Originally Posted by TeamCasey
Yo mama
Yo mama
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
Michael, nobody would ever find the other forum if they weren't well versed in RedsZone.
Everyone who participates in political or religious threads here will know where it is.
All that is going to change is the location, and what I would think would be a welcome change, less moderation.
I don't blame the mods if they don't want to have to read all this stuff. I just never thought of it that way before. They're still providing an opportunity for every single person here to post their opinions, the same people who've been in on every single political or religious thread since day one.
I think it's far better than eliminating them alltogether.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
Honestly, I sort of felt that way when some of the subscribers and "last thread" folks were annexed. I mean, I met everyone through Redszone and that's how the relationships evolved. But I understood the decision with the bandwidth issues .... as I understand the moderation issues here.
Create a shortcut to the new clubhouse, make it what you want it to be. Give Ochre some suggestions to formatting the place. Ask Boss to provide a link when a popular annexed thread is established. It'll all work out.
"Whatever you choose, however many roads you travel, I hope that you choose not to be a lady. I hope you will find some way to break the rules and make a little trouble out there. And I also hope that you will choose to make some of that trouble on behalf of women." - Nora Ephron
Go Gators!
Yeah, but giving someone a dialectical beatdown in BlueZone or Taupezone lacks the same cachet.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
Great post Michael. I don't really understand it either. One thing I've taken away from my experience here is that midwesterners don't like confrontation. I don't have a problem with it. I wouldn't even want to discourage RFA66, who's garnered some big negs from the board liberals, from posting. The major problem I have with some posters is not saying what they really believe. Speak your mind, I say, and we can come to some conclusions, even if its the hackneyed "agree to disagree".
Oh well. I never understood why Drew Nelson was banned. I miss him sometimes.
Well, my take on that is that the moderators and admins, the guys who have to read every stinkin' post and listen to every single complaint, got tired of the sheer volume of work he caused for them. Unpaid work. Largly unappreciated work.
I've always thought that the board benefited from guys like Drew and Richard Hand and even Don Cameron and Don Heffner, because of the controversy they created brought forth passionate rebuttals to their often incredible positions. But I'm not the guy who has to listen to all the crap their opinions generated.
Boss' post earlier, which I quoted because I found it so enlightening, has changed my mind on these threads. Why should those guys have to be forced to read stuff, completely removed from baseball discussion, in order to maintain the standard of civility that is in their mission statement? Simply put, they shouldn't. I trust their judgment, their willingness to be reasonable on these topics. They've bent over backwards for years to provide a non-baseball forum, and listened to a mountain of crap from all sides in the process. I don't doubt their motives.
If they say they've had enough, that's good enough for me. I can push a button or two to direct the exact same people to a forum a mouse click away, with much less moderation and restriction on free speech, if I want to read or discuss the very same issues.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
No I don't blame the mods either.
I just wish people had thicker skin.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
or current events with a political bias.
you can do it here.
http://lastperson.suncircle.org/index.php?board=6.0
Boss & GIK have indicated they don't have the time or the inclination to deal with it anymore on Redzone and Ochre has been gracious enough to make room for it on his site.
Let's just move the discussions over there and not start anymore P threads on RZ.
As Mickey Rooney often said. Come on kids! Let's put on a show!
Last edited by pedro; 09-03-2005 at 12:05 AM.
School's out. What did you expect?
We Want You!
Go Gators!
Yo mama.
:
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
I think political thread-starters are like Tareyton smokers...
/r/reds
Who has a political bias?
Okay, I'm going to venture into the unkown and post a no holds bar op-ed piece from the New York Times over there.
http://lastperson.suncircle.org/index.php?topic=57.0
Last edited by RBA; 09-03-2005 at 12:32 AM.
Thicker skin? Who needs thick skin? It's an internet message board that exists to talk Reds baseball. That's all it is. I stopped reading the political threads a few months ago because there was nothing to be learned from them anymore. Seriously, I can hardly think of any enlightening conversation on politics in a long time that wasn't like watching 2nd graders bicker over who's baseball card collection was better. Sure, there were lots of people with great articulation skills who can make it look like it's well-reasoned debate, but underneath it all it was nothing more than "I'm smart, you're dumb", basically reciting verbatim what can be found at worldnetdaily or The New Republic (of which I am a loyal reader). And it came from BOTH sides, so I'm not trying to single anyone out. It was almost everyone involved, from my perception.
You mentioned earlier that people need to understand the difference between personal attacks and attacks on a position. I think people probably just have different definitions, so what might not be personal to you, might be very personal to others and I don't think anyone can marginalize that or try to tell others what they should take personally. Watching how some folks behave in those "debates" was disappointing to watch for me personally, which was the main reason I stopped reading them altogether (except for two threads I unknowingly wandered into), and I don't blame the mods for not wanting to put up with it anymore. At leat that's my take....probably not worth much.
Personally, I don't see what anyone gains from these discussions. They can't possibly be enjoyable, can they? I've seen well-reasoned, intelligent, yet heated political debate before, and what we've had on the non-BB side of RedsZone ain't it.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote