Heck, I'm just anxious for Monday, May 12 to arrive.
I missed the game threads!
tho I shouldn't, I'm going to throw in a comment here. I think the addition of game thread mods is a GREAT idea ...
But I also think the "punishments" escalate too quickly.
First off, if we all agreed on what constitutes an infraction of the rules or a "punishable offense", I don't think we'd have much of a problem. We clearly don't all agree. And frankly, in any group even 2 or 3 more people, you will have disagreements about where the line is drawn. With "no warnings issued", you lose the opportunity to help define where the line is being drawn. At the very least, the game thread mods should step in and say "calm down, boys and girls, or we're going to start kicking people out." Or "you're beating a dead horse, cut it out". Helps not only the "offending party" but the rest of the board as well.
Don't think warnings "must" be issued ... just "can" be issued, and in some cases, should be issued. Tho they don't have to be defined as formal warnings.
I also think the mods should be able to issue the single game ban freely to calm a thread down when the discussion gets too heated. In a 162 game season, I don't think the third infraction "necessarily" warrants a remainder of the season "vacation" from game threads.
I'd rather see limits like ... say 3 single game bans in a week, 6 in a month, or 10 in a season ... before escalating to the next level. To be honest, that should make the mods job easier.
Just expressing my opinion.
Last edited by SandyD; 05-10-2008 at 01:11 PM.
my point mirrors Steel's in that what makes a game thread any different than any other thread. Additional moderators are fine, but why not use the existing infractions system instead of creating special rules? If you don't tolerate a thread getting personal during the course of a discussion on BP hitting fourth, and there are rules and moderators that deal with stated situation, why should the punishment be more severe just because it happened in a game thread?
More mods i firmly agree with.
Suck it up cupcake.
We are seeing the diversity of opinion and interpretations. This discussion, this input and feedback process for clarification needed these expressions, this discourse, including the banter that irritates to respond in kind, even the humor that was injected to try and comfort or soften previous responses. I believe that they needed to come out in this thread for a positive purpose so that we as a group might have a better chance to see it, recognize it in real time, and or be given the opportunity to properly expose it and to properly address it here.1) what do you say the problem was? Do you acknowledge that there obviously was some sort of problem?
First of all, if the moderators are going volunteer to accept a position of authority on Redszone, they also have to volunteer to accept a position of leadership.
Their writings and their responses have to be above board. They will have to act and respond in a manner to people in the way that they are advocating that they want to see the rest of Redszone interact and communicate with one another. It will be necessary for them to show leadership regarding the behavior that they want manifested on the board. Go ahead and blow that off, and you will have problems that were not necessary to have to begin with and that could have been reduced if not eliminated. I will use Boss and I as an over simplified example, because Boss knows what the hell I am trying to say, maybe. Boss and I used to interact with one another at cincy.com in the manner that some, perhaps all of us would prefer not to be a part of. I would write some dribble, and he might respond with something like, “yeah coming from you” etc.” and then the defensive nonsense flowed even deeper and longer.
Leadership can’t have it both ways. They need to be a big picture of what is to be considered right and good, and provide that tone and attitude in their communications about posters, players, coaches and the various subject matters. They are to be the example of “what playing nice is”, a generic term for acting or behaving within the rules and guidelines of Redszone. The moderators, respectfully, need to be the examples of what good posting in the “game threads”, non baseball, ORG or any thread for that matter, are to be and are acceptable regarding membership and posting privileges within the Redszone board, a vision of community standards. That leadership style should be for all posters and readers alike to set the tone, the style, the acceptable communications and interactions in this micro culture.
Second, the posters along with their communications style, input and feedback, have already been accepted on the main ORG, non baseball, and minor league boards. Apparently their/our posting or communications style has been found to be acceptable to the board’s administration and moderators. We naturally see examples in the ORG, non baseball and minor league threads, examples that one now might suspect are not acceptable in the game threads. Now we, administration, moderators, and posters alike accept and tolerate those very same communication styles of input and feedback or arguments in the ORG, non-baseball, and minor league and it is understandable, people will find it difficult to accept or understand in “game threads” if or when that same style is not acceptable in the “game threads” and there are times that it will not be acceptable.
What is tolerated and acceptable on the ORG board discussions should be consistent and accepted in the “game threads” as the accepted norm for written communications and expression on all of Redszone.
Beware and be careful of turning normal law/rule abiding, established, acceptable citizens of Redszone into non conforming, non law/rule abiding citizens in the “game thread”
Example: Others or I have long been allowed to post in a certain manner in the non-baseball and ORG threads, but it could occur in a seemingly all of the sudden scenario that when others or I post in that same writing or communication style in the “game threads” it now could be that others or I could be getting warnings and that punitive actions are taken against others or myself using a communication style that has long been tolerated or even encouraged in the non-baseball or ORG threads.
Leading us to:
Now they come to the “game threads” and they somehow become unacceptable and will be dealt with as deemed appropriate by the group of those that complain, or the moderators. Something is amiss in that when they have a long standing of acceptable norms and practices on the other threads outside of the “game threads” . Go ahead and blow that off, and you will have problems that were not necessary to have to begin with and that could have been reduced if not eliminated.
