Let's all take a deep breath (everyone please read)

[M2]

I think this one is pretty darn good and I'm glad I found it.

And that's an excellent point. We've got a big baby here and only a little dirty bathwater.

[rdiersin]

The Reds Live portion of this site is an open forum. You get what you get. Some good, some not so good. If you don't want to read or respond to any of it, don't. Fairly simple I think.

I've enjoyed all of the discussions that I have had with "veteran" members of this board, even ones where my opinion has been discounted. I expected that. It happens everywhere, not just the world of the internet. People disagree. No harm, no foul.

Repeated topics are also inevitable. For example: until Adam Dunn hits .600 (.999 with RISP) with no strikeouts, people are going to complain. I realize it causes excess "noise," but as I stated before, you can choose what you read and respond to.

No forum of this nature will be perfect. I think this one is pretty darn good and I'm glad I found it.

I think this is a pretty good post. Didn't this same sort of situation happen last year, and IIRC people then said that it happened the year before etc. Last year there was the split of the two forums, and IIRC the discussion at the Reds Live forum was still somewhat the same with some "this player sucks" threads and the ORG got a lot of attention. Over the past year it seemed that the Reds Live board got better and the ORG received less and less attention. So now we are back a little bit like last year, even though I don't think it is that bad, personally. Before making any changes shouldn't we see if the discussion in ORG picks up and then see if there is any corresponding change in RL?

[redsfan30]

Well, I've finally made my way through this thread and I think I've got some thoughts organized, so here goes.

1) This is the most important aspect of all of what I'm about to say. *We're all Reds fans!* We all have different ways of going about things, but in the end we are all rooting for the same thing. Whether you're a stat guy, a naked eye viewer, casual fan or anything else, we are all rooting for the game thing, and that's for the Reds to win that night's game.

Black or white, we're all Americans. Stathead or visual observer, high post count or low post count, we're all Reds fans.

2) My main question (rather than observation) in this whole thing is who determines what is "beaten to death" and what isn't? Thread after tire-less thread has been closed on Adam Dunn because it is a subject that has been "beaten to death." Yet thread after thread bashing on Marty Brenneman or George Grande...they're allowed to stay open more often than not. You don't have to have been a resident of this place for very long to understand that Adam Dunn is the Redszone Goldenchild. Whenever a thread is started about some of his weakness', the same group of posters come out of the woodwork to shut the thread down because it's already been ran into the ground, yet many of these same posters are the ones keeping Marty and/or George threads going.

We're not allowed to harp on the goldenboy, but we can bury Marty and/or George into the ground because it's the fashionable thing to do? I'm not saying we should keep the Dunn threads open because many of them are beyond rediculous. I just think some consistancy needs to be shown in regards to what's "beaten to death" and what's not.

3) I proposed this a month or so back, and it wasn't taken to too well, and that's fine, but I'll throw it out there once more. I think gamethreads on both boards is a mistake...a big one. Not allowing a person to participate in a game thread because his rep isn't high enough is not right.

I think two seperate game threads are needed, but along a different route. I think a "play by play" only thread and a "color comentary" thread should be instituted. Many people have stated that it's hard to go through the game thread if you're using that for updates and surf through all the filler. I think a thread with a designated play by play guy and another thread where you can shoot the breeze with everyone else would be a good thing. It'd be your call completely as to which thread you join. If you're at work and just want updates, you'd go to the play by play and if you're home watching the game and just want to interact with others during the game, you go into the comentary thread.

4) For the new members issue, when they register and have to say that they read the rules, what's keeping them from just checking that they read the rules and going on? It's like when you add new software to your computer and the licensing agreement comes up. There is a box to check to you agree or not. Who in their right mind actually sits there and reads through that? Nobody. They just check the box saying that they agree and go right on.

I'm willing to bet the same thing happens with the rules when the new members register. To prevent this from happening, maybe force them to take a rules quiz after they've read through. If they pass, they can come on in, if they fail, they're gone.

I don't know if that could work or not, just throwing something out there.

Again folks, we need to stop categorizing people. Most of the fights on this board are "stats vs. non stats" based. If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer, and the non stat guys would step back and realize that stats do play an important part of the game this place would be alot better off.

Whether the people that do it like to admit they do it or not, there is a definete tone that if you don't have stats to back up what you're saying, whatever it is you're saying is not valid. That has to stop.

In closing, just respect people. We're all (for the most part) grown men and women and lately we've all been behaving like small children. We're all Reds fans, and we are all rooting for the same cause.

