Originally Posted by OldRightHander
When I was new I came in here with a lot of opinions about the game that were not in agreement with many of the people here. Many of my opinions were not very well informed but the older members treated me with a good degree of respect and patiently explained a lot of things. I looked at everything with a fairly open mind and was willing to rethink many of my opinions. When I still found myself in disagreement with someone else, I always found this a good place to discuss those disagreements in a civil manner. This doesn't happen as much now. If folks didn't take disagreements personally and attack back when their ideas are challenged we wouldn't be having so many of these other issues. Everyone needs to calm down a bit and realize that ideas and opinions are up for debate and should not lead to personal attacks.
Well said, as usual, ORH. Frankly, I'd love to see the following added to the top of the Redszone Rules/Guidelines:
You have the right to have an opinion.
You do not have the right to have an unopposed opinion.
The folks who make it here long-term at Redszone almost instinctually understand those two truths. Those who don't...well, we've seen the issues.
I really don't have problems with the rep system, but that's easy for me to say. I try to reward good content when I'm on here, but I can see where the system can lead to a degree of jealosy or complaints about a "caste system." I don't know if hiding rep scores would solve this problem or not, but I wouldn't have a problem either way. It would still be nice if there was a way to see if someone is above or below 200, even if the exact number is not seen. That's just because I like to give my rep to those who are under 200, since once you're over 200 it's all icing on the cake anyway.
Also well stated. Excepting some abuse (which is a normal and expected residual), there's nothing wrong with the rep system as it stands, IMHO. I'm with you- if Boss and GIK decide it's best to hide rep point totals, not a big deal. That being said, there's a downside to doing so.
What most folks don't understand (even some vet posters) is that rep points don't equal reputation, credibility, or privilege. There's no mod out there who's going to bow down to posters with high rep points. The very idea of that is lunacy considering that just about every one of them has told a high rep poster (myself included) to shut up when shutting up was the best course of action. There's no high rep poster out there who hasn't had major disagreements with another high rep poster. There's no special caste. There are no major cliques. There is no "Redszone 10" unless "ten" equals "two hundred and fifty". The remainder of my post is going to be directed to anyone within reading distance, so my apologies for breaking off my response to you, ORH.
Every single person who has ever complained about not having enough reputation points doesn't understand the simplicity of the concept:
Reputation equals appreciation. Nothing more.
Type posts that folks appreciate and reputation points are earned. Quickly. And that runs into the point I probably should have made a couple paragraphs ago- hiding rep point totals does nothing to help posters who want to search for posts created by those with high rep point totals so that they may determine exactly what kind of information is valued.
Now, I dunno about anyone else but if it's me and I'm looking to try out a new message board that uses something akin to a reputation system, I'm probably going to do my homework before my first post and figure out the what kind of posts are appreciated versus the opposite by looking at contributions by the highest rep total posters on the board. So let's take a look at those guys in no particular order:
Now, do any of those guys have major reputation point totals because they're just popular? No (and please note that I only listed posters off the top of my head). The tie that binds those names- while they may disagree with each other often- is that every one of those posters has the ability to think three dimensionally, understand situational dynamics, and when challenged they have the ability to produce well thought out factually-based counterpoints even though every one has the ability to also be "chippy" at times (my own snide cuss self included).
The lesson is that if you see the game as an emotional AB-by-AB sprint instead of a marathon and don't have the ability to look past what's right in front of you, that may not be the best plan. If you harbor resentment against a certain type of player or game without factual basis, this may not be the best forum for you. If your plan is to attack posters rather than concepts, this isn't the place you should be. If your M.O. is to emotionally escalate a debate, there are folks here who are better at that game than you. If you feel you have a right to have an opinion but can't handle a challenge to it, go elsewhere. Please.
If you want rep points for effort rather than contribution, you won't get them unless said effort results in you making an actual point. There isn't a poster on this board who is immune to being wrong. That being said, there isn't a poster on this board who has the right to be right just because he thinks so.
But if you want to talk about baseball at an exceptionally high level and if you might be willing to shut up, listen, and learn about that which you don't know or you want to provide information above and beyond the general knowledge level of the forum then this IS the place for you.
I type the above not because I represent Redszone (I don't, of course) but because it is the Truth of any intellectual forum and in an intellectual forum that which demonstrates an understanding of fact and three-dimensional thinking rule.
And at this point, I've never seen an organization more in need of a mission statement than Redszone. The lack of one is what reduced SOSH to private membership.