that, just by it's nature. It's an emotional exchange due to people watching the game. People post quick and impulsively, due to the pace of the game. I think people that make personal attacks should be suspended from the game thread or board, but there's nothing that can be done about complaining about batting order, complaining about Fogg/Castro/whoever..

I also wonder why it's ok to rant on chat, but not the game thread.. :confused:

If people want simple play by play, a message board isn't the place to go. There's commerical sites that give you a very compact summary of every at bat. That's the place to go if you want a sanitized game report.

redsrule2500
04-17-2008, 08:59 AM
Personally, I loved game threads just as they were. They were fun environments to rant/rave about the team in real time. I'm not exactly in Reds fan heaven while in college, so it's fun to get together online (however lame that is) and discuss the game with a bunch of other fans in the game threads. I think that's what they offer - not "intelligent conversation" or whatever - and I like it.

Unassisted
04-17-2008, 09:02 AM
Some people got voted back in even with their past history on game threads. That was my point. It's our fault.http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/nod.gif

nate
04-17-2008, 09:10 AM
I also wonder why it's ok to rant on chat, but not the game thread.. :confused:

I find ranting to be as tedious in chat as it is in any other post. However, last night's game probably isn't a good gauge for chat due to the Fogg factor and large number of participants.

Always Red
04-17-2008, 09:24 AM
I find ranting to be as tedious in chat as it is in any other post. However, last night's game probably isn't a good gauge for chat due to the Fogg factor and large number of participants.

Chat is kind of fun, and certainly less formal than a thread, but it's equivalent to having 35 folks sitting in a circle, all trying to talk at the same time. It's hard to follow conversations, but on the other hand, I was LMAO at some of the stuff on there last night. :D

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 09:29 AM
I'll never understand why folks can't just tolerate the opinions of folks as long as they aren't breaking the rules. It's really simple, reduces cognitive dissonance, and makes for a better board. When people can't resist the urge to make it personal, we get Draconian measures like the game thread shutdown. Just deal with the fact that people are going to be negative and others are going to be pollyanna-ish. That's the way of the world; deal with it.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 09:45 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.

I agree with this too. To me there's become an unspoken divide between the ranting game threads and the more thoughtful forum threads. I think the emotion of game threads actually curbs the same thing happening everywhere else and that people are more apt to post measured things elsewhere if they can let it all hang out in the game threads. Without game threads, I suspect the bickering will ultimately just turn up elsewhere. I don't know, I'm always a fan of undermoderation and of posters taking things that bother them into their own hands, because different things bother different people. I've got a handful of prolific posters on ignore and I don't feel that I miss things or that it makes things too choppy at all. The second anyone causes me genuine grief here (and it has happened) I remember that it's a message board and I take things into my own hands and put a stop to it. I have enough ridiculous things causing me grief already; I'm a Reds fan.

The bandwidth thing, however, is something to consider. But that's an issue of quantity, not quality. I don't hear anyone complaining about avatars or an entire football forum and I have to imagine those eat up a lot of bandwidth too.

top6
04-17-2008, 10:14 AM
I also agree with the "who cares" crowd, although I don't usually take part in game threads. I do find them entertaining to read ex-post, and enjoy making an occasional post there. I am able to ignore the drivel, or (more often) laugh at it.

That said, Boss and GIK (and others as well) have now put years of their life into this forum, and obviously feel responsible for its content - especially the ORG content. They understandably feel embarassed when content that offends them is posted under the "Reds Zone" name. So while I don't personally care at all about the content of the game threads, it's their forum, and they are right to shut down the game threads if they can no longer control them.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 10:22 AM
My 2 cents:

If you want play by play, Yahoo, ESPN, and MLB.com all offer very pretty applets that show you exactly what has happened.

The beauty of a forum is a chance to interact with other people. To me, the game thread takes the place of my local watering hole. I can sit at home, watch the game and have all those comforts, while shooting the stuff with a bunch of fellow fans about the in-game occurrences.

Unless there is a clear stated "purpose" for the game thread as forum based play-by-play, I don't see how it could begin to be moderated as such. The description of the Game Thread board is: "Follow each pitch and discuss the game as it happens here"

I guess I don't see the need for an entire forum just to replicate what many other things do better. The value of the thread, uniquely from other places on the web, is in the back and forth discussion of current events. Clearly decorum is important and any moderation, in my opinion, should be significant in its impact -- ie. banned from the game thread board for a week. But for me, the value of the thread is not in finding out what the score is or what just happened, but what other Reds fan think about it.

All that said, I think the chat function can serve the same purpose, if not in precisely the same way.

BRM
04-17-2008, 10:43 AM
I think Chat is a lot of fun. Not much game talk in there but it's a blast anyway.

Stormy
04-17-2008, 11:28 AM
The way I see it is who cares? It's a game thread. If it's eating bandwidth and slowing the site down from the constant refreshing then I guess I understand shutting it down. Otherwise, it's a gamethread and I guess I wonder what people expect from it. When you are sitting watching a game with your friends you say what's on your mind at the time. If it's 1% bickering it doesn't bother me. I look past that. It doesn't bother me because I understand that I'm viewing a gamethread and we've all been following a losing franchise (that we all care about or we wouldn't be here) for the past decade.

You are 100% correct. I can't even fathom the decision to close the game thread forum.

Chip R
04-17-2008, 11:28 AM
You are 100% correct. I can't even fathom the decision to close the game thread forum.


I think Heath made it perfectly clear.

CrackerJack
04-17-2008, 11:36 AM
I think the decision was an overreaction, penalizing the masses for the actions of 1-3 people. I think the offenders should be addressed directly. At least this year we don't have the lineup, Juan Castro and Rich Aurillia belly-aching ad nauseum.

I think the threads this year have been pretty tame considering they're in a 5-game losing streak, so the decision confuses me as well.

Stormy
04-17-2008, 11:41 AM
I think Heath made it perfectly clear.

Really? As someone unfamiliar with what transpired, that statement sure doesn't afford me any clarity on the subject. I see a vague premise about 'not playing nice' followed by some allusions to indeterminate structural changes in the future.

I have no problem with moderators/owners doing whatever they wish, but I certainly haven't seen anything which improves my understanding of the issue. I already miss the game threads, and personally didn't see much difference in the climate of this year's threads compared to those of previous seasons.

Chip R
04-17-2008, 11:48 AM
Really? As someone unfamiliar with what transpired, that statement sure doesn't afford me any clarity on the subject. I see a vague premise about 'not playing nice' followed by some allusions to indeterminate structural changes in the future.

I have no problem with moderators/owners doing whatever they wish, but I certainly haven't seen anything which improves my understanding of the issue. I already miss the game threads, and personally didn't see much difference in the climate of this year's threads compared to those of previous seasons.


Perhaps if you read the game threads over the past several days, you would realize why they were closed for the time being.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 11:50 AM
Really? As someone unfamiliar with what transpired, that statement sure doesn't afford me any clarity on the subject. I see a vague premise about 'not playing nice' followed by some allusions to indeterminate structural changes in the future.

I have no problem with moderators/owners doing whatever they wish, but I certainly haven't seen anything which improves my understanding of the issue. I already miss the game threads, and personally didn't see much difference in the climate of this year's threads compared to those of previous seasons.

Agree. Based on Heath's comment, it appears there is some confusion as to why the gamethreads have been shut down. It seems by his last post that the reason it was closed was more than simply the bickering of a couple posters.

"Thanks for reinforcing the fact that game threads are becoming more and more ridiculous and redundant. Sure, blame Krivsky, blame Bob Boone, blame Dick Wagner, blame everything and how teh Reds are da suck."

I'm assuming that it has something to do with the negativity. Me, personally, I don't see it being that overly negative (at least when compared to the past). When the team is playing bad, fans are going to say so, especially in real-time. In fact, I agree with what someone said, that the gamethreads are probably the perfect place for these kinds of comments and vents where posters can commiserate with one another.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 11:52 AM
Perhaps if you read the game threads over the past several days, you would realize why they were closed for the time being.


I go in and out of those threads, so I guess I could be missing a bunch.

Benihana
04-17-2008, 11:55 AM
Sorry Chip (and Heath), but I have to agree with the opinion that it was a big overreaction. Obviously the mods are entitled to do whatever they want, but in this case I think it was a mistake. One or two guys are bickering, and it wasn't even that bad. If you compare it to any other messageboard in the world, it still looks like Sesame Street. If you want to suspend those one or two guys who were bickering, that's fine. But closing the entire forum seems like a gross overreaction. As a participant of this board from its inception (and the Enquirer board before that) I respect everything that Boss and everybody else has done for the board, but this decision was off-base.

RFS62
04-17-2008, 12:05 PM
The analogy that the game thread is like the local bar is a good one, IMO.

Every bar has bouncers, and the owners of the bar set the standards.

In a bar, if someone gets in a fight, you boot them out. Depending on the severity of the fight, you ban them for a period of time.

Then, they play nice (whatever the owners consider nice) and come back or you behave badly and they bounce you again.

Until they get tired of bouncing you and finally ban you forever.

Just establish what you want the rules to be, and enforce them.

Benihana
04-17-2008, 12:09 PM
The analogy that the game thread is like the local bar is a good one, IMO.

Every bar has bouncers, and the owners of the bar set the standards.

In a bar, if someone gets in a fight, you boot them out. Depending on the severity of the fight, you ban them for a period of time.

Then, they play nice (whatever the owners consider nice) and come back or you behave badly and they bounce you again.

Until they get tired of bouncing you and finally ban you forever.

Just establish what you want the rules to be, and enforce them.

And in the meantime, don't close the bar!

Boss-Hog
04-17-2008, 12:11 PM
I also wonder why it's ok to rant on chat, but not the game thread..

I don't know that I'd say it's OK, but at least it doesn't perserve a historical account of this. If people enjoy conversing with other fans as the game happens, I understand that and also understand that's conducive to often emotional comments ('XXX rules', 'XXX sucks', etc. which the game threads are littered with). However, I do think chat is a better venue for this type of dialog than a game threads. If someone is actually trying to follow the game via the game thread, I can't imagine how that would be possible, given the sheer amount of these type of responses. As others have posted, if you are simply looking for a historical account of what has happened, there are plenty of sites that will provide detailed play-by-play information.

I don't read the game threads much and never have because personally, it's not my cup of tea. I understand that there are plenty of people who do enjoy them, and that's why they have been allowed to do so. However, with what I have seen, my main problem with them, in their current state, are the amount of personal attacks, insults and so forth that I see every time I open a game thread. That type of discourse has no place on this board, as it's imperative that you are civil to each other - even if you disagree with someone's opinion.

Finally, to answer a question that was previously raised, long term, I don't necessarily have a problem banning the problematic posters from the game thread and enabling it for everyone else, but I do want to make it clear that the general nastiness that I have seen towards others within the context of the game threads absolutely will not be tolerated - now or ever.

Always Red
04-17-2008, 12:16 PM
And in the meantime, don't close the bar!

Ah, but we don't own the bar and so can't make those demands on the owner of said establishment. So, we can choose to drink elsewhere, but we really don't want to, because this is really a nice neighborhood bar where "everybody knows your name." So, we'll sit tight and wait for the owners to remodel, and then when they reopen, we'll come back, abide by the local rules, and do whatever it takes to avoid the attention of the bouncers. :)

Man, I love beer analogies! :beerme:

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 12:16 PM
Really? As someone unfamiliar with what transpired, that statement sure doesn't afford me any clarity on the subject. I see a vague premise about 'not playing nice' followed by some allusions to indeterminate structural changes in the future.

I have no problem with moderators/owners doing whatever they wish, but I certainly haven't seen anything which improves my understanding of the issue. I already miss the game threads, and personally didn't see much difference in the climate of this year's threads compared to those of previous seasons.

Stormy, I'll use you as an example here since I consider you one of the best posters on the site as well as one of the best game thread posters on the site. I know you don't participate in the game threads that much, but here's some snippets of some of your recent game thread posts that are all phenomenal, IMO ...


Wow, one of those situations where you wish you had a legitimate RHH bat on your bench. One of our 'scrappies' could come through, but a more potent threat would be nice. Have to lift Votto, and not get any RHH bang for our buck in the process. Part of our poor design, regardless of whether we breakthrough here or not.


Those are all good points, and verifiably true. I do think Dusty wants Cueto to expect an efficient 7IPs from himself. in the larger picture, but in this case that conflicted with sound in-game strateegery.


What they are missing is Hamilton (that blend of power, OBP, and one man catalyst when other parts of the puzzle are dormant). However, the future of this club needed an Edinson Volquez even more.


Blitz:

You're obviously right that a GREAT case can be made for PH'ing for Cueto in the top of the 7th.

Likewise, if you don't hit for him, you ideally want another full IP from your starter, but you also have to adjust to the situation. Cueto was coming off an efficient 6th inning, but after the HR, and the pitch count starting to escalate towards 100 (96), it became clear that Cueto wasn't going to cruise through the 7th. Dusty adjusted, let the kid leave on a successful note, and still kept him right in his target pitch count range.

Those aforementioned adjustments are the next best thing: If you decide to ride your rookie into the 7th, and he falters, there's no reason at all to push him, just for the sake of getting through the inning. After the failure to PH for him, Dusty made the right call by lifting him where he did.


I like the way Dusty handled Cueto tonight, and LOVE seeing him let Cueto exit on a successful note (at a very good pitch count), rather than lifting him after the HR. I like JC expecting to go out and pitch into the 7th economically.

Fabulous outing by Cueto. Still no walks by Cueto, amazing.

By the way, guys, it was 6 1/3IP, not 7 1/3.

That stuff is all fantastic, and that's the type of stuff I love seeing in the game threads. It's insightful, it's informative, it's interesting, and it will make me watch that night's game differently immediately after reading it. To me, those posts are an example of the kind of stuff that should be common in the game threads from each poster who is participating.

There's quite a few other posters who also tend to post really insightful and informative stuff in the game threads too. They all know who they are, and they should be commended for it.

Unfortunately, the problem is those posts are too few and far between. Excluding the straight pbp describing what just occurred (Reds Fanatic does a very nice simple, straight to the point pbp, and CE's commentary is hilarious), most of the rest of the game thread posts do not offer much value at all. If Todd Coffey enters a game, suddenly there's 50 one-liners spread out over the next half dozen pages with nothing more than some variation of "Todd Coffey stinks." Stuff like that is just pointless to post, a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of time to read.

Most of the people who post in the game threads are capable of posting good content, because they do post good content in the ORG. The problem is once they enter the game thread they somehow forget to post good content.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 12:16 PM
I don't know that I'd say it's OK, but at least it doesn't perserve a historical account of this. If people enjoy conversing with other fans as the game happens, I understand that's conducive to often emotional comments ('XXX rules', 'XXX sucks', etc.). However, I do think chat is a better venue for this type of dialog than a game threads. If someone is actually trying to follow the game via the game thread, I can't imagine how that would be possible given the sheer amount of these type of responses. As others have posted, if you are simply looking for a historical account of what has happened, there are plenty of sites that will provide play-by-play information.

I don't read the game threads much and never have because personally, it's not my cup of tea. I understand that there are plenty of people who enjoy them, and that's why they have been allowed to do. However, with what I have seen, my main problem with them, in their current state, are the amount of personal attacks, insults and so forth that I see every time I open a game thread. That type of discourse has no place on this board, as it's imperative that you are civil to each other - even if you disagree with someone's opinion.

Finally, to answer a question that was previously raised, long term, I don't necessarily have a problem banning the problematic posters from the game thread and enabling it for everyone else, but I do want to make it clear that the nastiness that I have seen towards others within the context of the game threads absolutely will not be tolerated - now or ever.

