Turn Off Ads?
Page 17 of 36 FirstFirst ... 713141516171819202127 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 533

Thread: Site Feedback/Questions

  1. #241
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    Legitimate new information isn't even getting a chance to develop anymore. As soon as Dunn's name comes up, the lock goes on the thread.

    I love the Reds, and I love baseball. I love the history of the team and the future of the team. I also love the history of the sport, as do many others that post here. We still talk about Austin Kearns. We still talk about Dmitri Young. We still talk about Josh Hamilton. I love discussing all of these guys, and others do as well. I know I'm just one fish in this great big sea, but one of the reasons I rarely post here anymore is the splintering of the board has made the existence of intelligent or entertaining discussion virtually null and void. What started with banning political and religious speech has continued on down a slippery slope. I know the internet is a global community, and not governed by the laws of the country, but we have freedom of speech here, no one has the freedom to not be offended. Obviously, others want to discuss the player in question as well, otherwise, the threads wouldn't have been so popular. He's among the Reds' all-time home run leaders after all, and may someday be among the MLB all time home run leaders as well. We're talking about words. Discussion. Ideas. These things have never hurt anyone, so I fail to see the problem. Why is it just because someone has the tag "moderator" that gives them the right to decide when discussion has ended and a conclusion has been reached? We're all on the same level here, at least we used to be, fans of a baseball team. I thought the creation of the Old Red Guard was initially for the moderators to have to do less moderating, but it's turned into the opposite, and now the part of the board where the best discussion used to take place is now the most heavily moderated, and dare I say, censored. Once you start censoring discussion, where do you stop? At what point do we come to a board where we can only discuss the current year's team?

    Geez...I'm not one to ruffle feathers, or cause problems, but that tirade has been building up in me for a while. I'm not saying I'm a better fan or better poster than anyone else here, I don't think you can put rankings on those type of things, but I do feel that there isn't always common sense being taken into account on decisions, and rushes to judgment are made, and we sit by quietly and say, "Welp, that's the way things are." This is still the best Cincinnati Reds' fan message board on the internet, but at the pace we're going, will it still be in 5 years? Many of us came here from cincinnati.com because it was too liberally ran, but we're going toward the opposite extreme.

    I never thought I'd agree with Rem on anything. I probably won't sleep for at least a week now.

    Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too. ~Voltaire

    Every human being has a right to hear what other wise human beings have spoken to him. It is one of the Rights of Men; a very cruel injustice if you deny it to a man! ~Thomas Carlyle
    I think the mods made their decision about Dunn threads for a couple of reasons: 1) what is left to be said about Dunn really?, 2) Often the latest Dunn accomplishment or blunder was increasing getting turned into an "advocacy thread" that was borderline baiting.

    Finally, while it could probably be argued that it really was a relatively few members on each pole of the "Dunn" issue, the mods hands were forced in my view because of a larger problem-it wasn't just Dunn-specific content....tangent discussions such as the value of defense, player valuation in general, impact of strikeouts, hitting approach-basically you name it-were increasingly becoming poisoned by the introduction of Dunn.
    Last edited by jojo; 03-26-2009 at 06:53 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #242
    Maple SERP savafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    17,568

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post

    Finally, while it could probably be argued that it really was a relatively few members on each pole of the "Dunn" issue, the mods hands were forced in my view because of a larger problem-it wasn't just Dunn-specific content....tangent discussions such as the value of defense, player valuation in general, impact of strikeouts, hitting approach, you name it were increasing becoming increasingly poisoned by the introduction of Dunn.
    Isn't Dunn's play relevant to those type of discussions though...whether or not you or I get tired of seeing his name come up in them (and for the record, I did)?
    My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!

  4. #243
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    Isn't Dunn's play relevant to those type of discussions though...whether or not you or I get tired of seeing his name come up in them (and for the record, I did)?
    The problem with Dunn though is that often such topics would be approached through a "Dunn prism" (i.e. a person's opinion of Dunn informed the validity of the metric/topic) rather than the more appropriate approach (i.e. other way around). As a result good discussion that advanced understanding was often impossible in my view as threads became essentially poisoned by less engaging rhetoric.

