[savafan]

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

As I stated above, Adam Dunn is a touchy subject because we've sat and watched the very mention of his name elicit nastiness from both camps. Rarely did it promote intelligent, civil discussion - more often than not, it was 'I'm right you're wrong'. Now that he's no longer truly relevant to the team this site exists to discuss, I do not see a continued need to rehash these arguments in otherwise unrelated threads.

We went through the same thing with SABR vs. traditional stats, The Trade, steroids, etc., yet we never put the kibosh on those discussions.

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

You could total all the threads in this site's history that discussed Austin Kearns, Dmitri Young and Josh Hamilton and it wouldn't scratch the surface on the number of the same Adam Dunn debates we've already had that soon turned nasty. This is not an issue because he's an ex-Red - it's an issue because the topic has been sufficiently beaten to death and it's in the best interests of the site to move on now that he no longer plays for the Reds.

You're talking about Reds fans here, these people don't know how to move on. We're still living in 1975-1976 and 1990, with passionate adoration for Pete Rose.

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

Compare this site to any other of its size and I can pretty much guarantee you we have equal or lesser moderation - relatively speaking. That being said, if you want to go somewhere where you can say whatever it is you want to say, regardless of the rules of the site, this is not the place for you.

We have one more moderator and many more locked threads than nyyfans.com, and they have 18,000 more members than us...and a political discussion forum.

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

What is there to discuss that hasn't already been said since he became a Red in 2001? Since this site's inception, the very topic has easily been the most divisive subject because people feel so passionately (in a positive or negative way) about his game that it often leads towards not being respectful of others that don't share the same opinions. I distinctly got the impression that some people came here more to argue with others that they don't agree with more so than they do to civilly discuss the game of baseball and those days are over.

Then wouldn't the act of the moderators be to deal with those specific posters that get out of hand? Locking everything before, and in case, it goes down a nasty road isn't moderation, it's censorship of people's ideas and passions, and passion is something that's been sorely lacking around this team for far too long. It's akin to forbidding a man to have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

Because these people have voluntarily agreed to offer their free time to help enforce the rules of the board and keep the site running? That seems like a pretty good reason to me.

I know moderating and administrating an internet message board is a thankless task, but the rest of us also give of our free time to make the board what it is with the discussion we provide. I understand that this is Boss and GIK's board, but if no one came to it to post, it would still be Boss and GIK's board. We are a community, respectful of one another, free to debate one another, and if that gets out of control then we take care of it from there. Look, I know I'm just one poster, but 7 years and 14,000+ posts, presenting the name of the Old Red Guard forum, sharing my thoughts on baseball and a variety of other subjects with people who've shared with me as well...I feel that I also have an investment of my time and loyalty here, which is why I feel so passionate.

I'm not trying to cause problems, or attack any one person or body of people by bringing this subject up, I'm just sharing how I feel...and I know I'm not the only one. I'm trying to present the argument without being argumentative. This sub-forum is for feedback, and that's what I'm providing. I'm not going to let my feelings about this carry over into the other areas of the board.