I think you've kind of hit the nail on the head here. Personal attacks are on record as being against the rules of this board. A poster who makes them has to accept that s/he will likely be banned. Period.

The rest of what you say is where it gets fuzzy. There's no clear description of what the game thread is "supposed" to be. Nowhere does it say that it's supposed to be a historical record, or a way to factually follow/preserve the game, or a play-by-play place, or a thorough analysis of players, or solely a place to rant, or anything else. Until rules are established to this effect (and my personal hope is that they're not), then people can treat it as whatever they want within the confines of the board's rules. Dicussing posters' transgressions against the nature of the game thread is pointless if there are no rules to point to as where they've transgressed.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 12:20 PM
Stormy, I'll use you as an example here since I consider you one of the best posters on the site as well as one of the best game thread posters on the site. I know you don't participate in the game threads that much, but here's some snippets of some of your recent game thread posts that are all phenomenal, IMO ...











That stuff is all fantastic, and that's the type of stuff I love seeing in the game threads. It's insightful, it's informative, it's interesting, and it will make me watch that night's game differently immediately after reading it. To me, those posts are an example of the kind of stuff that should be common in the game threads from each poster who is participating.

There's quite a few other posters who also tend to post really insightful and informative stuff in the game threads too. They all know who they are, and they should be commended for it.

Unfortunately, the problem is those posts are too few and far between. Excluding the straight pbp describing what just occurred (Reds Fanatic does a very nice simple, straight to the point pbp, and CE's commentary is hilarious), most of the rest of the game thread posts do not offer much value at all. If Todd Coffey enters a game, suddenly there's 50 one-liners spread out over the next half dozen pages with nothing more than some variation of "Todd Coffey stinks." Stuff like that is just pointless to post, a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of time to read.

Most of the people who post in the game threads are capable of posting good content, because they do post good content in the ORG. The problem is once they enter the game thread they somehow forget to post good content.

With all due respect Cyclone, that's opinion. I personally don't seek thoughtful analysis on the game threads. they're where I go when my time is limited between watching the game and doing 16 other things and when I don't have time or the mental capacity to pick through all the stats and analysis I love in the ORG.

I'm by no means saying that the game threads should NOT contain good information. I'm using this to make a point that different people like the game thread for different reasons, and I personally am opposed to establishing rules to state what their content should be (and they don't exist now in any case). You can enforce rules such as no personal attacks, etc. You cannot dictate quality. That gets into the very murky waters of governing by opinion.

I never post anything of quality in game threads. But I stick to the rules: I don't attack, I don't get personal, etc. By your standards, you're saying I "shouldn't" be permitted to post. I know that's not what you meant, but what you said translated into actual rules by default must reach that conclusion.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 12:24 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 12:27 PM
Chat's a mess. It's even lower-impulse-control nonsense. Fun, but not a game thread.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 12:28 PM
Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I follow the PBP via the gamethreads--no cable, no MLBTV. Don't want it. I dig the gladiatorial mood of the game threads. It's a great high.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 12:29 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I did when I couldn't listen to or see the game. Of the options you mention, a message board is by far the quickest and most reliable (not to mention most entertaining) way to do this on a computer with limited memory.

I still do use it to follow the game sometimes especially if I'm working on the computer.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 12:30 PM
I did when I couldn't listen to or see the game. Of the options you mention, a message board is by far the quickest and most reliable (not to mention most entertaining) way to do this on a computer with limited memory.

I still do use it to follow the game sometimes especially if I'm working on the computer.

Right. It's the greatest most informed color commentary on the Reds available. Well put.

BRM
04-17-2008, 12:31 PM
Chat's a mess. It's even lower-impulse-control nonsense. Fun, but not a game thread.

I do agree with that. I was in chat last night and had no idea what was going on with the game. It's a good place to BS and have fun but not a good way to follow the game at all.

klw
04-17-2008, 12:34 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I do a mix of gameday foxsports.com and the game thread. While the MLB gameday and foxsports fill in the nuts and bolts they sometimes are slow, lack emotion and really give only so much detail. The game thread can give eyes- ex the fielder should have gotten that, looked like a good/bad call, looked like so and so tweaked something, ball hit hard but at so and so, shifts in play, guy out by a mile, crowd into it, etc. It helps give life and reaction to the numbers and info, een more so than the fake crowd noise and bat sounds used in the remote radio play by play back when.

cumberlandreds
04-17-2008, 12:37 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I like it. It's a good pulse to what the Reds fans are thinking. I live away from the Cincy area and have no idea, other than this board, what Reds fans are thinking. The game thread gives me a good snapshot of that.
BTW, are we allowed to post the lineups anywhere just to comment on them or is that verboten too? Todays lineups are out per Fay but I didn't know if I should post them and then be sent to the principal's office. :)

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 12:39 PM
I do a mix of gameday foxsports.com and the game thread. While the MLB gameday and foxsports fill in the nuts and bolts they sometimes are slow, lack emotion and really give only so much detail. The game thread can give eyes- ex the fielder should have gotten that, looked like a good/bad call, looked like so and so tweaked something, ball hit hard but at so and so, shifts in play, guy out by a mile, crowd into it, etc. It helps give life and reaction to the numbers and info, een more so than the fake crowd noise and bat sounds used in the remote radio play by play back when.

And I do as well, but I don't get frustrated if I have to sift through some "Yay, Griffey" or "that was a shot" or "he's meat" kind of posts before I see what happened. Nobody on the board owes me anything with gametracker and so many other resources at my disposal.


Unfortunately, the problem is those posts are too few and far between. Excluding the straight pbp describing what just occurred (Reds Fanatic does a very nice simple, straight to the point pbp, and CE's commentary is hilarious), most of the rest of the game thread posts do not offer much value at all. If Todd Coffey enters a game, suddenly there's 50 one-liners spread out over the next half dozen pages with nothing more than some variation of "Todd Coffey stinks." Stuff like that is just pointless to post, a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of time to read.

This may be the one time I disagree with you. I find the one-liners to have value. I also appreciate the informative and insightful posts as well, but I don't think it's fair to say that the other stuff has no value. It has value too because it makes me laugh and it makes light of certain situations that otherwise make the game dull or depressing.

It's therapuetic to log on and see that there are several that are seeing the same thing as me and are baffled by it as well.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 12:42 PM
With all due respect Cyclone, that's opinion. I personally don't seek thoughtful analysis on the game threads. they're where I go when my time is limited between watching the game and doing 16 other things and when I don't have time or the mental capacity to pick through all the stats and analysis I love in the ORG.

I'm by no means saying that the game threads should NOT contain good information. I'm using this to make a point that different people like the game thread for different reasons, and I personally am opposed to establishing rules to state what their content should be (and they don't exist now in any case). You can enforce rules such as no personal attacks, etc. You cannot dictate quality. That gets into the very murky waters of governing by opinion.

I never post anything of quality in game threads. But I stick to the rules: I don't attack, I don't get personal, etc. By your standards, you're saying I "shouldn't" be permitted to post. I know that's not what you meant, but what you said translated into actual rules by default must reach that conclusion.

Yup, it's an opinion that the game threads should actually consist of some semblance of quality content rather than the BS that currently runs wild.

The typical game thread this season sees a new post every 15-20 seconds, and when 3/4 of those posts are mindless and thoughtless, it's going to create a long thread filled with drivel.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 12:49 PM
Yup, it's an opinion that the game threads should actually consist of some semblance of quality content rather than the BS that currently runs wild.

The typical game thread this season sees a new post every 15-20 seconds, and when 3/4 of those posts are mindless and thoughtless, it's going to create a long thread filled with drivel.

I understand your opinion, cyclone. You're still not offering any constructive rule changes though. We can say "no personal attacks". We can't say "post better stuff" or "only minimum three-sentence posts permitted". Not unless we want the game thread to turn into a seriously dictatorial place.

blumj
04-17-2008, 12:50 PM
I can almost guarantee you, from personal experience, that if a Reds pitcher just happens to throw a no-hitter, or the Reds have a great comeback win in a big game with playoff ramifications, you will be sorry if you don't have a game thread record of your own reactions to read and re-read later.

top6
04-17-2008, 12:52 PM
Yup, it's an opinion that the game threads should actually consist of some semblance of quality content rather than the BS that currently runs wild.

The typical game thread this season sees a new post every 15-20 seconds, and when 3/4 of those posts are mindless and thoughtless, it's going to create a long thread filled with drivel.
I guess I don't understand why it would be such a problem for you to not read them, then. Seems to me there are plenty of thoughtful posts elsewhere on the board.

I personally enjoy going back and reading a game thread after a big win - especially a comeback win. All the "*$&#$!" and "oh no, not coffey!" posts are pretty funny to me when you know that they will be followed in the 9th with "DUNN!!!!!" and "WALKOFF!!!!". It's kind of like reliving the emotional journey of an exciting game.

Again, though, if Boss and GIK are embarassed by what's there now, or if there are bandwith issues, then obviously they should just shut them down.

jojo
04-17-2008, 12:53 PM
a long thread filled with drivel.

That's the definition of game thread in the Oxford.

I couldn't make myself plow through more than an inning so far this season except on a rare occasion.

In their current form, I don't see the draw..... it's like game threads have become a license for ORG members to revert back to something akin an unmoderated SunDeck. Privilege/carrot indeed. :cool:

Chat is a great place for the 40 "oh ya baby!" posts after something good and the bitter, venting vitriole after something bad......

top6
04-17-2008, 12:55 PM
I can almost guarantee you, from personal experience, that if a Reds pitcher just happens to throw a no-hitter, or the Reds have a great comeback win in a big game with playoff ramifications, you will be sorry if you don't have a game thread record of your own reactions to read and re-read later.
Very good point.

How great would it be to go back and read, just to pick examples, a game thread for Tom Browning's perfect game or the thread for Game 6, 1975 (secure in the knowledge that the Reds win Game 7)? You never know when something amazing could happen. I think it would be pretty great even if 90% of the posts were exclamantions of emotion rather than breakdowns of the strategy that day.

What if Griffey hits 5 home runs today? It could happen, you never know.

westofyou
04-17-2008, 12:57 PM
Game Threads are the New York Daily News of Redszone, crass, full of laughs, idiocy, BS, and attacks.

I don't read that paper, I like the Times.

Occasionally I read the Daily News... I'm always reminded why I don't.. then I just stop looking.

That's how I solved that problem.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 01:00 PM
I guess I don't understand why it would be such a problem for you to not read them, then. Seems to me there are plenty of thoughtful posts elsewhere on the board.

I personally enjoy going back and reading a game thread after a big win - especially a comeback win. All the "*$&#$!" and "oh no, not coffey!" posts are pretty funny to me when you know that they will be followed in the 9th with "DUNN!!!!!" and "WALKOFF!!!!". It's kind of like reliving the emotional journey of an exciting game.

Again, though, if Boss and GIK are embarassed by what's there now, or if there are bandwith issues, then obviously they should just shut them down.

For the most part, unless it's a weekday afternoon game and I'm at work (such as today), I typically don't read them except for an inning here and there.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 01:02 PM
Game Threads are the New York Daily News of Redszone, crass, full of laughs, idiocy, BS, and attacks.

I don't read that paper, I like the Times.

Occasionally I read the Daily News... I'm always reminded why I don't.. then I just stop looking.

That's how I solved that problem.

Yup, that's the best way to solve the problem. I imagine a few other folks have done same thing themselves.

jojo
04-17-2008, 01:04 PM
I can almost guarantee you, from personal experience, that if a Reds pitcher just happens to throw a no-hitter, or the Reds have a great comeback win in a big game with playoff ramifications, you will be sorry if you don't have a game thread record of your own reactions to read and re-read later.

I've condensed such a thread for you:

"OH YA BABY"!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 500 posts

"Filth" 962 posts

"Nasty" 800 posts

"That was a nasty slider!" 300 posts (even though it was a change up)

roughly 40 deleted posts

at least one knock down fight made public in which the participants fail to realize how bad they are embarrassing themselves for posterity

At least 10 posts chastising people for potentially jinxing the nono..

That followed a spray of posts where people try to jinx it while posturing their post as if it was "innocent"

1400 posts complaining about Krivsky.

At least 3 posts about the trade.

One post about how cute Hilary's butt is....we'll assume that person was drinking during the game.

Maybe a few posts of substance.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-17-2008, 01:04 PM
Personally, I love the mayhem of the gamethreads with the entire cast of characters. For me, since I live so far away and don't make it to a ton of games, it gives me a bit of an "at the game" atmosphere.

How often at the ballpark do you hear people react to a homerun by saying. "It looks like he needs to change his arm slot, he's showing the ball too much and hitters are picking it up." I don't normally, I hear "BOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Get that bum out of here!"

I appreciate when the fan sitting near me has something insightful to say, but I love the raw emotion just as much. Like someone else said, it's comforting knowing you aren't the only person incensed at what you just saw. Personally, I love knowing that there's a good chance one of these days I'll be in a hospital bed next to OnBaseMachine after we both have heart attacks(just kiddin OBM! :) )

top6
04-17-2008, 01:05 PM
For the most part, unless it's a weekday afternoon game and I'm at work (such as today), I typically don't read them except for an inning here and there.
But to take my hypothetical example, would you go back and read it if Griffey hit 5 home runs today? I think a lot of people would, so there is some value there, but I guess the question is whether it is worth the costs.

(Of course, I guess that would depend heavily on whether the Reds bullpen lost the game anyway.)

Tommyjohn25
04-17-2008, 01:05 PM
I can almost guarantee you, from personal experience, that if a Reds pitcher just happens to throw a no-hitter, or the Reds have a great comeback win in a big game with playoff ramifications, you will be sorry if you don't have a game thread record of your own reactions to read and re-read later.

Excellent, excellent point! Do yourselves a favor. Go back a read the game thread of Adam Dunns walk-off Grand Slam against the Indians a couple years ago, it is an absolute blasty blast.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 01:10 PM
But to take my hypothetical example, would you go back and read it if Griffey hit 5 home runs today? I think a lot of people would, so there is some value there, but I guess the question is whether it is worth the costs.

(Of course, I guess that would depend heavily on whether the Reds bullpen lost the game anyway.)

Doubtful. I'd already know what would be in that hypothetical thread without even having to read it. Look above and jojo did a pretty good job summarizing it.

redsrule2500
04-17-2008, 01:12 PM
Honestly, this seems like nothing more than ruining the fun and enjoyment of casual posting with other reds fans during the game.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 01:12 PM
Doubtful. I'd already know what would be in that hypothetical thread without even having to read it. Look above and jojo did a pretty good job summarizing it.

Well, why is it such a concern for you then? Not being snarky, just curious. There's nothing stopping any of us from creating a thoughtful post-game analysis thread any day of the week if we want.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 01:13 PM
Game threads are the best thing about this site.

The offseason/non-game threads have become self-parodying jokes, whereby two "camps" are established and every retort is some variation on a strawman of the other's position.

Painful.

At least the game threads have the piquancy of real time action unfolding and being reacted to with something resembling ingenuousness.

Boss-Hog
04-17-2008, 01:16 PM
Stormy, I'll use you as an example here since I consider you one of the best posters on the site as well as one of the best game thread posters on the site. I know you don't participate in the game threads that much, but here's some snippets of some of your recent game thread posts that are all phenomenal, IMO ...











That stuff is all fantastic, and that's the type of stuff I love seeing in the game threads. It's insightful, it's informative, it's interesting, and it will make me watch that night's game differently immediately after reading it. To me, those posts are an example of the kind of stuff that should be common in the game threads from each poster who is participating.