    That's just my view and the mods might disagree in part or in whole but as someone who has been attacked as being both pro and anti Dunn depending upon the topic, I'm glad that Dunn discussion has been throttled a bit.
    Last edited by jojo; 03-26-2009 at 06:51 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  5. #244
    Waiting for a tour/album KittyDuran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Hamilton, Ohio
    Posts
    8,413

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Sigh...somewhere my message got lost so I'll repeat it (and I still say MY way is a better way...)

    Maybe RZ needs to have a separate forum for topics on the rest of major league baseball - including former Reds.

    I will add that it be open to all, like the Minor League Talk/Introductions and Site Feedback/Non-Sports Chatter/The Tavern.
    2014 Reds record when I'm attending: 23-18 - FINAL
    2014 Dragons record when I'm attending: 2-1 - FINAL
    "We want to be the band to dance to when the bomb drops." - Simon Le Bon of Duran Duran

  6. #245
    Member Ron Madden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,815

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    The problem with Dunn though is that often such topics would be approached through a "Dunn prism" (i.e. a person's opinion of Dunn informed the validity of the metric/topic) rather than the more appropriate approach (i.e. other way around). As a result good discussion that advanced understanding was often impossible in my view as threads became essentially poisoned by less engaging rhetoric.
    The problem in a nut shell is the freedom of discussion. Discussion leads to better understanding on both sides of an issue.

    It' wrong in so many ways to consider an opposing opinion as poisonous.
    We are all Cincinnati Reds Fans here. Please give us the opportunity to learn from each other.

  7. #246
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Don't forget that Dunn is not the only verboten subject these days. Willy T is also apparently an irritating subject since "all that has been discussed has been discussed".

    If that's really the measuring stick for mods and admins to decide a subject is tired then there's about a hundred other subjects that should be stopped immediately. Any Marty B, George Grande or any other Reds announcer being horrible thread should be locked. That's a tried subject with plenty of chance for non-respectful conversation. (Yet those continue.....funny huh?)

    All of the hot-stove league reports should be discontinued (sorry Chip) because nothing new really comes out of them other than 100 "thanks Chips" and assorted digs at the host. Any thread discussing why Dusty Baker is/isn't a good manager should be locked yesterday. It's all old news. Why are we discussing Keppeninger at all? No new news to discover there. He is what he is. What about Weathers? I mean, is there really any new ground to cover there? It's old news to everyone at this point.

    So the application of the "tired subject/chance for squabbling" standard is very uneven at best.

    This is Boss's & GIK's house. If they decide they are tired of hearing about Dunn obviously that is their prerogative. As long as they understand that the uneven and capricious closing of subjects and dispensing of infractions like Pez does nothing to further the "quality of the board". If you are going to have a "standard" have a standard and stick to it. Because right now what you really have are "subjects that irritate an admin so he doesn't want to hear about them anymore".

    Because frankly, if the standard was really "tired thread/non-respectful talk" Dunn conversations should have been stopped a long, long time ago.

    Perhaps we should have a sticky about subjects that irritate the admins and mods so we know which topics we should avoid altogether? That sounds far more smart-alec in words than it is intended. But I think it's a serious question. If the standard for stopping discussion of a topic is really more about what irritates the admins/mods than some actual concrete standard then shouldn't the RZ members know what those irritating subjects are so we can avoid them?

    While I'm sure many of you could care less, my interest in RZ has evaporated. There's really nothing of interest to discuss anymore. If you can't discuss the fundamental issues of baseball (run creation, how to improve a team, how performance is measured) because someone brought up an irritating players name then what else is there to discuss? The Reds TV schedule, goofy trade ideas and a story about a cradle-robbing Pirates wife aren't really a good reason to spend any time here. Write it off as off-season slowness if you wish, but the same trend will continue into the season if topics are banned willy-nilly.
    Last edited by Ltlabner; 03-27-2009 at 07:41 AM.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  8. #247
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Madden View Post
    The problem in a nut shell is the freedom of discussion. Discussion leads to better understanding on both sides of an issue.