[pedro]

We're not allowed to harp on the goldenboy, but we can bury Marty and/or George into the ground because it's the fashionable thing to do? I'm not saying we should keep the Dunn threads open because many of them are beyond rediculous. I just think some consistancy needs to be shown in regards to what's "beaten to death" and what's not.

In the last three months there have been 8 threads with "Marty" in the title, 8 threads with the "George" in the title, and 45 with "Dunn" in the title. I hardly think it's equal.

[redsfan30]

In the last three months there have been 8 threads with "Marty" in the title, 8 threads with the "George" in the title, and 45 with "Dunn" in the title. I hardly think it's equal.

But I can't even begin to recall how many gamethreads have been hi-jacked with "Marty sucks" or "George Sucks."

It's like many threads that start on something but turn into "Dunn sucks."

It just seems to me that the Dunn threads get closed alot more often than the announcer threads.

[pedro]

But I can't even begin to recall how many gamethreads have been hi-jacked with "Marty sucks" or "George Sucks."

It's like many threads that start on something but turn into "Dunn sucks."

It just seems to me that the Dunn threads get closed alot more often than the announcer threads.

But just look at the sheer number of threads started about Dunn. The volume of Dunn bashing on this board greatly outweighs the bashing of anything else, except of course the bashing of people who actually want to do a little research before they state their opinions as fact.

[KittyDuran]

But just look at the sheer number of threads started about Dunn. The volume of Dunn bashing on this board greatly outweighs the bashing of anything else, except of course the bashing of people who actually want to do a little research before they state their opinions as fact.

I think the question is not the quantity but how far the bashing goes (and who's doing it).

[M2]

If the stat guys would step back and realize that baseball is not played in a computer ...

There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

[TOBTTReds]

My take is that far more often it's someone using the word "opinion" as a shield against the facts that have been presented to them. Numerous times in the past week I've run into posters making claims that are simply contrary to some rather basic evidence and instead of using that evidence to alter their opinion they've griped that they should be allowed to have an opinion without having numbers thrown at them. Sorry, but (and this is a made-up example) if you want to claim the Reds are the best triples hitting team in history and there's a quick and easy numerical test that proves you wrong, then it's for you to recognize that they keep score in baseball and that your perception doesn't trump what's actually happened.

M2, there is no doubt that is the case. If someone would start to refuse stuff like that, then do whatever. But obviously there are many arguments that don't get solved (which catcher should go?....). People get brutal on threads like that is what I was getting at.

[KittyDuran]

There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

I knew when I read rf30 post that someone would jump at that part of the sentence. That's the problem we're addressing...

[pedro]

There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

Now don't go over board with that hateful language and suggest (oh my!) that someone might not have "good sense" because then someone will complain to a mod about you.

Honestly, the narrow breadth of "acceptable" language on RZ makes it impossible to even have a discussion anymore.

"when you say bad things about Adam Dunn it makes me feel like you might not like him" is about all you can apparently say in retort to all this BS these days.

[Puffy]

There isn't one person on this board that I know of who thinks that and yet it (or some variation of it) gets typed by people who apparently don't have the good sense to know any better about half-a-dozen times a day.

I go back and forth on whether it's a good thing that the board rules prevent me from using the nouns, verbs and adjectives I'd like to in order to express my true thoughts on that statement.

Yup - and my other favorite is "if you stepped away from the computer and actually watched the game...."

[KittyDuran]

Yup - and my other favorite is "if you stepped away from the computer and actually watched the game...."

Hey guys, can we get back to the topic at hand and try to find some solutions and not add to the problem?

[RollyInRaleigh]

I knew when I read rf30 post that someone would jump at that part of the sentence. That's the problem we're addressing...

Agree! It is exactly the problem. The newbies come and go, and if they get out of hand, they are easy enough to get rid of.

[M2]

M2, there is no doubt that is the case. If someone would start to refuse stuff like that, then do whatever. But obviously there are many arguments that don't get solved (which catcher should go?....). People get brutal on threads like that is what I was getting at.

I'm from the East Coast. Far as I'm concerned this board has never seen brutal. BTW, I do think cultural norms (regional, generational, class) play a role in this.

My experience on the board has been that larger matters of opinion get treated mostly with respect. Guacarock broached the "which catcher should go?" the other day and there was plenty of civil disagreement. It's over matter like a patently false statement about one of the catchers (and maybe he should go, but don't invent fictional reasons why) where you'll see an eruption occur.