PDA

View Full Version : Redszone Hall of Fame



Brutus
11-30-2010, 08:03 PM
I got to thinking, seeing today's thread on the ORG about the Hall of Fame vote (for players)... given the site setup, with the "call-up" like system we have here, why not institute a Hall of Fame for the best of the best?

Just thinking out loud, but it would be kind of cool to enshrine some of the best posters once a year.

Maybe after being a member for so many years and having 'x' number of posts, a person becomes eligible. Then we have nominations and a vote once a year to enshrine new members.

What say you? Seems like it would be kind of cool. I'm not normally much for making too big a deal out of who the best posters are, but if we're modeling a site a little after baseball and encourage recognition of better discussion, seems like a neat thing to try.

Anyone up for the idea?

*BaseClogger*
12-01-2010, 01:19 AM
I'm game.

For our first ballot I nominate: The Baumer! :thumbup:

BearcatShane
12-01-2010, 04:15 AM
That is an outstanding idea in my opinion.

Ron Madden
12-01-2010, 06:02 AM
I got to thinking, seeing today's thread on the ORG about the Hall of Fame vote (for players)... given the site setup, with the "call-up" like system we have here, why not institute a Hall of Fame for the best of the best?

Just thinking out loud, but it would be kind of cool to enshrine some of the best posters once a year.

Maybe after being a member for so many years and having 'x' number of posts, a person becomes eligible. Then we have nominations and a vote once a year to enshrine new members.

What say you? Seems like it would be kind of cool. I'm not normally much for making too big a deal out of who the best posters are, but if we're modeling a site a little after baseball and encourage recognition of better discussion, seems like a neat thing to try.

Anyone up for the idea?



Seems like a cool idea.

In my humble opinion # of post should NOT be a Qualifier.

I believe there are over a dozen members I'd vote in on the first ballot that just do not post very often. Sometimes Quality is better than Quantity.

mth123
12-01-2010, 07:11 AM
I'd have a hard time keeping the initial list below 50 or so.

Founders, Mods, Humorists, Stat Gurus, Historians, Prospect Experts and plain old baseball fans all have their place. There are tons of good posters and its what makes the sight so compelling. I'm happy being the Juan Castro among such immortals (just don't call me Willy T). Unfortunately, many on my list rarely post anymore.

RedFanAlways1966
12-01-2010, 07:57 AM
I appreciate the idea, but I am totally against it. Feelings may get hurt (great posters might vacate b/c of their feelings). If you are worthy of RZ HoF considerations, you already know it. The reputation system that was once used here showed anything that may be construed as a "popularity contest" is not a good thing.

Boss-Hog
12-01-2010, 08:06 AM
I appreciate the idea, but I am totally against it. Feelings may get hurt (great posters might vacate b/c of their feelings). If you are worthy of RZ HoF considerations, you already know it. The reputation system that was once used here showed anything that may be construed as a "popularity contest" is not a good thing.
That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

TRF
12-01-2010, 12:18 PM
How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.

Boss-Hog
12-01-2010, 12:31 PM
How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.
I'm perfectly fine with that if someone wants to organize it, as has been done in the past.

Brutus
12-01-2010, 04:02 PM
That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

Don't we kind of already hurt feelings anyhow? If someone applies for ORG membership and don't get in, do we worry about their feelings? It's basically a non-spoken way of saying they're not good enough.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not suggesting some of that couldn't happen. But if we limit the process to rather strict criteria, acknowledgment of some of the very best posters, would probably not hurt too many feelings in the process.

I do get some of those issues you are referring to. But unlike the old rep system, this is really just an honoring of the best folks, not necessarily a critique of each and every individual.

edabbs44
12-01-2010, 04:16 PM
Don't we kind of already hurt feelings anyhow? If someone applies for ORG membership and don't get in, do we worry about their feelings? It's basically a non-spoken way of saying they're not good enough.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not suggesting some of that couldn't happen. But if we limit the process to rather strict criteria, acknowledgment of some of the very best posters, would probably not hurt too many feelings in the process.