There's quite a few other posters who also tend to post really insightful and informative stuff in the game threads too. They all know who they are, and they should be commended for it.

Unfortunately, the problem is those posts are too few and far between. Excluding the straight pbp describing what just occurred (Reds Fanatic does a very nice simple, straight to the point pbp, and CE's commentary is hilarious), most of the rest of the game thread posts do not offer much value at all. If Todd Coffey enters a game, suddenly there's 50 one-liners spread out over the next half dozen pages with nothing more than some variation of "Todd Coffey stinks." Stuff like that is just pointless to post, a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of time to read.

Most of the people who post in the game threads are capable of posting good content, because they do post good content in the ORG. The problem is once they enter the game thread they somehow forget to post good content.
I agree with this...very well said.

klw
04-17-2008, 01:17 PM
Excellent, excellent point! Do yourselves a favor. Go back a read the game thread of Adam Dunns walk-off Grand Slam against the Indians a couple years ago, it is an absolute blasty blast.

On the flip side if you try and read the thread with EE's walkoff, it is limited because it crashed the board.

Ultimately I am always happy to defer to the moderators and board founders on how they want the site run- its rules and its makeup. They created a wonderful place to come and learn, discuss, entertain and be entertained. It is a vibrant site that I enjoy and hope to see flourish. Thank you for the direction and I think times when decisions are made it does make me consider the quality of posts and serves as a reminder to keep the quality up.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 01:18 PM
Discussing posters' transgressions against the nature of the game thread is pointless if there are no rules to point to as where they've transgressed.

In a nutshell, this is it.

Until and unless there's a defined "purpose" against which transgressions can be judged, the only real issue should be one of decorum -- and that is something that needs be to proper whether it's in the game thread or anywhere else on RedsZone.

I think some warnings/temp-banning of the transgressors would go a long way without the need for some fancy definition of what the game thread is or isn't supposed to be. Perhaps rights can be removed to the game thread forum at the discretion of the moderators and used liberally until things come around.

klw
04-17-2008, 01:21 PM
I've condensed such a thread for you:


1400 posts complaining about Krivsky.

.

Something like this?:

Well if he knew what he was doing the Reds would throw no-hitters every game! And when was the last time a reds pither hit a walk-off homer to win a no-hit game they were throwing? Come on already ! :D

Boss-Hog
04-17-2008, 01:27 PM
In a nutshell, this is it.

Until and unless there's a defined "purpose" against which transgressions can be judged, the only real issue should be one of decorum -- and that is something that needs be to proper whether it's in the game thread or anywhere else on RedsZone.

I think some warnings/temp-banning of the transgressors would go a long way without the need for some fancy definition of what the game thread is or isn't supposed to be. Perhaps rights can be removed to the game thread forum at the discretion of the moderators and used liberally until things come around.
I certainly don't disagree with that; if the majority of the people in the game threads enjoy countless "Yay!'s" or "We suck!" after every move that happens in a game, that's their prerogative. The only thing I feel strongly about is completely removing the personal attacks that I've seen within the game threads from the board. That's not to say the game threads are the only place where this unfortunately goes on, but I do think the emotion of following the game often leads to people being more short-tempered than they normally would.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 01:27 PM
I find ranting to be as tedious in chat as it is in any other post. However, last night's game probably isn't a good gauge for chat due to the Fogg factor and large number of participants.

I guess my bigger point is that if everyone moves to chat, how does this solve anything? The same behaviors will likely happen.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 01:28 PM
For the record, I think the portrayal of game threads as a series of worthless, repeated one-liners is decidedly overplayed. I just went through the last several pages of the game thread that got shut down and these types of posts were an extremely small minority. Admittedly I haven't been terribly present lately, but exaggerating the quality of the posts there in either direction doesn't help us deal with the "problem".

letsgojunior
04-17-2008, 01:36 PM
Stormy, I'll use you as an example here since I consider you one of the best posters on the site as well as one of the best game thread posters on the site. I know you don't participate in the game threads that much, but here's some snippets of some of your recent game thread posts that are all phenomenal, IMO ...

That stuff is all fantastic, and that's the type of stuff I love seeing in the game threads. It's insightful, it's informative, it's interesting, and it will make me watch that night's game differently immediately after reading it. To me, those posts are an example of the kind of stuff that should be common in the game threads from each poster who is participating.

There's quite a few other posters who also tend to post really insightful and informative stuff in the game threads too. They all know who they are, and they should be commended for it.

Unfortunately, the problem is those posts are too few and far between. Excluding the straight pbp describing what just occurred (Reds Fanatic does a very nice simple, straight to the point pbp, and CE's commentary is hilarious), most of the rest of the game thread posts do not offer much value at all. If Todd Coffey enters a game, suddenly there's 50 one-liners spread out over the next half dozen pages with nothing more than some variation of "Todd Coffey stinks." Stuff like that is just pointless to post, a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of time to read.

Most of the people who post in the game threads are capable of posting good content, because they do post good content in the ORG. The problem is once they enter the game thread they somehow forget to post good content.

I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that. Different people have, in my view, very different conceptions of what a good comment in a game thread is. For instance, sometimes someone will post something particularly funny or off-the-wall (for instance like Raisor or KYRedsFan used to post), and it may not advance the discussion substantively, but I think it is enjoyable for many posters to read. Moreover, posting scores and breakdowns after inning may not be PhD material, but it allows those without DirecTV or satellite radio to follow the game live without having to sit through the utter annoyance that is the ESPN and Yahoo delay in updating the game situation.

I don't know, I feel like interjecting some overall "quality" quotient into the game thread (i.e. you can't post something unless it meets some sort of highly subjective standar), is unduly restrictive and will cut back on people wanting to participate to begin with. I definitely agree that personal attacks and posts such as "X player sucks" need to be done away. At the same time, the game threads are the seminal feature of the site for me, and it's very easy to scroll through comments that you disagree with or don't find interesting.

Just my opinion of course, but it seems with such a big site that 30 page game threads with a few less than spectacular posts is inevitable. Again just my opinion.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 01:37 PM
For the record, I think the portrayal of game threads as a series of worthless, repeated one-liners is decidedly overplayed. I just went through the last several pages of the game thread that got shut down and these types of posts were an extremely small minority. Admittedly I haven't been terribly present lately, but exaggerating the quality of the posts there in either direction doesn't help us deal with the "problem".


I agree.

And what is the gamethread supposed to be? Just PBP with analysis?

"ball one, outside...1-0 count"

"Encarnacion on Deck, 2-1 game, 9th inning, two out."

"ball two"

"Wow, Wood is having a hard time locating his fastball. I think it's because he's overstriding"

nate
04-17-2008, 01:41 PM
I guess my bigger point is that if everyone moves to chat, how does this solve anything? The same behaviors will likely happen.

It doesn't. But at least it's scrolled off your screen by the time you put your beer down.

WVRedsFan
04-17-2008, 01:44 PM
I certainly don't disagree with that; if the majority of the people in the game threads enjoy countless "Yay!'s" or "We suck!" after every move that happens in a game, that's their prerogative. The only thing I feel strongly about is completely removing the personal attacks that I've seen within the game threads from the board. That's not to say the game threads are the only place where this unfortunately goes on, but I do think the emotion of following the game often leads to people being more short-tempered than they normally would.

That's it. I am annoyed by the constant "______(put name of Reds player or GM here) sucks", but I can ignore that. When condescending people constantly in an around about way call another person dumb or stupid, it's really annoying to me to the point of just signing off. Sometimes it is the emotion of the game, but sometimes this same behavior is found outside the game threads.

I'm good either way, Boss, and I appreciate you providing this for all of us, but I think the game thread is an important part of RedsZone. Violators should be, if not prosecuted, at least given "time out" when the personal attacks happen. i know that's a lot to ask of the mods, but couldn't individual members just PM a mod about it. He could review it and take appropriate action?

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 01:58 PM
Well, why is it such a concern for you then? Not being snarky, just curious. There's nothing stopping any of us from creating a thoughtful post-game analysis thread any day of the week if we want.

It actually isn't a big concern for me personally.

I do find this quote telling from the About Us section though ...


If you’re looking for a place to blow off steam by pronouncing players worthless when the Reds play poorly, this is not the place for you. If you’re looking for a place to engage in smack talk, this is also not for the place for you. If you’re looking for a place to intelligently and passionately discuss the team in a respectful manner, this may be the place for you.

It's obvious Boss and GIK have a pretty well-defined and acceptable vision for what they'd like the board to be. It's a good vision too, IMO. My interpretation is the current state of the game threads is probably going against that vision. So when I see a message that game threads are temporarily closed, I'm not surprised at all. Boss and GIK have a vision for the site, and when part of that site deviates from that vision, then it becomes apparent that something needs to be addressed ... hence what we have now.

What people really need to think about is how to get the game threads back on a path that lines up with Boss and GIK's vision.

Unassisted
04-17-2008, 02:03 PM
It doesn't. But at least it's scrolled off your screen by the time you put your beer down.And comments posted in chat aren't maintained in near-perpetuity and visible to prospective members of the site or to Google, like comments in game threads are.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 02:06 PM
Suggesting chat as an alternative is like suggesting that rawhide is an alternative to a t-bone steak.

Do away with the game threads, but don't posit chat as an alternative. It isn't.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 02:08 PM
Finally, to answer a question that was previously raised, long term, I don't necessarily have a problem banning the problematic posters from the game thread and enabling it for everyone else, but I do want to make it clear that the general nastiness that I have seen towards others within the context of the game threads absolutely will not be tolerated - now or ever.

Thanks for taking the time to respond Boss. I agree that something needs to be done about fighting/personal attacks. I realize this is a burden to the admins to have to babysit the long game threads. Hopefully that will change.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 02:14 PM
It actually isn't a big concern for me personally.

I do find this quote telling from the About Us section though ...



It's obvious Boss and GIK have a pretty well-defined and acceptable vision for what they'd like the board to be. It's a good vision too, IMO. My interpretation is the current state of the game threads is probably going against that vision. So when I see a message that game threads are temporarily closed, I'm not surprised at all. Boss and GIK have a vision for the site, and when part of that site deviates from that vision, then it becomes apparent that something needs to be addressed ... hence what we have now.

What people really need to think about is how to get the game threads back on a path that lines up with Boss and GIK's vision.

Vision works with a 20-person board. After that, you need rules.

I will line up with whatever rules they set, because it's their board. If I don't like the rules, I'll defer and leave, because it's their board. Right now, people are talking about quality when the only way to realistically deal with this is via quantifiable measures. There are people suffering the consequences of a select few who broke quantifiable rules, and others holding up quality as the fuzzy reason why. It doesn't work.

I want to say that I think the mods to a great job and I don't envy their position. I wouldn't do that job. And I will forever respect the owners of this board. But I can't let go my position that a board run by standards of quality will not work unless that quality is defined in quantifiable terms. It's like running a government based solely on morality. It doesn't work. Large numbers of people need quantifiable rules, because they're the only kind that can be enforced.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 02:14 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I've used it to follow the game some times, but I actually enjoy all the emotional stuff mixed in with the thoughtful analysis. It's like being at a real game. I find it much more entertaining than a game tracker.

If some posters find that it's not their cup of tea or not high enough quality for them, I understand why they'd avoid the game thread, but I think it's going to be impossible to "up the quality" and get rid of emotional comments.

It's not reasonable to have a mod looking over and approving every post, and that's what it would take..

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 02:15 PM
It's a negative definition disguised as a positive.

WVRedsFan
04-17-2008, 02:17 PM
I've used it to follow the game some times, but I actually enjoy all the emotional stuff mixed in with the thoughtful analysis. It's like being at a real game. I find it much more entertaining than a game tracker.

If some posters find that it's not their cup of tea or not high enough quality for them, I understand why they'd avoid the game thread, but I think it's going to be impossible to "up the quality" and get rid of emotional comments.

It's not reasonable to have a mod looking over and approving every post, and that's what it would take..

Why wouldn't "self-policing" (reporting personal attacks to mods via PM) work? If the person sending the PM mentions the game thread and the post number as an example?

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 02:19 PM
Vision works with a 20-person board. After that, you need rules.

I will line up with whatever rules they set, because it's their board. If I don't like the rules, I'll defer and leave, because it's their board. Right now, people are talking about quality when the only way to realistically deal with this is via quantifiable measures. There are people suffering the consequences of a select few who broke quantifiable rules, and others holding up quality as the fuzzy reason why. It doesn't work.

I want to say that I think the mods to a great job and I don't envy their position. I wouldn't do that job. And I will forever respect the owners of this board. But I can't let go my position that a board run by standards of quality will not work unless that quality is defined in quantifiable terms. It's like running a government based solely on morality. It doesn't work. Large numbers of people need quantifiable rules, because they're the only kind that can be enforced.

Well said, once again.

Unassisted
04-17-2008, 02:29 PM
Vision works with a 20-person board. After that, you need rules.But there are rules... numbered and posted at the bottom of every single page on the board. And Boss has admitted that the problem is with violations of rule #5. So more rules are not needed. The issue here is with the consequences of breaking rules.

I used to run 2 message boards for a previous employer, so I know what I'd do with posters who repeatedly violate such well-defined rules on my board. Since it isn't my board and I've been asked to do so previously, I'll keep that opinion to myself.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 02:29 PM
Vision works with a 20-person board. After that, you need rules.

I will line up with whatever rules they set, because it's their board. If I don't like the rules, I'll defer and leave, because it's their board. Right now, people are talking about quality when the only way to realistically deal with this is via quantifiable measures. There are people suffering the consequences of a select few who broke quantifiable rules, and others holding up quality as the fuzzy reason why. It doesn't work.

I want to say that I think the mods to a great job and I don't envy their position. I wouldn't do that job. And I will forever respect the owners of this board. But I can't let go my position that a board run by standards of quality will not work unless that quality is defined in quantifiable terms. It's like running a government based solely on morality. It doesn't work. Large numbers of people need quantifiable rules, because they're the only kind that can be enforced.

VP that statement's been up there for nearly a year, and it's one click away for every person every time they're on this board. It isn't some new development, which is why I'm confused why you're refuting its usefulness. Other boards have flourished under similar visions.

This is all pretty simple ...

1) Boss and GIK have a vision for the site (which includes, but isn't limited to, rules)
2) People haven't been following that vision in the game threads
3) Game threads get closed

It doesn't get anymore straight-forward than that.

And instead of people complaining about the game threads being closed, they're better off figuring out what is they need to do to get the game threads back on the path of Boss and GIK's vision. And then they need to go out and do it. My wild guess is if people did that then there wouldn't be any problems with the game threads.

I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm just being blunt. This really is basic stuff.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 02:47 PM
VP that statement's been up there for nearly a year, and it's one click away for every person every time they're on this board. It isn't some new development, which is why I'm confused why you're refuting its usefulness. Other boards have flourished under similar visions.

This is all pretty simple ...

1) Boss and GIK have a vision for the site (which includes, but isn't limited to, rules)
2) People haven't been following that vision in the game threads
3) Game threads get closed

It doesn't get anymore straight-forward than that.

And instead of people complaining about the game threads being closed, they're better off figuring out what is they need to do to get the game threads back on the path of Boss and GIK's vision. And then they need to go out and do it. My wild guess is if people did that then there wouldn't be any problems with the game threads.

I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm just being blunt. This really is basic stuff.


That vision is still a negative disguised as a positive. Yes, we do have rules, the violations of which are very clear.