    It' wrong in so many ways to consider an opposing opinion as poisonous.
    We are all Cincinnati Reds Fans here. Please give us the opportunity to learn from each other.
    The comment you've quoted is in no way arguing that an opposing opinion should be considered poisonous.

    Freedom of discussion is the ideal.

    In the case it of Dunn it isn't "an opposing opinion" that poisons the discussion. It's that all too often, it is impossible to have a free discussion-about anything-once his name becomes associated with it.

    There is a discussion about Strasburg in the minor league forum that is completely civil though both sides clearly disagree. Try finding a Dunn thread where that can be said. You have to look hard.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  9. #248
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    8,066

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    Don't forget that Dunn is not the only verboten subject these days. Willy T is also apparently an irritating subject since "all that has been discussed has been discussed".

    If that's really the measuring stick for mods and admins to decide a subject is tired then there's about a hundred other subjects that should be stopped immediately. Any Marty B, George Grande or any other Reds announcer being horrible thread should be locked. That's a tried subject with plenty of chance for non-respectful conversation. (Yet those continue.....funny huh?)

    All of the hot-stove league reports should be discontinued (sorry Chip) because nothing new really comes out of them other than 100 "thanks Chips" and assorted digs at the host. Any thread discussing why Dusty Baker is/isn't a good manager should be locked yesterday. It's all old news. Why are we discussing Keppeninger at all? No new news to discover there. He is what he is. What about Weathers? I mean, is there really any new ground to cover there? It's old news to everyone at this point.

    So the application of the "tired subject/chance for squabbling" standard is very uneven at best.

    This is Boss's & GIK's house. If they decide they are tired of hearing about Dunn obviously that is their prerogative. As long as they understand that the uneven and capricious closing of subjects and dispensing of infractions like Pez does nothing to further the "quality of the board". If you are going to have a "standard" have a standard and stick to it. Because right now what you really have are "subjects that irritate an admin so he doesn't want to hear about them anymore".

    Because frankly, if the standard was really "tired thread/non-respectful talk" Dunn conversations should have been stopped a long, long time ago.

    Perhaps we should have a sticky about subjects that irritate the admins and mods so we know which topics we should avoid altogether? That sounds far more smart-alec in words than it is intended. But I think it's a serious question. If the standard for stopping discussion of a topic is really more about what irritates the admins/mods than some actual concrete standard then shouldn't the RZ members know what those irritating subjects are so we can avoid them?

    While I'm sure many of you could care less, my interest in RZ has evaporated. There's really nothing of interest to discuss anymore. If you can't discuss the fundamental issues of baseball (run creation, how to improve a team, how performance is measured) because someone brought up an irritating players name then what else is there to discuss? The Reds TV schedule, goofy trade ideas and a story about a cradle-robbing Pirates wife aren't really a good reason to spend any time here. Write it off as off-season slowness if you wish, but the same trend will continue into the season if topics are banned willy-nilly.
    You, Sir, are now the proud recipient of 1M Remdog Rewards Points for that post! (Gets you a $.01 cent off coupon at Dairy Queen---Do Not Double).



    Rem

  10. #249
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    While I'm sure many of you could care less, my interest in RZ has evaporated. There's really nothing of interest to discuss anymore. If you can't discuss the fundamental issues of baseball (run creation, how to improve a team, how performance is measured) because someone brought up an irritating players name then what else is there to discuss? The Reds TV schedule, goofy trade ideas and a story about a cradle-robbing Pirates wife aren't really a good reason to spend any time here. Write it off as off-season slowness if you wish, but the same trend will continue into the season if topics are banned willy-nilly.
    It takes a lot of work to write a post the espouses what is hopefully an engaging opinion or insight while also showing the argument behind it. The point of "showing your work" rather than just stating an answer is that it can hopefully stimulate people to in turn express their unique opinion or find flaws in the original argument and collectively everyone benefits (and has fun).

    It's not that there aren't things left to discuss. A good game thread can provide literally tens of comments/observations that can trigger the "hmmmm... that's worth digging into deeper" response.