I do get some of those issues you are referring to. But unlike the old rep system, this is really just an honoring of the best folks, not necessarily a critique of each and every individual.

I would tend to agree...if you limit it to "classes" of say 3-5 people per year, you might steer away from some of the potential controversy. The ORG voting has become almost ridiculous, this should have a much higher standard.

Razor Shines
12-01-2010, 04:19 PM
How about we just do the year end awards like always? best poster, nicest poster, most handsome poster (The Raisor Award) etc. all tongue in cheek and light hearted.

I miss those, they were funny.

paintmered
12-01-2010, 04:52 PM
I enjoyed the SERPies. They were never to be taken seriously.

TRF
12-01-2010, 05:13 PM
So let's use this thread to organize it by coming up with the questions. It could be posted in both the ORG and the SunDeck.

here are a few...

Most eloquent post
best sig
best one liner
nicest poster
ROY
MVP
Best post by TRF
best poster at diffusing a thread gone bad
best fan from another board (I say we call it the Swampturkey award, just cuz that is a great username)
Best bet made during the year.
Best predictor of future results.


Feel free to add more. :)

Brutus
12-01-2010, 05:42 PM
That's kind of how I feel. I think it's a great idea but past history has indicated this very well could happen. If someone can come up with a way to avoid that situation, I'd certainly consider this idea because I think it's a good one.

I guess I would suggest the process as such:

Once a year, we have a nomination process. The moderators could field the nominations. The minimum criteria would be certain time in rank and maybe a threshold of number of posts (though I agree with Ron I wouldn't set the number too high, but I do think there should be a minimum as this is supposed to be not just about quality, but longevity and amount of quality).

Anyone fielding at least two nominations will go up for the ballot.

The moderators then propose the Hall of Fame ballot and I would propose that both Sun Deck and ORG members vote on it (though results are hidden). The reason I propose Sun Deck members vote too is because they often read the ORG and have an objective view about the best members.

My proposal is that we set the number at 75% of the votes for admission into the Hall of Fame.

We could have the first ballot be a little bigger to account for past members that aren't necessarily active anymore. Some of the past great posters could be included on that first ballot (or subsequent ballots if they're not voted in).

Though it seems counterintuitive, if we wanted to avoid hurt feelings, we could avoid a discussion thread on the topic except for nominations. This would somewhat lessen the chance it gets too sensitive.

TRF
12-01-2010, 05:50 PM
I guess I would suggest the process as such:

Once a year, we have a nomination process. The moderators could field the nominations. The minimum criteria would be certain time in rank and maybe a threshold of number of posts (though I agree with Ron I wouldn't set the number too high, but I do think there should be a minimum as this is supposed to be not just about quality, but longevity and amount of quality).

Anyone fielding at least two nominations will go up for the ballot.

The moderators then propose the Hall of Fame ballot and I would propose that both Sun Deck and ORG members vote on it (though results are hidden). The reason I propose Sun Deck members vote too is because they often read the ORG and have an objective view about the best members.

My proposal is that we set the number at 75% of the votes for admission into the Hall of Fame.

We could have the first ballot be a little bigger to account for past members that aren't necessarily active anymore. Some of the past great posters could be included on that first ballot (or subsequent ballots if they're not voted in).

Though it seems counterintuitive, if we wanted to avoid hurt feelings, we could avoid a discussion thread on the topic except for nominations. This would somewhat lessen the chance it gets too sensitive.

I don't see the upside here. Once someone is nominated, if there is discussion on his/her merits, feelings are going to be hurt. someone will dissent eventually.

Besides, in every HOF it usually means that person is retired. I prefer yearly awards because there are no hard feelings.

Brutus
12-01-2010, 05:53 PM
I don't see the upside here. Once someone is nominated, if there is discussion on his/her merits, feelings are going to be hurt. someone will dissent eventually.

Besides, in every HOF it usually means that person is retired. I prefer yearly awards because there are no hard feelings.