Same thing with the voting system--the criteria for the "vision" are nebulous. This HAS to be designed based on limitations of freedoms, not some faux-positive about "good talk" or whatever.

Break a rule, get a ban.

RMR said it best. It is simple; RMR enumerated it.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 02:49 PM
Cyclone, I think the problem is that the rules are being applied differently. If a handful of posters in ORG start calling each other names, those posters are handled accordingly. It is unclear to me, and perhaps others, why the board/thread needed to be shut down to eliminate the behavior of certain posters.

The only explanation I can see is that Boss and Co. feel that there is something fundamental in the design of having an open-ended daily Game Thread which encourages that sort of behavior -- thus requiring a restructuring. Otherwise the solution seems pretty simple, more enforcement of the rules/vision which already exist.

Heath
04-17-2008, 02:49 PM
Since my name is all over the place with the closed game thread announcments and I took the gamble with some other discussions with other moderators, I feel I need to reply.

There are valid arguments on all sides. However, there are three points that I feel that need to be addressed.

One - Game threads are a football fan's mentality of baseball. Live and die every night, every pitch, every right or wrong. Raw emotions for 3 hours. Those emotions turn into personal attacks, vendettas, beating subjects, players, ideologies, etc in to the ground, looking for pats on the back from other posters, and the stereotypical responses from the same posters night after night. What do you gain from this? Baseball is a six month sport. It's not over next month. Emotionally, especially with the problems of the on-field play, where does the general direction of the game thread go?

Two - This is TEMPORARY - this isn't a permanent loss. It's been down one night. One game. There are 145 games or so left. Can you give the moderator staff a week to clarify rules and regulations to a game thread? It's obvious that there is a need for some type of rules, but as moderators, we don't know that. We've not ever had to do this before. In the meantime, let us have some time to discuss how we handle this as a moderator staff. Let us have a chance to work this out for all parties, not just the select few who feel "put out" since we closed it down.

Three - Bandwidth. Game Threads are easily the most used forum. By far. The average game thread is 350 or so posts. How much bandwidth does that carry? What's Boss's bill every month? Boss & GIK both have pulled $$ out out of their own pockets for you to say "Dunn Sucks!". Wow, can we respect that? Is raw emotion worth spending someone else's money? I understand that some do donate towards the bottom line, and GIK and Boss appreciate that. And you may feel that's your go-ahead to spout what you spout. Kinda like a fan in a park situation. But, let's face it, bandwith isn't getting cheaper, and chat does allow a psuedo-game thread at no bandwidth storage.

I personally sincerely apologize that *I* took away some of your favorite places to post. I'm sorry. I'm sorry that some of you who genuinely enjoy game threads aren't able to do that right now. I'm sorry for the posters who don't abide by the simple rules of a game thread that caused the whole thing to be suspended temporarily. I'll take full responsibility for that action. If you feel that RedsZone.com doesn't suit your needs at the present time and this action made you leave, per se, I apologize for that as well.

On the other hand, cyclone pulled out the About Us part. That part was started in 2000 and has never been wavered. The quality of this site has been debated since day one. Looking at current events, are you proud of the stuff that you have posted on a game thread? If you knew a friend who was looking for a Reds Message board, would you show them a game thread? Or, would you show them a certain part of the board? This is one of the best message boards, NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, etc. etc. FWIW, it is a clean board, devoid of ads, large sig line billboards, and usually the home of good, decent, baseball discussion of a tradition-rich, yet recent history poor baseball club with more downs then ups. If this quality needs to continue, please let the moderators and owners of this board do their jobs.

Thanks -

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 02:52 PM
VP that statement's been up there for nearly a year, and it's one click away for every person every time they're on this board. It isn't some new development, which is why I'm confused why you're refuting its usefulness. Other boards have flourished under similar visions.

This is all pretty simple ...

1) Boss and GIK have a vision for the site (which includes, but isn't limited to, rules)
2) People haven't been following that vision in the game threads
3) Game threads get closed

It doesn't get anymore straight-forward than that.

And instead of people complaining about the game threads being closed, they're better off figuring out what is they need to do to get the game threads back on the path of Boss and GIK's vision. And then they need to go out and do it. My wild guess is if people did that then there wouldn't be any problems with the game threads.

I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm just being blunt. This really is basic stuff.

That vision is seriously up to interpretation cyclone. The rules posted are enforceable (and should be enforced). The vision is not. That's pretty basic stuff too.

VR
04-17-2008, 02:54 PM
I miss em.

My time zone means I usually am getting home in the 5th inning or so...and then start to set up command central w/ gameday, audio, and RZ.

My routine has become to open the game thread first to catch up to the action, before I switch on to live time.

I enjoy talking baseball, a lot...on a real time basis during the game. Go back to when the Reds were on a winning streak, in first place or just generally on a roll. Quality posters like 62, Stormy, M2, LGJ, even Boss are joining the threads and contributing great discussion, along with a bit of snark, humor and an occasional rabbit trail.

When they are losing...it quickly erodes into everyone's punching bag, and those wanting good discussion just stay away. I can't seem to break free, but I see why others do.

I think it's quite simple. Don't focus on what should be talked about in the threads...let them be a bit organic.
Focus on weeding on poor behavior as outlined in the rules, and make it a great environment where rolleyes aren't the #1 post.

TeamCasey
04-17-2008, 02:54 PM
With MLB TV, satelite radio, espn, cbssportsline, and yahoo gametracker's I didn't realize people were using gamethreads to actually follow the game.

Do people still follow the game via gamethreads? If so, I wonder how many?

I do for weekday day games but that's about it.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 03:10 PM
That vision is seriously up to interpretation cyclone. The rules posted are enforceable (and should be enforced). The vision is not. That's pretty basic stuff too.

The site is owned by two cool dudes. It's their site; it's their vision; it's their rules; it's their expense. Their interpretation is what matters. It's up to every single poster on this site to identify it, adapt to all the above, and then abide by it. In fact, when each and every one of us signed up for an RZ account, we agreed to do all the above.

TeamCasey
04-17-2008, 03:12 PM
I follow the gamethreads more on Friday or Saturday when I'm enjoying a cold beer and watching with 50 of my bestest Redszone friends. In that case, I simply enjoy the cameraderie of the game thread while being able to watch the game and multitask on the computer.

You could say ..... go to chat for that. Sometimes I do ...... other times I want to do things in multiple windows which isn't conducive to chat.

I haven't seen whatever ugly stuff transpired. I'm sure there's no need for that and the guilty parties know who they are.

The one liners and whatnot - it's a large community participating during a live event. So what if there are a dozen people who post ....... "Holy Cow, Dunn blasted that one!" at the same time. It's the nature of the beast and part of that camaraderie of enjoying the game thread. If you want something more in depth, start a thread. As for the play by play ...... some of you do a great job and I appreciate it. Keep up the good work.

vaticanplum
04-17-2008, 03:35 PM
The site is owned by two cool dudes. It's their site; it's their vision; it's their rules; it's their expense. Their interpretation is what matters. It's up to every single poster on this site to identify it, adapt to all the above, and then abide by it. In fact, when each and every one of us signed up for an RZ account, we agreed to do all the above.

This is my last post on the subject but I will make one last post because I feel that my own respect for the bosses or the rules is beginning to be questioned. I've said over and over that this is their board, they can do what they want, and I'll abide by it. I've also said that anyone who breaks a specific rule deserves to be booted. My only argument is your consistent harping on the quality issue and other things that can't be enforced. The vision that you posted is as follows:


If you’re looking for a place to blow off steam by pronouncing players worthless when the Reds play poorly, this is not the place for you. If you’re looking for a place to engage in smack talk, this is also not for the place for you. If you’re looking for a place to intelligently and passionately discuss the team in a respectful manner, this may be the place for you.

Line by line:
- "Dunn is a really terrible defender and I want him off the team." That's one person's definition of blowing off steam. It's another's definition of a legitimate criticism of the team.
- "smack talk" - I don't even know where to begin on that one. Some people genuinely think you're smack talking if you utilize stats to make a point. Others can call somone a foul name and consider it within the confines of legitimate criticism.
- "intelligently and passionately discuss the team in a respectful manner" People have widely varying views on what constitutes intelligence, passion, and respect. Widely. Someone could very easily use the passion argument as a defense basis for an impassioned one-lilner, in fact, and that's just a very basic example.

Companies have mission statements. They're vital to the quality of a company. But you cannot fire someone based on them. You need something significantly more quantitative than that.

Where you and I have the same opinion is that we both think everyone should respect this vision. Where we diverge is that you think that everyone is going to have the same definition of that vision. I don't agree, and I don't want them to. Varying opinions and backgrounds and ways of reading things is what makes this board a good one. letsgojunior said this best -- she's a lawyer, isn't she? She knows from enforcing rules.

That's really all I can say on the matter.

Cedric
04-17-2008, 04:22 PM
This is my last post on the subject but I will make one last post because I feel that my own respect for the bosses or the rules is beginning to be questioned. I've said over and over that this is their board, they can do what they want, and I'll abide by it. I've also said that anyone who breaks a specific rule deserves to be booted. My only argument is your consistent harping on the quality issue and other things that can't be enforced. The vision that you posted is as follows:



Line by line:
- "Dunn is a really terrible defender and I want him off the team." That's one person's definition of blowing off steam. It's another's definition of a legitimate criticism of the team.
- "smack talk" - I don't even know where to begin on that one. Some people genuinely think you're smack talking if you utilize stats to make a point. Others can call somone a foul name and consider it within the confines of legitimate criticism.
- "intelligently and passionately discuss the team in a respectful manner" People have widely varying views on what constitutes intelligence, passion, and respect. Widely. Someone could very easily use the passion argument as a defense basis for an impassioned one-lilner, in fact, and that's just a very basic example.

Companies have mission statements. They're vital to the quality of a company. But you cannot fire someone based on them. You need something significantly more quantitative than that.

Where you and I have the same opinion is that we both think everyone should respect this vision. Where we diverge is that you think that everyone is going to have the same definition of that vision. I don't agree, and I don't want them to. Varying opinions and backgrounds and ways of reading things is what makes this board a good one. letsgojunior said this best -- she's a lawyer, isn't she? She knows from enforcing rules.

That's really all I can say on the matter.

The vision is what Boss, GIK, and the moderators feel it should be. They have taken a look at the game threads and obviously don't like what they see. It's not like this decision was a big screw you to most posters. I think it was a general wake up call for the few people that post every two seconds and engage in immature fights daily. I almost wish Boss and GIK would go back and redo the list of posters invited into ORG and completely change the voting procedures.

After the change there was a few posters who seemingly didn't have a shot in hell of participating in the game threads. Two months later they had somehow changed their posting style and were angels and got voted in. It's fairly obvious now that their changes were superficial and their behavior turned ugly right after they got voted back here.

That's my two cents.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 04:40 PM
Where you and I have the same opinion is that we both think everyone should respect this vision. Where we diverge is that you think that everyone is going to have the same definition of that vision. I don't agree, and I don't want them to. Varying opinions and backgrounds and ways of reading things is what makes this board a good one. letsgojunior said this best -- she's a lawyer, isn't she? She knows from enforcing rules.

That's really all I can say on the matter.

No, what I think is that everyone does need is to have a close enough definition to Boss/GIK's. And if individuals do not comply, then Boss/GIK are free to kick them out as they please.

RZ is a privately owned site by two dudes; it is not public society, nor do individual posters own shares of the site. Boss/GIK can be as subjective as they want in enforcing whatever vision and rules they want to enforce. If they have a quality vision and require RZ posters to abide by that vision, then they're allowed to do just that.

If they want to sell the site for $20, they're free to do so. If they want to shut it down, they're free to do so.

This goes back to my earlier point that instead of complaining about game threads being closed, people should instead figure out what they need to do to get the game threads back to the vision/standards/rules that Boss/GIK have outlined for the entire site.

top6
04-17-2008, 04:46 PM
Wait a minute, for as long as I can remember (since 2000) there have been game threads. This hasn't exactly been a golden era of Reds baseball. Maybe Boss and GIK should give it a month or two, look at the Reds' record, then reassess the game thread situation at that time.

;)

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 05:10 PM
I follow the gamethreads more on Friday or Saturday when I'm enjoying a cold beer and watching with 50 of my bestest Redszone friends. In that case, I simply enjoy the cameraderie of the game thread while being able to watch the game and multitask on the computer.

You could say ..... go to chat for that. Sometimes I do ...... other times I want to do things in multiple windows which isn't conducive to chat.

I haven't seen whatever ugly stuff transpired. I'm sure there's no need for that and the guilty parties know who they are.

The one liners and whatnot - it's a large community participating during a live event. So what if there are a dozen people who post ....... "Holy Cow, Dunn blasted that one!" at the same time. It's the nature of the beast and part of that camaraderie of enjoying the game thread. If you want something more in depth, start a thread. As for the play by play ...... some of you do a great job and I appreciate it. Keep up the good work.

Your comments seem realistic and reasonable to me.

We need you as game thread moderator, you know what playing nice is.

In my opinion on the game threads we think too long and wrong.

It is a game time spontaneous emotional reaction, emotions with sports are a normal reaction, negative and positive emotions because negative and positive occurs during sporting events in the perceptions of human beings.

Rules violations?

Simple
Make a form letter.

Example.
Private Message:
Boss/GIK to SpringfieldFan

The follow type of discussion that is deemed appropriate or expected in game threads are such and such.
Example here: Because, all people are different, with a different set of standards, values and understanding.

They/We/I need to be shown what is expected of them in this culture.

Problematic: Hm, I am allowed to go to a sporting event, hoot and holler whatever but here I am not. So what is a good example of what I can do and participate in here?

Consequences of negative behavior in this culture:
As a result of certain rule violations:
Your privileges of posting in game threads have been suspended indefinitely for the following reasons.

Clear and Concise:
I. Personal attacks on other posters
A. Episodes and examples

II. Labeling, name calling (inappropriate language use) of players, coaches, management or posters etc.

III. SpringfieldFan, you’re just too stupid to get it or you refuse to accept the posting guidelines during game threads, to get the obvious so we had to do some behavioral modifications on you.

Just “too stupid” is labeling and name calling and will be provocative and inflammatory :bash: motivates :duel: negative behavior responses and reactions. So we don’t do that here. Hello!

IV. If you are going to get mad and throw a defensive fit due to the suspension decision, then your not working with us SpringfieldFan, your working against the greater whole, please move to a message board where you will be more happy. It is your decision, your choice, your responsibility as a member of this board.

Modify clearly and conscisely as you deem appropriate that will best meet the boards needs.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 05:40 PM
If the argument from Cyclone is: "it doesn't matter what you think good posting is, all that matters is what Boss and GIK think it is" then of course you're right. They can be as capricious and willy-nilly in who they let stick around as they want to be. No one can or is arguing that point. But can Boss or GIK clearly and *positively* state what *good* is? What that benchmark would be? No--and if I may say so, I doubt they really want to get into that business. In fact, from what I can gather, that's why they instituted the whole voting system, so others could make those kinds of determinations so the traffic is essentially more self-policing. You're arguing for an ideal that ultimately doesn't exist; all that can be *expected* of a participant of this board is playing by the rules and hopefully doing his/her best to contribute to the board.

GAC
04-17-2008, 05:54 PM
RedsManRick had a good idea I failed to mention. Use the chat feature below.

It's pretty cool.


I also wonder why it's ok to rant on chat, but not the game thread.

Not that those of us who frequent chat wouldn't like to see more participants, and that they wouldn't be welcome; but yeah, lets have those same people who can't play nice in the GTs, which was why they were stopped, now come into chat and cause problems with those of us that enjoy chat. What makes anyone think they are going to behave any better? Just because it's chat?