    While I wouldn't have stated it exactly as you did above (and I agree with the mods decision to throttle Dunn topics), increasingly, I catch myself wondering if it's worth it to try and engage on certain subjects and whether the effort to compose more time consuming posts like below is really going to be worth it.

    http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...vingston+homer

    http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...vingston+homer

    http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=jojo+leverage
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  11. #250
    Member redsfandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,597

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by KittyDuran View Post
    Sigh...somewhere my message got lost so I'll repeat it (and I still say MY way is a better way...)

    Maybe RZ needs to have a separate forum for topics on the rest of major league baseball - including former Reds.
    I will add that it be open to all, like the Minor League Talk/Introductions and Site Feedback/Non-Sports Chatter/The Tavern.
    And I'll say it's not a bad idea to have non-public forums for somethings. But I think the problem is how to handle controversial posts/threads wherever they happen. Taking an "out of sight, out of mind" approach won't solve the problem. It just moves the problem to another part of the site.

    At the top of every page it says this:

    RedsZone
    For Reds fans, by Reds fans

    RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion


    But baseball isn't the only thing discussed here. The Reds are the main reason most of us are here but in The Tavern you can discuss any sport. In Non-Sports Chatter you can discuss almost anything that isn't sports related. And if you want to talk about potential hot button stuff we have the Peanut Gallery for political and religion based stuff. Do we really need to have all Dunn related threads/posts made in the Peanut Gallery since he's "controversial"? Where do you draw the line?

    It says
    RedsZone
    For Reds fans, by Reds fans

    If someone wants to talk about Dunn, Jr, or any other former Red I have NO problem with it. I'm just curious how many people have become disrespectful in Dunn threads or if it's mostly just a few people. Everyone shouln't be penalized because a few people can't, or don't want to, discuss something in a civil respectful way. Disagreements will always happen. But there's no reason for things to get carried away.

    Imo, if someone gets carried away with an argument the subject isn't the problem. The problem is the person and how they choose to respond.
    Last edited by redsfandan; 03-27-2009 at 08:31 AM.

  12. #251
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    ...increasingly, I catch myself wondering if it's worth it to try and engage on certain subjects and whether the effort to compose more time consuming posts like below is really going to be worth it.
    I gave up creating threads (and I used to start a lot of them) a while back.

    Mostly it was because I ran out of ideas and the threads I liked to start had a very limited range. There's only so many "what's your favorite...." you can do.

    But I also learned that very few people are here to learn about some esoteric aspect of the game or "expand their knowledge". The vast majority of us lean towards arguing our viewpoint about the Reds/Reds players/Reds management decisions as the real enjoyment of coming here. It's the same thing that happens at a sports bar, why would RZ be any different?

    Obviously subjects like Dunn, how runs are created, old-school vs new-school, walks vs hits vs strike outs and why ______________ is a horrible player or why _________________ was a bad decision are going to get the most traction. If you start limiting those subjects you don't get better threads, you just get less of them. There's only so many of the outstanding threads RMR, Cyclone and WOY can create.

    That doesn't mean you shouldn't have clear standards and evenly enforce them, but wholesale elimination of topics does nothing to stimulate website discussion quality IMO.
    Last edited by Ltlabner; 03-27-2009 at 08:55 AM.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  13. #252
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    I gave up creating threads (and I used to start a lot of them) a while back.

    Mostly it was because I ran out of ideas and the threads I liked to start had a very limited range. There's only so many "what's your favorite...." you can do.

    But I also learned that very few people are here to learn about some esoteric aspect of the game or "expand their knowledge". The vast majority of us lean towards arguing our viewpoint about the Reds/Reds players/Reds management decisions as the real enjoyment of coming here. It's the same thing that happens at a sports bar, why would RZ be any different?

    Obviously subjects like Dunn, how runs are created, old-school vs new-school, walks vs hits vs strike outs and why ______________ is a horrible player or why _________________ was a bad decision are going to get the most traction. If you start limiting those subjects you don't get better threads, you just get less of them.

    That doesn't mean you shouldn't have clear standards and evenly enforce them, but wholesale elimination of topics does nothing to stimulate website discussion quality IMO.
    You make a lot of excellent points. That said, the ORG is supposed to be content driven in the sense that it's held to a much higher standard. I'd think the motivation for getting in is because it had something to offer that one couldn't necessarily get at a local sports bar.