Like I said, if we're worried about hurt feelings, why do we already have a class society separating the best posters from the folks on the Sun Deck? If that's truly an issue, we should go back to one board.

Several people have already commented they think it's a neat idea. So if it is, then I think we shouldn't let the possibility of a few people getting their feelings hurt stop us from doing it. I'm all for doing it in a way we can limit the possibility, but I see no reason why we can't do it. Awards, merits, honors are given in almost every facet of life at the risk of someone having their feelings hurt. I just think that's a petty reason not to do something. Do we have to give trophies for last place these days?

Boss-Hog
12-01-2010, 07:00 PM
Brutus, you make some good points, but if we're going to (re)institute an accolades system, I'd prefer we start with the yearly awards that we've had in the past. It's something we used to have and I never heard a negative word uttered about the process; personally speaking, I enjoyed them quite a bit. If there's enough interest to make this happen and things go as well as they have in the past, I'm certainly open to reconsidering your suggestion. I'd rather start a bit smaller with something we've successfully done before and see how the yearly awards goes over first, though, before potentially attempting your idea. That will be kind of a guinea pig to see if there's enough interest to make this type of idea work.

Ron Madden
12-02-2010, 04:38 AM
I really enjoyed the old Annual RedsZone Postees Awards.

RFS62
12-02-2010, 08:16 AM
I really enjoyed the old Annual RedsZone Postees Awards.

I think Sava used to start that thread every year.

Raisor
12-02-2010, 11:04 AM
most handsome poster (The Raisor Award)

damn right

Chip R
12-02-2010, 12:48 PM
damn right


Sure, now that you've shaved off your beard no one else has a chance. :(

TRF
12-02-2010, 04:30 PM
Like I said, if we're worried about hurt feelings, why do we already have a class society separating the best posters from the folks on the Sun Deck? If that's truly an issue, we should go back to one board.

Several people have already commented they think it's a neat idea. So if it is, then I think we shouldn't let the possibility of a few people getting their feelings hurt stop us from doing it. I'm all for doing it in a way we can limit the possibility, but I see no reason why we can't do it. Awards, merits, honors are given in almost every facet of life at the risk of someone having their feelings hurt. I just think that's a petty reason not to do something. Do we have to give trophies for last place these days?

Something about this post was bugging me, and I finally figured it out.

You are right. We don't have to give out trophies for last place. Where you are wrong is not everything is a competition. The reason tORG was separated from tSD was that the established members of Redszone had built a community that was comforable. There were rules posted but almost no violators. We left the old cinci.com board to get away from trolls, flame posts and edgy language (see edgy language thread :) ) Like it or not, the new people had to prove they can contribute in a way acceptable to the existing community. And they weren't doing a good job.

And now you want to segregate another group, by placing a fewat yet another level? why? There is absolutely no upside to this idea. IMO Redszone has one HOFer... Old Red Guard. Look for the post that tORG was essentially founded on. I think it's archived.

I've been here a long time. I've been right a few times, wrong a few times and part of the masses almost all the time. Some here I consider casual friends, though we have never met. Some I miss terribly because they left and their wit and wisdom were a bright point to a day or week. Some I wouldn't say hi to if we passed on the street. I don't need to see them in a Virtual Hall of Fame.

The yearly awards are fun, light hearted, offer no special privileges and are not taken so seriously that we offend anyone. It's about as much of a competition as a David Letterman Top 10 List.

So count me against a HOF idea.

Puffy
12-02-2010, 04:38 PM
I demand inclusion on the first ballot!

Puffy
12-02-2010, 04:39 PM
damn right

Man how I wish I still had that picture of you and the bunnies. I need to see if I can find that bad boy....

westofyou
12-02-2010, 04:53 PM
Man how I wish I still had that picture of you and the bunnies. I need to see if I can find that bad boy....

I have it at home

Chip R
12-02-2010, 05:44 PM
Man how I wish I still had that picture of you and the bunnies. I need to see if I can find that bad boy....


Ask and ye shall receive.