I'm sorry, and I understand that mods do a pretty good job and also have lives outside of RZ, and shouldn't have to babysit GROWN ADULTS; but when you know who the culprits are, then you take the appropriate disciplinary action in accordance with the posted forum rules. It's sad when you have to do so, but when such behavior persists then it's all you have left to do.

That is the only way you're going to get the GTs to "run better" IMO.

GAC
04-17-2008, 05:59 PM
But can Boss or GIK clearly and *positively* state what *good* is? What that benchmark would be? No--and if I may say so, I doubt they really want to get into that business.

No personal attacks on other members seems to be a very sound and reasonable bench mark. Easy to understand, and pretty straightforward. The rule has been in existence for how long now on here?

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 06:05 PM
But can Boss or GIK clearly and *positively* state what *good* is? What that benchmark would be? No--and if I may say so, I doubt they really want to get into that business. In fact, from what I can gather, that's why they instituted the whole voting system, so others could make those kinds of determinations so the traffic is essentially more self-policing. You're arguing for an ideal that ultimately doesn't exist; all that can be *expected* of a participant of this board is playing by the rules and hopefully doing his/her best to contribute to the board.

They already have stated it.

I specifically remember Boss and GIK outlining their vision for the board a year ago when they made those significant changes. And since it's a privately run forum, it isn't required for them to *positively* state what good is. Good is subjective to their discretion, and the vision they have provided outlines what *good* is well enough for people to adapt and abide.

This is a 100+ post thread full of people complaining about losing a game thread temporarily, and I have not yet seen one person ask Boss/GIK what the community needs to do or how it needs to change to get the game threads back. Nor have I seen anybody ask them their opinion on how they'd prefer to see the game threads flow and what type of content they would prefer to see frequently posted in those threads.

There's plenty of "I want" or "I think" or "This isn't fair," but nobody is asking the site's owners what they would prefer.

*BaseClogger*
04-17-2008, 06:06 PM
Boss and GIK, what would you prefer for a Game Thread?

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 06:36 PM
Different people have, in my view, very different conceptions of what a good comment in a game thread is.

:clap::clap:

GAC
04-17-2008, 06:37 PM
The beauty of a forum is a chance to interact with other people. To me, the game thread takes the place of my local watering hole. I can sit at home, watch the game and have all those comforts, while shooting the stuff with a bunch of fellow fans about the in-game occurrences.

This is absolutely true. It's the sole reason why I, and many others, enjoy chat. Sit in the comfort of your home, enjoy a cold one, and talk/discuss the game just as if you were sitting at your local pub.


Unless there is a clear stated "purpose" for the game thread as forum based play-by-play, I don't see how it could begin to be moderated as such. The description of the Game Thread board is: "Follow each pitch and discuss the game as it happens here"

There doesn't need to be a stated purpose. Sounds too formal for what is designed as an informal situation.

If people want PBP, then go to ESPN, Yahoo, etc. Not that it can't be available on the GTs or chat, but that is really not the main reason for it's existence.

GTs and chat simply exist for the reasons stated above...... people (friends,fans) wanting to interact and discuss the games. And just like when you're sitting at your local watering hole doing so, there will be agreements and disagreements. Those occur in all discussions. But we're not talking about that. That is always going to occur in such type of interactions. The problem has been the personal attacks. If someone makes an insulting personal attack while at a local bar, they might get their lights punched out. In the GTs and/or chat, you need to be warned, suspended, and if needed, banned.

The GTs, just as RZ itself, has grown. You therefore have a wider diversity of people. It just simply needs MORE moderation. Does that requires adding on more mods, especially ones that participate in those GTs? That should be considered IMHO.

reds44
04-17-2008, 06:43 PM
My only problem with chat is, as an out of market Reds fan I have MLB.tv which is on a good 20 second delay from what most people in chat are seeing. If I am in chat, I already know what happens before it happens. With game threads, I can control when I hit refresh and what I see. I was in chat today, and I thought it was good. There were no personal attacks or anything of that nature.

However, chat just doesn't work for me.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 06:50 PM
They already have stated it.

I specifically remember Boss and GIK outlining their vision for the board a year ago when they made those significant changes. And since it's a privately run forum, it isn't required for them to *positively* state what good is. Good is subjective to their discretion, and the vision they have provided outlines what *good* is well enough for people to adapt and abide.

This is a 100+ post thread full of people complaining about losing a game thread temporarily, and I have not yet seen one person ask Boss/GIK what the community needs to do or how it needs to change to get the game threads back. Nor have I seen anybody ask them their opinion on how they'd prefer to see the game threads flow and what type of content they would prefer to see frequently posted in those threads.

There's plenty of "I want" or "I think" or "This isn't fair," but nobody is asking the site's owners what they would prefer.

I've essentially just said this entire post in my last post. How did GAC steal Cyclone's login name? ;)

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 06:52 PM
No personal attacks on other members seems to be a very sound and reasonable bench mark. Easy to understand, and pretty straightforward. The rule has been in existence for how long now on here?

That's not a benchmark--that's a rule. That's very, very different. A benchmark is something *positive* to have had accomplished.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 06:53 PM
The only thing I feel strongly about is completely removing the personal attacks that I've seen within the game threads from the board.

:clap::clap:

Clear and conscise.

Red in Chicago
04-17-2008, 06:54 PM
Aren't some of the accusations of "personal attacks" overblown? I think a lot of people are overly sensitive, but that's just me. It's a message board, and a fantastic one at that. I probably check it 50 times a day and thats no exaggeration. People have been rude to me before, but I'm not going to complain. If someone is rude to you, ignore them. Whatever Boss and GIK decide is fine with me. Che sara, sara.

Falls City Beer
04-17-2008, 06:56 PM
Aren't some of the accusations of "personal attacks" overblown? I think a lot of people are overly sensitive, but that's just me. It's a message board, and a fantastic one at that. I probably check it 50 times a day and thats no exaggeration. People have been rude to me before, but I'm not going to complain. If someone is rude to you, ignore them. Whatever Boss and GIK decide is fine with me. Che sara, sara.

And how. But I guess I can appreciate mechanisms being in place for touchy folk.

Cedric
04-17-2008, 07:02 PM
And how. But I guess I can appreciate mechanisms being in place for touchy folk.

It's not even about if someone gets their feeling hurts. It's about having a website that is above the smack talk and personal disrespect that you see almost everywhere else on the net.

I honestly agree that some people are a little bit too touchy. The problem is that a few people here are really young and seem to shoot from the hip a little too much. If you try and respectfully calm them down they shoot back "nice job junior mod." That kind of behavior isn't what Redszone has ever been about. That's straight out of MLB.com.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 07:03 PM
How did GAC steal Cyclone's login name? ;)

If I really wanted, I think I could hang with GAC in a wordiness contest. :lol:

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 07:05 PM
The problem has been the personal attacks. If someone makes an insulting personal attack while at a local bar, they might get their lights punched out.

Greg suppose that FCB is posting what he believes is the truth about the Reds team and organization and it is perceived in negative tones from other's?

What if his comments though they might be true and brought on by the results that the Reds are achieving at this time and other's are put off by his remarks in game threads? That can be construed as personal to them.

Personally I enjoy his remarks because they reflect a truth to me and my perceptions, but to others, they are provoking in a negative manner because they come across as if the Reds can do nothing right. I go to that game thread to see what FCB, GAC, Stormy, etc are going to say, I also go that game thread to see what MATT WLW and Raisor are going to say for levity and a sense of lightening up.

Cedric
04-17-2008, 07:07 PM
Greg suppose that FCB is posting what he believes is the truth about the Reds team and organization and it is perceived in negative tones from other's?

What if his comments though they might be true and brought on by the results that the Reds are achieving at this time and other's are put off by his remarks in game threads?

Personally I enjoy his remarks because they reflect a truth to me and my perceptions, but to others, they are provoking in a negative manner because they come across as if the Reds can do nothing right. I go to that game thread to see what FCB, GAC, Stormy, etc are going to say, I also go that game thread to see what MATT WLW and Raisor are going to say for levity and a sense of lightening up.

FCB doesn't deserve any of the personal attacks he gets, NONE. He's allowed to be as negative as he wants to be. It's one thing to question his point of view and to joke around about his negativity. It's completely wrong when people question if he's a Reds fan. I've joked countless times with him about that and I think most do. The people that openly disrespect him are wrong though. It's right in the rules.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 07:09 PM
Greg suppose that FCB is posting what he believes is the truth about the Reds team and organization and it is perceived in negative tones from other's?

What if his comments though they might be true and brought on by the results that the Reds are achieving at this time and other's are put off by his remarks in game threads?

Personally I enjoy his remarks because they reflect a truth to me and my perceptions, but to others, they are provoking in a negative manner because they come across as if the Reds can do nothing right. I go to that game thread to see what FCB, GAC, Stormy, etc are going to say, I also go that game thread to see what MATT WLW and Raisor are going to say for levity and a sense of lightening up.

Really easy. The mods are the arbiters of what constitutes a breech of conduct and what doesn't. With a little effort, it shouldn't be difficult for any poster to stay way on the safe side of that line.

If they get close and get penalized, oh well; better than no forum at all. I have the feeling that a forum ban or two and suddenly people will think twice before going down that road at all.

Posts don't insult people, Posters do. Nip it in the bud.

Red in Chicago
04-17-2008, 07:11 PM
It's not even about if someone gets their feeling hurts. It's about having a website that is above the smack talk and personal disrespect that you see almost everywhere else on the net.

I honestly agree that some people are a little bit too touchy. The problem is that a few people here are really young and seem to shoot from the hip a little too much. If you try and respectfully calm them down they shoot back "nice job junior mod." That kind of behavior isn't what Redszone has ever been about. That's straight out of MLB.com.

For what it's worth, I've heard the "junior" comments come from more than just some of the younger folks on the board. I actually thought the comment was kind of funny, but to each his own. No offense, but honestly sometimes those that try to calm everyone down, can really be just an annoying as those that make the smart a$$ comments in the first place. Just my two pennies:)

Cedric
04-17-2008, 07:13 PM
For what it's worth, I've heard the "junior" comments come from more than just some of the younger folks on the board. I actually thought the comment was kind of funny, but to each his own. No offense, but honestly sometimes those that try to calm everyone down, can really be just an annoying as those that make the smart a$$ comments in the first place. Just my two pennies:)

It's not annoying when that kind of behavior is the reason we are even having this thread. I would probably think about laughing and egging that kind of talk on. Nothing personal about you and I'm not honestly speaking on just one situation.

If Boss and GIK want this board to be self policed I am going to make damn sure I respectfully say something to the cat fighters in the game thread. I'm not going to let Redszone get ruined because certain people were voted in and then completely fell back into their old disrespectful patterns.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 07:19 PM
FCB doesn't deserve any of the personal attacks he gets, NONE. He's allowed to be as negative as he wants to be. It's one thing to question his point of view and to joke around about his negativity. It's completely wrong when people question if he's a Reds fan. I've joked countless times with him about that and I think most do. The people that openly disrespect him are wrong though. It's right in the rules.

I agree 100%

I don't see him as being negative, I see him as being honest, and that is refreshing to me. Other's I don't know.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 07:21 PM
Really easy. The mods are the arbiters of what constitutes a breech of conduct and what doesn't. With a little effort, it shouldn't be difficult for any poster to stay way on the safe side of that line.
If they get close and get penalized, oh well; better than no forum at all. I have the feeling that a forum ban or two and suddenly people will think twice before going down that road at all.

Posts don't insult people, Posters do. Nip it in the bud.

Seems right to me.

nate
04-17-2008, 07:29 PM
Following all this, one thing that occurs to me is that the minor league "game thread" is usually chock full of great conversation, updates about the game(s) and discussion back and forth. Although I don't know how to extract _what_ is different about it in black and white other than saying "check that out", it might serve as an example of what our hosts are looking for in a "game thread."

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 07:47 PM
The rest of what you say is where it gets fuzzy. There's no clear description of what the game thread is "supposed" to be. Nowhere does it say that it's supposed to be a historical record, or a way to factually follow/preserve the game, or a play-by-play place, or a thorough analysis of players, or solely a place to rant, or anything else. Until rules are established to this effect (and my personal hope is that they're not), then people can treat it as whatever they want within the confines of the board's rules. Dicussing posters' transgressions against the nature of the game thread is pointless if there are no rules to point to as where they've transgressed.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

CrackerJack
04-17-2008, 07:52 PM
As for ideas, how about instituting a longer "flood timer" on the game thread forum (say something between every 30-60 seconds), so that people aren't posting emoticon replies and have to take a breath and think before posting a reaction to something? (forcing them to make their posts count and thus reducing the length of game threads and saving bandwith)

Basic but effective right? Hell I'm certainly guilty of the occassional one-liner reactionary "yay" or "boo" post, but I keep it to one or two times throughout a game at most, if I post at all. So it wouldn't bother me any certainly.

Just a thought.

jojo
04-17-2008, 08:11 PM
Greg suppose that FCB is posting what he believes is the truth about the Reds team and organization and it is perceived in negative tones from other's?

Why deal in impossibilities? :cool:

jojo
04-17-2008, 08:22 PM
This is really pretty easy.

Imagine you're thirsty. Now imagine the person you're talking to is about to buy you a beer after you finish conveying your thought. Now imagine that person is a loved one.....

It should be pretty easy to moderate yourself....

Really, if we adopt the stance that we interpret the statements of others with the utmost amount of charity (i.e. assume the comment wasn't meant to be a personal attack but rather is directed at an idea and frankly ideas don't mind) while proofreading our own comments as harshly as possible, it shouldn't be a problem.

Personally, I've got a stilted writing style that at times leads to my intentions being misread. I have a pretty thick skin too so sometimes, something I think is innocent might actually hack someone else off. I do the best I can but certainly a private message could go a long way towards letting me know something I've written needs a little softening. PMs work.

Or, to make it really, really, simple- stop before hitting "post quick reply" and think to yourself, could this comment be construed as hurtful or mean spirited?

Snark is great but only because it's clever rather than motivated by the intent to be demeaning (emoticons are very helpful so as to really let others know it's snark...see the above comment about FCB....now that's funny ha ha.... take away the emoticon and it might easily be misinterpretted as me potentially escalating hard feelings). When in doubt send a private message and ask. I'd certainly edit my comment to make absolutely sure it couldn't be misconstrued as in a mean spirited fashion if FCB sent a private message wondering.


Consistently taking the harshest possible interpretation of a person's view in a dialog is not only intellectually dishonest but it kills the discussion. It's what politicians do when they really have nothing to say or are incapable of making an honest argument.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 08:27 PM
Why deal in impossibilities? :cool:

That's right and ambiguous.
Yet every year they try to with the game threads.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-17-2008, 08:40 PM
For what it's worth, I've heard the "junior" comments come from more than just some of the younger folks on the board. I actually thought the comment was kind of funny, but to each his own. No offense, but honestly sometimes those that try to calm everyone down, can really be just an annoying as those that make the smart a$$ comments in the first place. Just my two pennies:)

What Red said.

Frankly, I think the whole thing is being overanalyzed, but that's me.

The Baumer
04-17-2008, 08:44 PM
This is a 100+ post thread full of people complaining about losing a game thread temporarily, and I have not yet seen one person ask Boss/GIK what the community needs to do or how it needs to change to get the game threads back. Nor have I seen anybody ask them their opinion on how they'd prefer to see the game threads flow and what type of content they would prefer to see frequently posted in those threads.