    Again the mods might totally disagree with me on this.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  14. #253
    Administrator Boss-Hog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    6,074

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Ltlabner View Post
    Don't forget that Dunn is not the only verboten subject these days. Willy T is also apparently an irritating subject since "all that has been discussed has been discussed".

    If that's really the measuring stick for mods and admins to decide a subject is tired then there's about a hundred other subjects that should be stopped immediately. Any Marty B, George Grande or any other Reds announcer being horrible thread should be locked. That's a tried subject with plenty of chance for non-respectful conversation. (Yet those continue.....funny huh?)

    All of the hot-stove league reports should be discontinued (sorry Chip) because nothing new really comes out of them other than 100 "thanks Chips" and assorted digs at the host. Any thread discussing why Dusty Baker is/isn't a good manager should be locked yesterday. It's all old news. Why are we discussing Keppeninger at all? No new news to discover there. He is what he is. What about Weathers? I mean, is there really any new ground to cover there? It's old news to everyone at this point.

    So the application of the "tired subject/chance for squabbling" standard is very uneven at best.

    This is Boss's & GIK's house. If they decide they are tired of hearing about Dunn obviously that is their prerogative. As long as they understand that the uneven and capricious closing of subjects and dispensing of infractions like Pez does nothing to further the "quality of the board". If you are going to have a "standard" have a standard and stick to it. Because right now what you really have are "subjects that irritate an admin so he doesn't want to hear about them anymore".

    Because frankly, if the standard was really "tired thread/non-respectful talk" Dunn conversations should have been stopped a long, long time ago.

    Perhaps we should have a sticky about subjects that irritate the admins and mods so we know which topics we should avoid altogether? That sounds far more smart-alec in words than it is intended. But I think it's a serious question. If the standard for stopping discussion of a topic is really more about what irritates the admins/mods than some actual concrete standard then shouldn't the RZ members know what those irritating subjects are so we can avoid them?

    While I'm sure many of you could care less, my interest in RZ has evaporated. There's really nothing of interest to discuss anymore. If you can't discuss the fundamental issues of baseball (run creation, how to improve a team, how performance is measured) because someone brought up an irritating players name then what else is there to discuss? The Reds TV schedule, goofy trade ideas and a story about a cradle-robbing Pirates wife aren't really a good reason to spend any time here. Write it off as off-season slowness if you wish, but the same trend will continue into the season if topics are banned willy-nilly.
    You bring up some good points, but where I strongly disagree with your main one is as follows: most of the the topics you mentioned that have been debated are at least relevant to the team this site was founded to discuss. Adam Dunn, no longer being a member of the Reds, does not warrant rehashing the same arguments over and over again - I rarely saw any good come from them in the first place. More often than not, all they did was to help create a larger rift among members of the board. The previous discussions probably did more harm than good, but I was willing to let them slide because they at least had relevance to the team. I don't think that discussion of the player should be taboo if it's genuinely new information, but I will emphatically say that I think continuing the same volume of arguments for or against a player that's no longer a member of the Cincinnati Reds is not in the board's best interests. My personal opinion is not that the Dunn threads are "irritating" - it's that it's not good for the board to continue the very same debates, which I don't think were good in the first place, about a player who is no longer a member of the Reds.

  15. #254
    Member redsfandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,597

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Boss-Hog View Post
    ...most of the the topics you mentioned that have been debated are at least relevant to the team this site was founded to discuss. Adam Dunn, no longer being a member of the Reds, does not warrant rehashing the same arguments over and over again - I rarely saw any good come from them in the first place. ...
    So this site is for Reds fans to discuss anything that has to do with the CURRENT Reds team and some other things but just not whatever we want to discuss?

  16. #255
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,056

    Re: Site Feedback/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by redsfandan View Post
    So this site is for Reds fans to discuss anything that has to do with the CURRENT Reds team and some other things but just not whatever we want to discuss?
    The standard seems pretty clear. If someone wants to start an in depth discussion about Dunn going forward, it needs to be related to the Reds somehow and it needs to provide some type of new insight.

    Given the last statement of the site rules:

    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.
    The above standard doesn't seem arbitrary.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

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.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25