WMR
12-02-2010, 06:02 PM
Enshrine Puffy and Raisor and then burn it to the ground.

Red Leader
12-02-2010, 08:44 PM
Enshrine Puffy and Raisor and then burn it to the ground.

Hopefully with both of them still inside.... :beerme:

Ron Madden
12-03-2010, 04:31 AM
Something about this post was bugging me, and I finally figured it out.

You are right. We don't have to give out trophies for last place. Where you are wrong is not everything is a competition. The reason tORG was separated from tSD was that the established members of Redszone had built a community that was comforable. There were rules posted but almost no violators. We left the old cinci.com board to get away from trolls, flame posts and edgy language (see edgy language thread :) ) Like it or not, the new people had to prove they can contribute in a way acceptable to the existing community. And they weren't doing a good job.

And now you want to segregate another group, by placing a fewat yet another level? why? There is absolutely no upside to this idea. IMO Redszone has one HOFer... Old Red Guard. Look for the post that tORG was essentially founded on. I think it's archived.

I've been here a long time. I've been right a few times, wrong a few times and part of the masses almost all the time. Some here I consider casual friends, though we have never met. Some I miss terribly because they left and their wit and wisdom were a bright point to a day or week. Some I wouldn't say hi to if we passed on the street. I don't need to see them in a Virtual Hall of Fame.

The yearly awards are fun, light hearted, offer no special privileges and are not taken so seriously that we offend anyone. It's about as much of a competition as a David Letterman Top 10 List.

So count me against a HOF idea.



This is a very good post IMHO. :thumbup:

Sea Ray
12-03-2010, 10:32 AM
I got to thinking, seeing today's thread on the ORG about the Hall of Fame vote (for players)... given the site setup, with the "call-up" like system we have here, why not institute a Hall of Fame for the best of the best?

Just thinking out loud, but it would be kind of cool to enshrine some of the best posters once a year.

Maybe after being a member for so many years and having 'x' number of posts, a person becomes eligible. Then we have nominations and a vote once a year to enshrine new members.

What say you? Seems like it would be kind of cool. I'm not normally much for making too big a deal out of who the best posters are, but if we're modeling a site a little after baseball and encourage recognition of better discussion, seems like a neat thing to try.

Anyone up for the idea?

Kinda like Facebook, let's see who has the most "friends". Nah, no thanks

Sea Ray
12-03-2010, 10:34 AM
Like I said, if we're worried about hurt feelings, why do we already have a class society separating the best posters from the folks on the Sun Deck? If that's truly an issue, we should go back to one board.

Several people have already commented they think it's a neat idea. So if it is, then I think we shouldn't let the possibility of a few people getting their feelings hurt stop us from doing it. I'm all for doing it in a way we can limit the possibility, but I see no reason why we can't do it. Awards, merits, honors are given in almost every facet of life at the risk of someone having their feelings hurt. I just think that's a petty reason not to do something. Do we have to give trophies for last place these days?

Why would we want to expound on one of the most controversial and contentious issues RZ has had to deal with? Your example above is the best argument you could make not to do it.

Brutus
12-03-2010, 03:28 PM
Why would we want to expound on one of the most controversial and contentious issues RZ has had to deal with? Your example above is the best argument you could make not to do it.

There's a big difference... the rep system was about pointing out the 'bad' posts/posters. A HOF is meant simply to acknowledge the best of the best. The two are very different.

Brutus
12-03-2010, 03:31 PM
Something about this post was bugging me, and I finally figured it out.

You are right. We don't have to give out trophies for last place. Where you are wrong is not everything is a competition. The reason tORG was separated from tSD was that the established members of Redszone had built a community that was comforable. There were rules posted but almost no violators. We left the old cinci.com board to get away from trolls, flame posts and edgy language (see edgy language thread :) ) Like it or not, the new people had to prove they can contribute in a way acceptable to the existing community. And they weren't doing a good job.

And now you want to segregate another group, by placing a fewat yet another level? why? There is absolutely no upside to this idea. IMO Redszone has one HOFer... Old Red Guard. Look for the post that tORG was essentially founded on. I think it's archived.