There's plenty of "I want" or "I think" or "This isn't fair," but nobody is asking the site's owners what they would prefer.

This makes me think that you aren't really reading what people are saying. There are plenty of posts asking for clarification of whats expected/what the rules are. Sure, not all of them are prefaced with a paragraph of Boss/GIK worship, but they are there if you look. Or is the issue not what people say, but that you'd like them to say it in a subservient tone, like a child who has done something wrong and is asking his parents for forgiveness?

Anyway, if you cast off this thread as just complaining you're disqualifying a lot of people's opinions and input. You're also missing a lot of opportunities to reach the other side and find solutions to the problem at hand.

GAC
04-17-2008, 09:13 PM
That's not a benchmark--that's a rule. That's very, very different. A benchmark is something *positive* to have had accomplished.

That's right, it is a rule. But certain people weren't obeying it. And how many times in the past have the administrators/mods made public annoncements warning and announcing members of the rules and to "play nice"? Quite a bit. They instituted changes in the forum a while back, and one of the complaints was the behavior and quality of posts not only on ORG, but also the GTs. Some contended that the behavior on the GTs was due to an influx of people (newcomers) from that "other" forum. Weed those people out and things will improve.

It didn't happen did it? We're back to square one, so to speak, when it comes to addressing the issue of behavior on the GTs. ;)

I said it then, and I still echo that sentiment.... the majority of the posters on here obey the rules. Issuing generalized warnings to everyone, whether it's via an annoucement or "sticky", when it's a minority creating the problem, is not going to resolve the situation. Continually telling people to play nice, when some continue not too, means, sadly enough, you have to alter/modify your approach and begin to directly address those who flaunt that rule. They have had enough warnings.

Now they have closed the GTs down indefinitely until some sort of resolution is found. Until they start coming down on those people who don't seem to get it, then it's just not going to improve.

If they need more mods, especially a person(s) who frequent the GTs daily, then so be it. Interview candidates and do so. But IMHO, that is the only way this situation is going to be resolved.

Again - it's not about people disagreeing. It's when members take it to the level of personal attacks and refuse to let it go.

Boss-Hog
04-17-2008, 09:15 PM
Fundamentally, I have absolutely no problems with game threads, even though I've already admitted that generally speaking, they're not for me. I realize that there are plenty of people who enjoy them and in a wide variety of forms. Some people enjoy mostly play by play accounts of the game, others enjoy the emotional aspects (both positive and negative) as if they were at the game with other fans and some even enjoy repeatedly reading knee jerk reactions from those who wear their emotions on their sleeves and seemingly live and die by every single pitch.

Nate brought up a very good point that the defacto minor league game threads / updates are very enjoyable to read and I agree with that. Very rarely have I seen posters bringing personal conflict onto that side of the board and there's a good blend of brief analysis and reaction to events without the scale being tipped one way or another. Ideally, that's what I, personally, would like to see in the game threads on here. I completely understand that the vast majority of posts within game threads are going to be made in direct response to events that happen in the game, so most posts are not going to provoke deep thought, and I'm fine with that. However, there are at least a handful of people that get overly emotional in the game threads and seemingly every time something goes wrong for the team, the offending player is pronounced worthless (or something similar). I never see this type of talk, or at the very least, not ad nauseum in the minor league section and it makes for a much, much more pleasurable read, at least in my opinion.

However, the main issue I have is with the personal attacks - both those that are subtle and not so subtle. If there's one constant rule we've had since day one that this site was created, it's been that personal issues should be handled privately and should never take place on the board. If you can not resolve the issues privately, we've always suggested placing each other on ignore for the betterment of the board. I would say that we are guilty to some extent of not sufficiently punishing the parties involved when this happens, but it's more difficult and time consuming to moderate several hundred posts every single night of the season than you might imagine. Speaking only for myself, the last thing I feel like doing in my free time is just that, so unless someone reports a perceived problematic post (which they should continue to do) or I'm inclined to read the reaction to a certain event in the game, I generally stay free of the game threads. As a result, I have a hard time expecting the moderators to read through hundreds and hundreds of posts every single night when they generously donate their time and energy to help maintain the site without being paid a dime.

If you have any other questions about where I stand, feel free to let me know.

GAC
04-17-2008, 09:25 PM
I would say that we are guilty to some extent of not sufficiently punishing the parties involved when this happens, but it's more difficult and time consuming to moderate several hundred posts every single night of the season than you might imagine. Speaking only for myself, the last thing I feel like doing in my free time is doing just that, so unless someone reports a perceived problematic post (which they should continue to do) or I'm inclined to read the reaction to a certain event in the game, I generally stay free of the game threads. As a result, I have a hard time expecting the moderators to read through hundreds and hundreds of posts every single night when they generously donate their time and energy to help maintain the site without being paid a dime.

You're absolutely right Boss. That is why I stated earlier that you need more mods for that GT. You admins, as well as the mods, have lives outside of RZ. The volume involved is overwhelming for the small group that you have. You do the best you can.

I can remember several years ago when we had a similar problem with chat when the software was accessible via MIRC. We had a problem with trolls and various other controversial behavior. You not only added chat mods; but looked for candidates that regularly/daily participated in chat, so that someone would always be present there because you guys couldn't.

I think you need to do the same with the GTs. Besides you and GIK, you only have 7 mods to oversee this entire forum. That is a pretty burdensome job to have to do on a daily basis. You need more mods.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2008, 10:51 PM
I think you need to do the same with the GTs. Besides you and GIK, you only have 7 mods to oversee this entire forum. That is a pretty burdensome job to have to do on a daily basis. You need more mods.


I nominate GAC, TeamCasey, FCB, vaticanplum, MattWLW and Krono for game thread moderators only, they have good people skills.

WVRedsFan
04-17-2008, 11:35 PM
Years ago, I used to be a moderator on a CompuServe forum. We had the right to suspend people as mods and did often. When the tone got personal, we would just not publish what they wrote and sent them a private note telling them that was strike one and three strikes and they were out. We had to go to Strike 2 on a couple of occasions, but only once did strike 3 happen. Most of the time, the first warning was enough. They knew we meant business and things would tone down.

I sympathize with Boss and GIK because this would probably be work intensive, but if it saved he game thread, it might be worth it.

WVRedsFan
04-17-2008, 11:37 PM
I nominate GAC, TeamCasey, FCB, vaticanplum, MattWLW and Krono for game thread moderators only, they have good people skills.
Sounds like a good bunch to nominate. i concur.

SteelSD
04-17-2008, 11:39 PM
Well, I really have no dog in this fight as I can live either with or without game threads. I don't post in them nearly as much as I used to and I generally prefer a reasonably-sized real-time chat. But I see two issues being presented:

1. Post "quality"
2. Personal attacks

The first "issue" has me scratching my head a bit because as quickly as the game threads move along, there really isn't a whole lot of time for things like research to debunk a comment here or there. I think I'm pretty quick to gather information but the nature of game threads means that some post types are going to be virtually eliminated- in particual those that involve a real-time collection of data. Quick one or two line comments are the norm. When something good happens, the group cheers. When things go wrong, there's a collective "Booooo!". I've never seen anything wrong with that. Even though it looks like "noise" because posts are presented in chronological order, those posts are all being typed at the same time.

While a goodly amount of quality posts have been made and are capable of being produced, the game threads IMHO aren't the best source from which to expect top-notch stuff on a consistent basis.

The second issue appears to be what Boss is more concerned with- personal attacks. Here's why I was actually confused to see not only that game thread shut down (with a potentially "quality" discussion about the merits of "protection" about to ensue), but also that the game thread venue was locked...

On 04/04/08, Boss posted a universal Announcement thread about dealing with Infractions of RedsZone policy. Easily understood, IMHO. So, I expected any issue of potential policy violators to be taken care of via the process outlined. See a post you feel is a "personal attack", report said post to the mods, and let the mods determine if the post warrants a "warning".

That's a pretty simple and likely effective process, IMHO, if followed. If a poster is deemed to deserve enough warnings, then the process removes that poster organically with no need to close game threads or the game thread venue. Instead, what we saw was from my perspective setting off a nuke to do a job that required nothing but a scalpel. I understand the temporary nature of the closure, but considering that we already have a clear vision, clear rules, and a clear process to follow regarding potential policy violations, I'm confused as to why such extreme measures needed to be taken.

Ron Madden
04-18-2008, 04:43 AM
Well, I really have no dog in this fight as I can live either with or without game threads. I don't post in them nearly as much as I used to and I generally prefer a reasonably-sized real-time chat. But I see two issues being presented:

1. Post "quality"
2. Personal attacks

The first "issue" has me scratching my head a bit because as quickly as the game threads move along, there really isn't a whole lot of time for things like research to debunk a comment here or there. I think I'm pretty quick to gather information but the nature of game threads means that some post types are going to be virtually eliminated- in particual those that involve a real-time collection of data. Quick one or two line comments are the norm. When something good happens, the group cheers. When things go wrong, there's a collective "Booooo!". I've never seen anything wrong with that. Even though it looks like "noise" because posts are presented in chronological order, those posts are all being typed at the same time.

While a goodly amount of quality posts have been made and are capable of being produced, the game threads IMHO aren't the best source from which to expect top-notch stuff on a consistent basis.

The second issue appears to be what Boss is more concerned with- personal attacks. Here's why I was actually confused to see not only that game thread shut down (with a potentially "quality" discussion about the merits of "protection" about to ensue), but also that the game thread venue was locked...

On 04/04/08, Boss posted a universal Announcement thread about dealing with Infractions of RedsZone policy. Easily understood, IMHO. So, I expected any issue of potential policy violators to be taken care of via the process outlined. See a post you feel is a "personal attack", report said post to the mods, and let the mods determine if the post warrants a "warning".

That's a pretty simple and likely effective process, IMHO, if followed. If a poster is deemed to deserve enough warnings, then the process removes that poster organically with no need to close game threads or the game thread venue. Instead, what we saw was from my perspective setting off a nuke to do a job that required nothing but a scalpel. I understand the temporary nature of the closure, but considering that we already have a clear vision, clear rules, and a clear process to follow regarding potential policy violations, I'm confused as to why such extreme measures needed to be taken.

:clap::clap::clap::clap: very well said.

klw
04-18-2008, 07:19 AM
To address the bandwidth issues caused by quick refreshing of the game thread, can the thread be split in two once it reaches a certain point, say 200 posts. Once the game is over it can be rejoined. This way people refreshing to get an update only need to refresh a smaller thread but the whole thread is still out there for people wishing to get caught up.

Boss-Hog
04-18-2008, 07:24 AM
To address the bandwidth issues caused by quick refreshing of the game thread, can the thread be split in two once it reaches a certain point, say 200 posts. Once the game is over it can be rejoined. This way people refreshing to get an update only need to refresh a smaller thread but the whole thread is still out there for people wishing to get caught up.
I'll have to check with vBulletin to see if that would reduce bandwidth (of which the game threads definitely use a considerable amount, but that wasn't a primary factor for this decision).

cumberlandreds
04-18-2008, 08:23 AM
. Besides you and GIK, you only have 7 mods to oversee this entire forum. That is a pretty burdensome job to have to do on a daily basis. You need more mods.[/quote]

I totally agree that you need more mods. I am a moderator on a UK sports site and we have approximately 20 mods. The posting traffic there is about the same as here. Actually with a daily game day thread there is much more traffic on RZ. If I looked in the right place RZ only has about seven.

Ltlabner
04-18-2008, 08:39 AM
FWIW, a different forum I freqent has 1049 users online right now and 13,000 active members in total. About 25 to 30 mods. Currently there are 109 people online at RZ and 7 mods. They have many more users per mod than RZ does and do not have nearly the problem with behavior RZ has. So more mods isn't the answer.

They have no memebership requirements and no sundeck/ORG process to weed out problem children. But it helps that they enforce the rules, delete inflamatory posts, boot those who misbehave and boot long-time/popular members if they act up regularly.

And this forum has just as many heated issues ala strike outs and value of stats as a baseball forum has, perhaps more. It's definatley far more a subjective subject matter.

Spring~Fields
04-18-2008, 01:20 PM
An after thought.

Maybe Boss and GIK should put it to a vote in the Futures to see if the people really want a game thread, perhaps the majority might decide that thoughts and feelings regarding game threads have changed and maybe they don't really want one anymore.

Perhaps the chat room and a play by play thread such as they do in the minor leagues would suffice, they do a great job over in the minor league forums.

TeamCasey
04-18-2008, 01:58 PM
I appreciate the kind words guys but I'm afraid I'd be an absentee landlady.

I only have time for Friday and Saturday games/ gamethreads ...... and don't tell anyone but sometimes I fall asleep before the 9th inning. ;) It's an old lady thing ....... or the beers.

I wouldn't mind being an occasional chat mod, but I just don't participate enough in the game threads to help the guys out.

redsrule2500
04-18-2008, 02:33 PM
If game threads used too much bandwidth, this decision could make sense. I miss them.

Patrick Bateman
04-18-2008, 03:59 PM
Personally, the game threads have been a mess for a long time. I think what needs to happen is a more strict policy. The rules are clearly stated. I think offenders need to be suspended from game threads once problems arise (banned from game threads if it's a recurring problem). No warnings or anything, it's the only way to eliminate the petty arguments/name calling.

*BaseClogger*
04-18-2008, 04:00 PM
has it really been that big of a problem? I can only remember the one recent incident... (remember this is my first season of games)

membengal
04-18-2008, 04:24 PM
I miss them. This place is less fun without them. Even though I was not a regular participant, as an out-of-town fan with no one to share game chatter with live and in person (my wife is wonderful, but she has limits when it comes to my zealotry, and discussing with me pitch counts is one of them), it was nice to have a place with contemporaneous reactions and what not. Matter of fact, for out-of-town fans, that kind of thing is real hard to replace, so I just have to do without, I guess. With regard to the issues in that thread from time to time, I just read past the personal stuff when it flared up.

GIK
04-18-2008, 04:43 PM
Good afternoon, my fellow Redszonians.

I apologize for my tardiness. The last six months have seen a reduction in my activity here as my work and home life has changed, but I do try to check in on the community as much as I possibly can.

The staff is currently in discussion on how to proceed with the Game Thread forum and I do appreciate comments from you all.

I think it's impossible for me to quantify what a "good" post is, absolutely. However, I do know how I wish RedsZone to represent our team and this community. I'll sum it up in one word.

Respect.

Respect your fellow members, your moderators, this site and maybe most importantly, yourself.

Think before you post. Take that extra five seconds and ask yourself if what you wrote is what you stand for.

And, finally, to those who cannot abide by our rules - and yes, we do have rules (please scroll to the bottom of each page) - you will be punished. There is an infraction system here at RedsZone. We will use it accordingly and if you break our rules, you will be disciplined. Once you reach a "5" point score on this scale, you will be banned. It may not be permanent, but you will definitely earn a vacation.

Like Boss, I don't visit the Game Thread forum often. I would much rather scream at my TV than bash the keyboard on my laptop. However, I do understand that the GT forum is important to many of you. Again, the staff is currently addressing this issue privately and we will update you on our progress accordingly.

GIK

Highlifeman21
04-18-2008, 04:52 PM
I can't believe that the people who ruined the game threads aren't embarrassed and apologizing for ruining something which could be so much fun. We've all been aggravated before but it's beyond bad now and hopefully the few bad apples are ashamed. I've posted probably five times in game threads this year because of the level of mean and disrespectful posters in those threads. I don't know if it's anonymity or what but I'm always shocked at how petty some of the fights are and how often the same posters are involved.