I've been here a long time. I've been right a few times, wrong a few times and part of the masses almost all the time. Some here I consider casual friends, though we have never met. Some I miss terribly because they left and their wit and wisdom were a bright point to a day or week. Some I wouldn't say hi to if we passed on the street. I don't need to see them in a Virtual Hall of Fame.

The yearly awards are fun, light hearted, offer no special privileges and are not taken so seriously that we offend anyone. It's about as much of a competition as a David Letterman Top 10 List.

So count me against a HOF idea.

But that's still acknowledging that some posters are better than others, yes? I don't see how it can be OK to do that, and in the same breath, say it's not OK to acknowledge a certain group of people for their contributions. I just don't see the big deal.

And if someone has their feelings hurt because they didn't receive a message board honor, I don't think the problem has anything to do with the recognition itself.

TRF
12-03-2010, 03:38 PM
But that's still acknowledging that some posters are better than others, yes? I don't see how it can be OK to do that, and in the same breath, say it's not OK to acknowledge a certain group of people for their contributions. I just don't see the big deal.

And if someone has their feelings hurt because they didn't receive a message board honor, I don't think the problem has anything to do with the recognition itself.

No. It's saying new posters have to prove they can meet a certain standard. I don't let just anyone in my livingroom. SunDeck posters can prove they accept and adhere to the rules. And if they want ORG access, they can apply for it.

I don't see the upside of a post like this:
well, yada yada does post a lot, but he tends to take over threads and presents opinions as facts too often. I know he's popular with some, but hardly a hall of famer.

And that might be a tame version of a post.

Brutus, you had an idea. IMO it's a bad one, but worth discussion. If it were put to a vote, you'd get a no from me, and from the general reaction, I think a lot of others agree.

Brutus
12-03-2010, 03:48 PM
No. It's saying new posters have to prove they can meet a certain standard. I don't let just anyone in my livingroom. SunDeck posters can prove they accept and adhere to the rules. And if they want ORG access, they can apply for it.

I don't see the upside of a post like this:

And that might be a tame version of a post.

Brutus, you had an idea. IMO it's a bad one, but worth discussion. If it were put to a vote, you'd get a no from me, and from the general reaction, I think a lot of others agree.

It has nothing to do with the rules in most cases. Most of the Sun Deck posters do follow the rules. We simply pick and choose who we feel gives better discussion. Let's call a spade a spade. You know it and I know it. We decide who the better posters are, they request being added, and we decide who comes and who doesn't. There are certainly some situations where some posters break rules quite often, but you know that it is usually simply a matter of popularity--and who we think is worthy of being added. The general rule of thumb is deciding who adds the most quality discussion. A lot of the people turned down don't break the rules. If, truly, the "rules" were all we were worried about, why not simply let everyone join and then quickly ban anyone breaking them? Because you know it's not about that.

I think it's a good idea. Many people have said so, including Boss. Now granted, boss has some concerns about it, but if it came to a vote, my sense is more people think it's a good idea than not.

Razor Shines
12-03-2010, 05:24 PM
I'm with you on a lot of things Brutus, but not this one. I just don't see the need for it. For me it's not about anyone's feelings getting hurt, it's just that I don't see the point. They've memorialized Old Red Guard and that's probably good enough.

I do like the idea of the yearly awards and I nominate TRF to run it.

TRF
12-03-2010, 06:18 PM
It has nothing to do with the rules in most cases. Most of the Sun Deck posters do follow the rules. We simply pick and choose who we feel gives better discussion. Let's call a spade a spade. You know it and I know it. We decide who the better posters are, they request being added, and we decide who comes and who doesn't. There are certainly some situations where some posters break rules quite often, but you know that it is usually simply a matter of popularity--and who we think is worthy of being added. The general rule of thumb is deciding who adds the most quality discussion. A lot of the people turned down don't break the rules. If, truly, the "rules" were all we were worried about, why not simply let everyone join and then quickly ban anyone breaking them? Because you know it's not about that.