I guess I'm just shocked this happened after Boss and GIK completely changed the site and made some people get voted in. A certain few obviously didn't realize that there was a reason they weren't brought back in the first place and I hope like hell they realize it now. It's just frustrating, IMO.

This episode with the game threads is a great example of how the entrance to the ORG voting system is not working.

There are clearly posters in the ORG that shouldn't be. Yet they are here, and they are contributing to the noise and pouring gas on the fires in the game threads.

I'm not sure what the solution to the problem is, but like the state of the Reds, the status quo certainly isn't working either for the ORG game threads.

TeamCasey
04-18-2008, 05:14 PM
Can we get the game threads back for the weekend while you guys are working all this stuff out?

Pretty please? ;)

I'm getting ready for a business trip and I'd like to hang out and partake in a couple games and threads.

I'll talk TeamBoone into making you guys dinner or something. :p:

klw
04-18-2008, 05:37 PM
This episode with the game threads is a great example of how the entrance to the ORG voting system is not working.

There are clearly posters in the ORG that shouldn't be. Yet they are here, and they are contributing to the noise and pouring gas on the fires in the game threads.

I'm not sure what the solution to the problem is, but like the state of the Reds, the status quo certainly isn't working either for the ORG game threads.

The issue seems to be primarily in game threads and not the rest of ORG. The question then becomes whether the posters contribute to (or at least that they don't worsen) discussion in ORG. If the problem area is simply the Game Thread, should the game threads be in separate from ORG in a more restrictive or less restrictive area? for instance, it could be open to all registered members of Redszone but not visible to those who are not logged in or it could be restricted to a smaller group of ORG posters.

Just throwing ideas out there.

WVRedsFan
04-18-2008, 06:01 PM
The issue seems to be primarily in game threads and not the rest of ORG.

I may be alone here, but I see it happening on the other sections of the board from time to time. Some just do not have the tolerance for members that go against their opinions. Things get nasty and all of a sudden it's a fight. Pure internet bliss. It doesn't happen as often on the board as a general rule, but it happens. Arrogance is the main culprit. I usually ignore it (and sometimes I do not), but there are arrogant people in the world and RedsZone being part of the world means you have arrogant people.

FCB has it right. Use the ignore button. It does wonders for your mental health. The other key is strict enforcement of the rules. I know that's tough on a board this size, but it's the only way to make it all work.

klw
04-18-2008, 06:10 PM
I may be alone here, but I see it happening on the other sections of the board from time to time. Some just do not have the tolerance for members that go against their opinions. Things get nasty and all of a sudden it's a fight. Pure internet bliss. It doesn't happen as often on the board as a general rule, but it happens. Arrogance is the main culprit. I usually ignore it (and sometimes I do not), but there are arrogant people in the world and RedsZone being part of the world means you have arrogant people.

FCB has it right. Use the ignore button. It does wonders for your mental health. The other key is strict enforcement of the rules. I know that's tough on a board this size, but it's the only way to make it all work.

Well I guess I should have said that the issue is being primarily discussed as an issue in Game Thread. I am curious if people see it as an issue elsewhere.

WVRedsFan
04-18-2008, 06:37 PM
Well I guess I should have said that the issue is being primarily discussed as an issue in Game Thread. I am curious if people see it as an issue elsewhere.

It really isn't a problem other than on the game threads, and it's not all the time, so you are essentially correct. IMHO, you have three kinds of fans here. You have the studious fan--those that research statistics and are students of the game. Then you have those who are not quite there and very opinionated. Finally you have the casual fan who just wants to watch the Reds win. Conflict happens. When it does, the frustration usually comes from the first group talking to the third group. That seems to happen more in the GT.

Heck, i value so many opinions on this board. Sometimes I even change my opinion on things because of what a respected poster says (really, a lot of the time), but I'm in the third group so I suppose I aggravate a lot of people on here. I've been to therapy and I'm doing better :).

klw
04-18-2008, 06:45 PM
I've been to therapy and I'm doing better :).

Serenity now! Serenity Now!

GAC
04-18-2008, 06:56 PM
Greg suppose that FCB is posting what he believes is the truth about the Reds team and organization and it is perceived in negative tones from other's?

What if his comments though they might be true and brought on by the results that the Reds are achieving at this time and other's are put off by his remarks in game threads? That can be construed as personal to them.

Personally I enjoy his remarks because they reflect a truth to me and my perceptions, but to others, they are provoking in a negative manner because they come across as if the Reds can do nothing right. I go to that game thread to see what FCB, GAC, Stormy, etc are going to say, I also go that game thread to see what MATT WLW and Raisor are going to say for levity and a sense of lightening up.

I could care less what FCB, or any other member on the GT, has to say/post on the GTs. They can be as negative, positive, optimistic, pessimistic, as they want. Whatever trips their trigger. In discussions, people agree/disagree all the time during these situations. It's not about pleasing me, or any other poster, and only putting out statements and positions that I would concur with. Discussion forums are all about expressing opinions.

It's when disagreements arise between individuals that then elevate into personal attacks (name calling, demeaning remarks meant to slight, downright nastiness, etc).

When you disagree - you disagree - no need to let it deteriorate to that level.


Really easy. The mods are the arbiters of what constitutes a breech of conduct and what doesn't. With a little effort, it shouldn't be difficult for any poster to stay way on the safe side of that line.

If they get close and get penalized, oh well; better than no forum at all. I have the feeling that a forum ban or two and suddenly people will think twice before going down that road at all.

Posts don't insult people, Posters do. Nip it in the bud.

Exactly!

jojo
04-18-2008, 08:49 PM
Here's some ideas for the game threads:

Appoint a "game thread" moderator whose only only duties are game thread monitoring.

Anyone with 3 or more infraction points loses game thread privileges.

Spring~Fields
04-18-2008, 09:05 PM
They can be as negative, positive, optimistic, pessimistic, as they want. Whatever trips their trigger. Discussion forums are all about expressing opinions.



:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Screwball
04-19-2008, 03:42 AM
I have a couple of points to make...

First off, I'm tired of some of the shots that have been made towards ORG members that have been voted in. If you really have that big of a problem with them, then take it private, thus sparing us the indignant routine while, at the same time, also preventing making personal attacks towards them (yes, we're not stupid, we know who you're talking about).

Secondly, I see Cyclone and others wishing that more quality posts would be made in the GTs. While I completely agree, I think that it's gonna take the more respected posters to set an example. Rarely do I see guys like Steel, jojo, RMR, M2, princeton, dougdirt, and a host of other very knowledgeable and civil posters making remarks. I think that if they did more frequently (I'm not necessarily saying they should, I'm sure they have lives outside of RZ), this entire situation would've never even come up.

Lastly, I very much enjoy the contributions of the "voted in" ORG members. More specifically, Reds44 and WilyMoROCKS are nothing short of awesome to talk baseball with, and I hope that's become apparent to more than just me.

Ron Madden
04-19-2008, 04:40 AM
I am very grateful to Boss, GIK and all of the moderators here for making RedsZone what it is. There is no better place than RedsZone to Read, discuss, or even learn about baseball and the Cincinnati Reds.

I love reading the game threads, I don't see how the game thread in and of it's self is a problem.

There are some members who want nothing to do with the game threads, that is all well and good. There are other members who love to participate in or just read the game threads.

Those members who want no part of game threads should just ignore them.

Those members who partiipate in game threads should always be resectful to other members. There is absolutely nothing wrong with disagreeing with another member, disagreement should lead to discussion. Always enter those discussions with an open mind. Somebody might actually learn something.

It seems to me that Chip and Joseph are the only mods that take a regular part in any baseball discussion on ORG or in game threads. I hope that their opinions count more than the moaning and groaning of a few members that spend all their time in non baseball chatter and the peanut gallery.

:beerme:

Highlifeman21
04-19-2008, 07:39 AM
I have a couple of points to make...

First off, I'm tired of some of the shots that have been made towards ORG members that have been voted in. If you really have that big of a problem with them, then take it private, thus sparing us the indignant routine while, at the same time, also preventing making personal attacks towards them (yes, we're not stupid, we know who you're talking about).

Secondly, I see Cyclone and others wishing that more quality posts would be made in the GTs. While I completely agree, I think that it's gonna take the more respected posters to set an example. Rarely do I see guys like Steel, jojo, RMR, M2, princeton, dougdirt, and a host of other very knowledgeable and civil posters making remarks. I think that if they did more frequently (I'm not necessarily saying they should, I'm sure they have lives outside of RZ), this entire situation would've never even come up.

Lastly, I very much enjoy the contributions of the "voted in" ORG members. More specifically, Reds44 and WilyMoROCKS are nothing short of awesome to talk baseball with, and I hope that's become apparent to more than just me.

Since you mentioned them, reds44 and WMR are great examples of voted in success stories. Since they've "rejoined" the ORG, they both been nothing short of spectacular with their contributions to the ORG. Unfortunately, they (and a short list of others), seem to be the only voted in ORG members that are showing the desired result of the voting in process. I would definitely also include you, Screwball, on the short list. You've been exactly what the voting process into ORG should be. Unfortunately, you're not the norm. We've definitely voted in some people that shouldn't be in the ORG. Hell, maybe if I went through the voting process, I wouldn't have gotten in. Who knows? I'm sure I'd get in trouble if I posted a list of voted in ORG members that have vastly contributed to the personal attacks and noise in the game threads, so I won't. It's not hard to figure out the usual suspects that led to the game threads being shut down (hopefully temporarily).

Boss-Hog
04-19-2008, 08:34 AM
Let's keep on topic in the discussion of game threads, please.

Highlifeman21
04-19-2008, 08:41 AM
Let's keep on topic in the discussion of game threads, please.

Is it possible to seclude some ORG members from the game threads, while letting others continue to post in them?

IMO, it seems that the majority lost the game thread privileges b/c of the minority. If you eliminate the offending minority, then would the majority be able to enjoy the game threads again?

Are game threads something the mods, you and GIK want to continue going forward with RedsZone, or should the game threads turn into PbP summaries, and then have the majority of would be posts that would be in the game threads go to chat instead?

membengal
04-19-2008, 08:44 AM
fwiw, the chat option is really not a great solution. The few times I have tried it, I can't really following the conversation because it flies by so fast, and, if you just want reds chatter, the other stuff is tedious. Not knocking it, mind you, for those who enjoy that means of game experience, just saying that it is not an ideal solution for everyone.

nate
04-19-2008, 08:55 AM
A couple of thoughts:

GAMETHREAD:

1. Someone else may've mentioned this but is it possible to have a repost interval of, I dunno, a minute that one must wait before making another post. Would that, perhaps, have the effect of slightly cooling a hot head?

2. Similarly, someone mentioned increasing the refresh interval, perhaps that's a good idea as well.

3. Perhaps one person can by the dedicated PBP person who isn't subjected to the interval restrictions.

Don't know if any of this is possible.

CHAT

Just one comment, I believe that it _IS_ possible to create other rooms in chat so those who prefer something slower paced could chat thusly.

FINALLY

All of this behavioral modification requires time and effort from the mods. The best solution would be to for our esteemed members to dispense with any further "BS" and return to our regularly scheduled programming.

Boss-Hog
04-19-2008, 09:02 AM
Is it possible to seclude some ORG members from the game threads, while letting others continue to post in them?
Yes, this is possible. Forum-based posting timers are not.

paintmered
04-19-2008, 09:37 AM
IIRC, one of the motivations for not allowing SD posters into game threads was to reduce post volume. Take it from me, it's very difficult to moderate a thread that can grow faster than 20 posts per minute. It's extremely time consuming, thankless and often difficult to follow. I don't choose to spend my evenings in the game threads any more for these reasons.

From my observations, it is usually more than a few posters gradually bending the rules as the thread continues. When dozens of posters are bending the rules, where do you start to place blame and hand out punishments when it's the majority of the posters gradually moving together? So I completely understand Heath's decision to close it down. I've been tempted to do the same in the past but never had the cajones to actually do so.

I think it would be unfortunate to lose the game threads permanently. Game threads are a Redszone institution. They are a great place to go an enjoy the game with friends, discuss the game with friends and enrich your Reds experience. Game threads are none of those right now. In my opinion, game threads are not a place for manic-depressive behavior. There's too much of that on RZ as a whole and especially the game threads. Let's bring the emotional highs down a bit and bring the lows up a bit as well. Also, unless you have something to actually say in a game thread, consider not posting. This is not football. I urge you to think otherwise if you want to bring that mentality to a game thread. Also, I think it is a good thing to exercise a little personal restraint to limit posting in a game thread. 200-300 post game threads are good, 900+ post game threads are not.

The board software allows for suspensions of a specific forum. Let's start handing out 3-hour, game-thread time outs to anyone who infringes on Rule 5. Boss has warned everyone and is blue in the face. We're past warning at this point. If you break the rules, we'll hit the mute button and see you after the game.

RedlegJake
04-19-2008, 10:44 AM
Sometimes for me, living in the KC area and not subscribing to any airtime service to get games, the game threads are my only play by play of the game except for Gameday. I just won't use "free" (as in stolen) radio sites. I do miss the game threads but it was really becoming obnoxious and hard to follow.

For instance, Encarnacion gets a single. What is see is 7 posts. 6 say things like Wow!, way to go!, Alright E! One post usually says "EE gets a single up the middle". I just waded through 7 posts to read the 1 relevant post. I also like to read how a guy's fastball has good movement, or a fielder just missed getting his glove on it because those posts visualize it for readers. I wish discussion topics about non game related stuff would simply get posted in a regular thread, though. Maybe a "read and follow" game thread with 3 or 4 selected "guest" contributors each night who would post the pbp and color and keep the thread focused on the game and its description. Or else start with thre or four guys who follow the game each night and volunter to do it, to provide the game threads, and slowly allow others to rejoin the process. I'll trust Bos and the mods to make the decision on how. I just hope they eventually bring back the threads in some format.

RFS62
04-19-2008, 11:06 AM
The board software allows for suspensions of a specific forum. Let's start handing out 3-hour, game-thread time outs to anyone who infringes on Rule 5. Boss has warned everyone and is blue in the face. We're past warning at this point. If you break the rules, we'll hit the mute button and see you after the game.



That sounds to me like a very reasonable approach.

:thumbup:

Cyclone792
04-19-2008, 11:12 AM
Sometimes for me, living in the KC area and not subscribing to any airtime service to get games, the game threads are my only play by play of the game except for Gameday. I just won't use "free" (as in stolen) radio sites. I do miss the game threads but it was really becoming obnoxious and hard to follow.

For instance, Encarnacion gets a single. What is see is 7 posts. 6 say things like Wow!, way to go!, Alright E! One post usually says "EE gets a single up the middle". I just waded through 7 posts to read the 1 relevant post. I also like to read how a guy's fastball has good movement, or a fielder just missed getting his glove on it because those posts visualize it for readers.

Absolutely spot on.

You just summarized my precise take in a handful of sentences.

Screwball
04-19-2008, 11:37 AM
This is an honest question...

Are we not allowed to talk at all about that day's lineup or game until after it's been played? I ask because I've noticed a few threads shut down seemingly for that very reason.

Spring~Fields
04-19-2008, 11:43 AM
Let's keep on topic in the discussion of game threads, please.

Now you are redefining things.

Lineups have been discussed on the forum since its beginning, now your staff is calling those game threads.


I'm such a killjoy. This looks like a game thread, acts like a game thread and sounds like a game thread.

This kind of flippant cavalier response from RZ leadership is not conduscive to improving the behavior or tone from others, when it itself sets a tone contrary to what you and GIK have asked for. We need some clarity and balance, not double standards and mixed messages.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67348&page=3

membengal
04-19-2008, 11:54 AM
So, now there is absolutely no approved means of discussing today's game ahead of the game?

What about after the game?

The whole thing makes it hard to even know what is okay to post...do I need to wait 24 hours after I see something I want to talk about on here to make sure it is not game related?

RedlegJake
04-19-2008, 11:57 AM
I agree with Springfield Fan. What was the offending behavior exactly? I'm having difficulty understanding this one.

Danny Serafini
04-19-2008, 11:59 AM
Since when is a lineup a game thread? I'm not one to typically run in screaming overmoderation, because that card gets overplayed, but if this isn't a case of overmoderation I don't know what is.

westofyou
04-19-2008, 12:01 PM
So, now there is absolutely no approved means of discussing today's game ahead of the game?

What about after the game?

The whole thing makes it hard to even know what is okay to post...do I need to wait 24 hours after I see something I want to talk about on here to make sure it is not game related?

Not being able to even talk about the game is a tad draconian, might as well just leave Redszone if you can't even mention the thing the the board is built around.

Baseball Games.

Tony Cloninger
04-19-2008, 12:02 PM
Try going to the enquirer.com game threads...... people would realy go at some of those folks.

One guy calls Dunn....Dunng..... no matter what he does.

Phillips is the best hitter according to some posters. Dunn should bat 6th...although there about 3 people who say he should bat 2nd (I agree)

Some people want Freel/Hopper all the time beacuse they run real fast! :D

Spring~Fields
04-19-2008, 12:05 PM
I agree with Springfield Fan. What was the offending behavior exactly? I'm having difficulty understanding this one.

Good question, I reread that specific lineup discussion thread and I could not find personal adverse behavior in human interpersonal communications.


Right or wrong we have been kicking the tires and looking under the hood of lineups on Redszone for a long time. It is akin to discussing trades in the winter time. Right or wrong, meaning perhaps those types of discussions are futile since we fans don’t make out the lineups or make the trades but discussing those facets of the Reds is a part of the fans life in sports a norm and a tradition.

It has been an accepted norm throughout the time of Redszone.

pedro
04-19-2008, 12:09 PM
I completely understand the ban of gamethreads for the time being but I think it's being taken a bit far with the complete shut down of the lineup threads.

Perhaps some middle ground, such as allowing lineup threads but not allowing commentary while the game is actually going on might be an acceptable solution.

If there is no way to even discuss games then I think RZ kind of becomes superfluous.

RedlegJake
04-19-2008, 12:11 PM
If we're going to remove threads that cause heated discussions or get lots of critical comments and counter retorts then these must go too:

1. Trade proposals
2. Lineup threads
3. Anything mentioning Dunn, Junior, Castro, and Freel
4. All threads for 24 hours after a loss

membengal
04-19-2008, 12:14 PM
5. Wayne Krivsky
6. "The" trade
7. Homer Bailey
8. Efficacy of young pitchers in rotation
9. Dusty Baker and vet love/no vet love
10. Dusty Baker and pitch counts

NJReds
04-19-2008, 12:16 PM
might as well just leave Redszone if you can't even mention the thing the the board is built around.

Baseball Games.

The guys who run the site can do as they please with no arguement from me, but I agree 100% with the above statement.

VR
04-19-2008, 12:26 PM
One guy calls Dunn....Dunng..... no matter what he does.




just proves he really is the prototypical #2 hitter

Spring~Fields
04-19-2008, 12:30 PM
Try going to the enquirer.com game threads...... people would realy go at some of those folks.

One guy calls Dunn....Dunng..... no matter what he does.

Phillips is the best hitter according to some posters. Dunn should bat 6th...although there about 3 people who say he should bat 2nd (I agree)

Some people want Freel/Hopper all the time beacuse they run real fast! :D

In the past I went over there to snoop or read around. My mouse and keyboard revolted on me. :)

RFS62
04-19-2008, 12:53 PM
just proves he really is the prototypical #2 hitter

Now THAT was funny.

:beerme:

Highlifeman21
04-19-2008, 01:04 PM
If we're going to remove threads that cause heated discussions or get lots of critical comments and counter retorts then these must go too:

1. Trade proposals
2. Lineup threads
3. Anything mentioning Dunn, Junior, Castro, and Freel
4. All threads for 24 hours after a loss

11. Wayne's knack for punting 1st round draft picks
12. Drew Stubbs

pedro
04-19-2008, 01:06 PM
13. Pogs.

Tony Cloninger
04-19-2008, 01:58 PM
There is one guy named Davis44.....who blasts Dunn no matter what. He is the proto-typical "stats...bah" type of person. What is funny is that he uses a moniker for a player that people could never be happy with no matter what he did...but since he was fast and could play defense.....this guy is ok with him even though Dunn's production outweighs his.

RedlegJake
04-19-2008, 02:01 PM
I don't bother with the Enquirer boards. They are exactly what Boss and GIK and the other mods have worked so hard to avoid becoming.

redsrule2500
04-19-2008, 02:04 PM
I want a gamethread please!!!

Tony Cloninger
04-19-2008, 02:04 PM
Jeff Suppan......this is Jeff Suppan.....the horror....the horror....

Spring~Fields
04-19-2008, 02:15 PM
I don't bother with the Enquirer boards. They are exactly what Boss and GIK and the other mods have worked so hard to avoid becoming.

Over there one could get "fatal error" "blue screen" :eek: that site hurts my eyes.

Stormy
04-19-2008, 06:58 PM
So, now there is absolutely no approved means of discussing today's game ahead of the game?

What about after the game?

The whole thing makes it hard to even know what is okay to post...do I need to wait 24 hours after I see something I want to talk about on here to make sure it is not game related?

It's the most absurd tactic I've ever seen on this site. Hard to imagine.

Raisor
04-19-2008, 07:03 PM
Raisor is confused.

GIK
04-19-2008, 08:31 PM
It's the most absurd tactic I've ever seen on this site. Hard to imagine.

The thread was open almost an hour before the game began today, FYI.

jojo
04-19-2008, 08:42 PM
That was a game thread caterpillar just waiting to become a game thread butterfly IMHO. Just sayin'.....

GIK
04-19-2008, 09:06 PM
Oh, most definitely. This who thing, to put it bluntly, sucks. It's a pain for you all and it's crap I don't want to deal with on my weekend.

However, we're looking to get things back on track ASAP.

Boss-Hog
04-19-2008, 09:23 PM
Now you are redefining things.

My post was pretty clearly in response to keeping this thread on the topic of game thread discussion (as opposed to discussion of who does and doesn't deserve to have ORG posting access in the previous few posts.)

Spring~Fields
04-19-2008, 09:35 PM
My post was pretty clearly in response to keeping this thread on the topic of game thread discussion (as opposed to discussion of who does and doesn't deserve to have ORG posting access in the previous few posts.)

Presented the input to you wrong, that's my fault.

Raisor
04-19-2008, 09:46 PM
Oh, most definitely. This who thing, to put it bluntly, sucks. It's a pain for you all and it's crap I don't want to deal with on my weekend.

However, we're looking to get things back on track ASAP.



Here's how to fix it.

Open the game thread.

Ban people who screw up the thing.

Fixed.

WVRedsFan
04-19-2008, 11:43 PM
Here's how to fix it.

Open the game thread.

Ban people who screw up the thing.

Fixed.

What Raisor said.

When I was a public school teacher, it used to be common practice that when one teacher screwed up, a new set of rules would follow that punished everyone. It didn't work then and it probably won't work now. Once, we had a teacher who would spend large amounts of the school day in the teacher's lounge, leaving his class unattended. When it was discovered, a new rule came down that said that every teacher would be in their rooms and the lounge would be closed. This reminds me of that.

Boss and GIK are fine fellows and I appreciate their having this for us to discuss Reds baseball. And since it's theirs, they can do whatever they want--I have no say in this. But the answer is to punish offenders and not everyone. The little skirmish that happened the other day is not atypical of the whole board. I've seen disrespect for opinions throughout every section and people get personal. The fact that it wasn't reported must mean it didn't make any difference to the offended, but if reported it should be dealt with the offender getting a "time out." JMO.

jojo
04-20-2008, 08:49 AM
Here's how to fix it.

Open the game thread.

Ban people who screw up the thing.

Fixed.

Yes. And throw pie at them too.....

GT's are the big carrot for Sundeckers, so as a forum, they should neither model the behavior that led to the split not should they be an arena for ORG members to take the gloves off concerning ORG-related squabbles. If anything, the consequences for ORG members should be even harsher because, frankly, we should know better. Heck, we vote people in the ORG in large part based upon how they interact with others.

Yep, a good pie in the face, now that makes a statement.

RFS62
04-20-2008, 08:56 AM
Here's how to fix it.

Open the game thread.

Ban people who screw up the thing.

Fixed.



Yeah, seems pretty simple. A player can get ejected from a game for his behavior, so eject a poster from a game thread if they go over the top. They go too far, give them a couple of days out of the game thread.

The problem is, I believe, that someone has to read all that crap to decide, which means the mods.

That sounds like a worse punishment than the offending party will receive, only the mods will get it every day.

The solution isn't as simple as it sounds, mainly because it creates more work for the mods.

Spring~Fields
04-20-2008, 09:31 AM
Yeah, seems pretty simple. A player can get ejected from a game for his behavior, so eject a poster from a game thread if they go over the top. They go too far, give them a couple of days out of the game thread.

The problem is, I believe, that someone has to read all that crap to decide, which means the mods.

That sounds like a worse punishment than the offending party will receive, only the mods will get it every day.

The solution isn't as simple as it sounds, mainly because it creates more work for the mods.

I know that if they (GIK/Boss/Chip) simply asked me to not post in the game threads that I would comply without a fuss, perhaps others that are seen as a problem would too if simply asked?

RedlegJake
04-20-2008, 09:43 AM
I'm for the game thread ban idea. No warnings. Post the consequences then let er rip. First offense...out a week. 2nd offense that season ... you're out. Period. Til next season. Get any suspension 2 years running, sayonara. You're out for good. Also...in gamethreads...ban You Tube, pics, etc. Waste of bandwidth and irritating as heck in game threads. Great for regular threads. Just a waste in game threads, imo.

Spring~Fields
04-20-2008, 10:24 AM
Seems like game day consist of three threads

1. Lineup discussion - we had that a few days now and it seemed to work out without problems on ORG - usually this type discussion was incorporated at the start of game threads.

2. Game day thread with play by play and comments, yea, boo, etc. Brown and Jones are really tearing it up right now, Smith is really struggling etc. type thread. - usually the core of game threads.

3. Post game discussion, such and such was great fantastic, et el stinks and the reason why, point counter points. This usually comes on the game threads at the end, and yesterday there was a separate thread on the ORG for that.

Could the board accept a format as such above keeping the game threads cleaner and without the “stuff” that seems to become clutter when interjected in the game threads if they were on a separate thread for discussion?

Something like:
1.Pre-game Post-game discussion thread - which would incorporate a lineup discussion along with the positives and negatives of that game, that day?
2. Game thread - with play by play and the yea and boo for spontaneous emotional reactions to the good and bad of the game?

Would something like the above becoming the norm work to the channeling and focusing the energy, input/output in the right direction away from clutter, noise and superfluous redundant interjections on the game thread and reduce the probability of uncomplimentary remarks between posters toward one another?

jojo
04-20-2008, 11:02 AM
Part of the problem is that game threads lend themselves to venting because lets face it, we're fans and it's frustrating to watch your team play poorly (and it's been a while since we've had some legitimate reason to hope though lets step back and see the big picture-the future looks much better people!).

Venting however, is counter to the mission of Redszone since it increases the noise and really is a form of beating the horse.

The solution is simple really-it's two pronged. We can stay off the personal attacks and second, the Reds need to win on a consistent basis....

I'm willing to do my part. I now appeal to the Reds organisation to do theirs....

Ltlabner
04-20-2008, 04:11 PM
The real joy will be when the mods crack down and boot people from the game threads and then their friends start posting "why did SuperFly get booted, he didn't do anything" and then other folks feel the need to pile on. Then the treads will start, "why are the mods such meanies". Those will then boil over with name calling.

We've all blown gaskets and posted attacks we shouldn't. Some folks are just condecending by nature. Part of the problem is that it's been allowed without repercussion for so long. The other part is that so many feal entitled to act that way in the first place.

The only way to get things where you want re: behavior is reopen the game thread and boot people the second they cross the line. Come down hard for a while and eventually the ship will be righted. Just prepare the mods for lots of crying.

George Anderson
04-20-2008, 04:35 PM
We've all blown gaskets and posted attacks we shouldn't. Some folks are just condecending by nature. Part of the problem is that it's been allowed without repercussion for so long. The other part is that so many feal entitled to act that way in the first place.

The only way to get things where you want re: behavior is reopen the game thread and boot people the second they cross the line. Come down hard for a while and eventually the ship will be righted. Just prepare the mods for lots of crying.

I really don't read or participate in the game threads because the whole thing makes my head spin, but I agree that there should be repercussions for people that act up, but I also believe moderators should also follow the rules likewise. The following post happened well over a year ago between myself and Chip R who is a moderator.


Quote:
Originally Posted by George Anderson
If you walked in a subway and had the choice to sit next to a man in a business suit or next to someone dying of a deadly disease as the result of their own irresponsible actions, just who would you sit next to??

Chip R
You said they contracted the disease because of their lifestyle. Even you aren't ignorant enough to believe that.

I realize that the moderators are all volunteers and I totally appreciate the work they do for the site but I don't think I am out of line when I would ask that the moderators be expected to follow the same guide lines the rest of us are.

Ga_Red
04-20-2008, 09:42 PM
A game thread is essential to ORG.

It would be a magnet for the problem makers ,
and if well moderated,
would offer
a most effective vehicle
for problem solving.

Caveat Emperor
04-21-2008, 01:36 AM
I like Game Threads -- I like to drop in a comment or two when I'm at home watching the game, and I like to check them out after I get back from the game (when I go down) to see what the reactions were to things that happened.

I agree with a lot of what has been already said -- the site rules are the site rules. If you can't follow them for the game thread, then you should get a vacation from the game thread forum for the day. If you look at who posts in the GT form, there are enough regulars that I'm sure you could find a couple sane people to serve as moderators there. If you make 5 or 6 people mods, odds are there will always be at least one of them in the forum to take care of business.

I don't go to the game thread looking for deep thought -- I go to have a good time and as a way to get some instant feedback on the game. Deep thought isn't a requirement, but respect is. I think we can all do a better job of that, and I think the mods can hold everyone to THAT standard rather easily.

jojo
04-21-2008, 07:28 AM
I don't go to the game thread looking for deep thought -- I go to have a good time and as a way to get some instant feedback on the game. Deep thought isn't a requirement, but respect is. I think we can all do a better job of that, and I think the mods can hold everyone to THAT standard rather easily.

I go to the game threads looking for dropped change.... :cool:

Seriously, game threads are nice because they can be all things to everyone. They don't have to be just one thing.

That said, game threads have been the inspiration for a lot of threads that I've started in the past. For instance, a comment made about strategy or an opinion voiced by someone got me thinking and motivated me to dig a little deeper. That's awesome.

I haven't been able to wade though many GTs lately and that makes me kind of sad.

In an ideal world game threads are a loosely organized forum where everyone can voice an opinion/make a comment without fear of being hit over the head with a saberbat or shouted down because they need to actually "watch a game for once". Game threads should be fertile ground to actually inspire/improve the content of the ORG.