I think it's a good idea. Many people have said so, including Boss. Now granted, boss has some concerns about it, but if it came to a vote, my sense is more people think it's a good idea than not.

RZ has over 2200 members. remember all the moderating that had to be done when just a few trolls came in after the BP tirade and ensuing brawl?

do we want one forum with 30 threads about Player X? and with such insightful posts as "I agree" or "that is interesting" and no follow up? you can obey the rules and still offer nothing to a forum.

I don't see the need to point to another group, put them on a yet higher pedestal, and foster even more division. I don't need to put Stormy in the hall of fame, in my mind he's there because when he does post, I ALWAYS read his posts. Same with woy, M2, princeton, who I happen to not like very much, no offense, he just rubs me the wrong way, Raisor, Puffy and TeamCasey. If they post, I read it. They are in my Hall of Fame already.

And my sense is if it were put to a vote, you'd be wrong about the outcome.

Puffy
12-03-2010, 07:05 PM
If I can be serious for a second I'd vote a BIG no to this idea. I don't think we need yet another popularity contest, but thats just me.

I will say though that if I am overruled than I'd immediately nominate RFS - he's old and I'd like to get him in before dementia sets in. He's a moderator on another board ya know!

Puffy
12-03-2010, 07:07 PM
Hopefully with both of them still inside.... :beerme:

Thanks.....hey wait, there's an insult in there!!

Red in Chicago
12-03-2010, 08:24 PM
My two cents ---- Bad idea...No Redszone HOF...

Raisor
12-03-2010, 09:05 PM
I will say though that if I am overruled than I'd immediately nominate RFS - he's old and I'd like to get him in before dementia sets in.

errrrr...might be a little late.

savafan
12-04-2010, 11:47 AM
I think Sava used to start that thread every year.

I actually think creek started this, and I just carried on the tradition. I'd certainly be happy to do it again, as it was usually done every January, but I don't like the idea of a Redszone HOF.

WMR
12-04-2010, 12:35 PM
I actually think creek started this, and I just carried on the tradition. I'd certainly be happy to do it again, as it was usually done every January, but I don't like the idea of a Redszone HOF.

Agreed. Always really enjoyed those year end accolades. You should definitely get it rolling again this year if you feel so inclined, Sava. :)

RZ HoF is a bad idea, IMHO.

kaldaniels
12-05-2010, 08:44 PM
I'm game for a Redszone Roast every few months. I'm sure we all have posts that we have made that we hope remain forgotten. :cool:

Homer Bailey
12-06-2010, 03:46 PM
I'm game for a Redszone Roast every few months. I'm sure we all have posts that we have made that we hope remain forgotten. :cool:

Wow that sounds AWESOME.

I have plenty that can surely be ridiculed. Would be really fun for those that want to participate.

And I'm against the HOF idea, FOR the yearly awards. I wouldn't be up for anything on either of them, but the yearly awards sounds like much more fun to me.

redsmetz
12-06-2010, 06:45 PM
Here's a sample of such an Awards thread, from 2005, I think.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40456&highlight=award

WMR
12-06-2010, 07:06 PM
I'm sensing a spin-off website...

www.RedsZoneHallOfShame.com

KittyDuran
12-11-2010, 07:37 PM
I'd vote NO on the HOF... RZ had something like it back in the day. Was a bad idea then as well.

And yes, I'm alive and well! :thumbup:

WMR
12-11-2010, 09:42 PM
Kitty is a RZ HoFer if there ever was one.

Red Leader
12-11-2010, 09:50 PM
Kitty is a RZ HoFer if there ever was one.

Word.

mth123
12-11-2010, 11:01 PM
Kitty is a RZ HoFer if there ever was one.

:thumbup:

Chip R
12-13-2010, 11:08 AM
Kitty is a RZ HoFer if there ever was one.


Absolutely.

Homer Bailey
12-20-2010, 01:07 PM
Are kal and I the only ones that are excited about the idea of a roast?