Third, don’t dismiss out of hand just because of some emotional taboo that the Reds are a very bad team, that the Reds have a long way to go to be a quality product, that the Reds now have a long history of losing many games, which many people don’t dismiss. In turn don’t dismiss out of hand that we are expecting or asking people to write and to respond with writing certain qualities, certain positive and constructive standards about a bad team, a losing team, and a bad product that has seen an extension of such year leading to year, extending season to season for eight straight years, and then turn around and expect individuals to pose quality writing over the true dead horse, the bad team itself and poor quality. That is unrealistic to be asking people to write about something that does not exist, as if the Reds were something special to write home about at this time. People, they are naturally going to write and communicate what they see, what they think in the present and what they believe about the bad product at hand and how they spontaneously feel about it.
Most of the people on the board are analytical and management type personalities, they are going to write in a manner and yes complain or point out, in manner that would be consistent with problem solving, and with the Reds that isn’t sweet and positive in nature. Don’t kick against the rocks trying to change something that one cannot change, nor would it be right to change. All organizations from public to private, from the churches to the government have the dirty laundry of problems that need to be, that have to be discussed openly and dealt with by people. The Reds bad product is a real problem, is dirty laundry, don’t ask or imply that people should candy coat that away in their communications and turn around and call this an open forum at the same time, which is a conflict in and of itself.
About as far as subject matter and content, yes.Everyone has their own ideas about what the GTs should/shouldn't be
That is why Administration, management ie. Moderators need and have to show the people what good and bad is within the behavioral norms and standards of this micro culture. It cannot be assumed that everyone has the same values, beliefs, and norms as everyone else when they do not. Thus it cannot be assumed that “everyone” knows how to write and to communicate or behave like the given moderators assume that we know. The premise is good, the assumptions are in error. Communicating the mission or communicating the vision or teaching the group takes some work, some extended exertion of effort to show the people what is good and is bad; what is acceptable and unacceptable in the “game threads”, especially if it might be in conflict or contrary to what are the acceptable norms of the ORG, non-baseball, or minor league postings that have been long accepted norms. I assume that they have not attempted this when they could have simply copied and pasted a number of do’s and don’ts posts from previous game threads, live, real examples, because it might step on someone’s toes, in effect praising some and a becoming a form of ridicule for others. The board needs to get past that for constructive reasons. Those do and don’t type post need to be extracted and used for a clear and concise example of what is acceptable, expected, wanted, and needed in the “game threads” and what is not, before attempting to regulate and to move to punitive measures. Probably all of my posts in game threads, because I am one of those fans who come to “game threads” when I am disappointed, sad, disgusted or frustrated over the Reds and one who shouldn’t be posting that over and over for the consumption of the other readers.
Simply gather up some do and don’t type posts, that are sound and strong examples of things to try and avoid on the game threads. No one needs to be embarrassed or humiliated, leave the poster’s name off of the example post that are used, as examples. Don’t assume and then take some punitive actions until you have done so. The “do” posts simply give the people an idea of what you are really looking and hoping for in the game threads. If you keep blowing that suggestion off Redszone will continue to have problems in the game threads, contrary, the chat accepts posts now that are apparently unacceptable for “game threads” how can that be? What I am saying is that we are trying to correct something in “game threads” that is an acceptable norm in other areas of Redszone. Administration, moderation, leadership is allowing and sending mixed messages or creating double standards that contribute to the problem that they have indicated that they want eliminated. Fine, show the people what is and what is not acceptable in the “game threads”. Most leadership authors will tell us that the leader has to show the people what is good performance, what good performance looks like.
Because, “Everyone has their own ideas about what the GTs should/shouldn't be” clearly “everyone’s idea is not what the administration, moderators, and fellow posters want for the game threads.
I believe that we should refrain from posting in the game threads as an emotional dumping grounds for others to hold our hands during times of disappointments, chagrin, sadness, disgust, frustration or even a natural anger over the poor product and play of the Reds that has long been established. If I understand correctly the game threads are not the place for that, the game threads should not be a place where the cliché that “misery loves company” is well pronounced and expedited.
Personal responsibility, I can contribute and exhibit a willingness to work with the group and to consider the readership by not making such chronic, negative emotional dumping contributions on the game thread and will do so by being reserved and withholding and refraining from such in the new attempt to create a better environment for the reading and participation for others.
I think we can and should ask ourselves and others to try to limit the misery loves company exposes in a never ending redundant manner during game threads. Come on we already know and understand that play stinks, that outcome hurt, and that we have seen it over and over with the Reds, I don’t need to shove it onto your plates, or down the throats of your eyes one more time, the pain or disgust of it has been covered and will continue to be covered in the ORG threads.
The first week of the new game thread should be a walk through and a testing of the new system. Set up the normal game thread, allow the posters to post, have the new moderators on hand to interject for the first week on the board, calling attention to or pointing out the various good posts, and those that are not desirable for the “game threads” endure and tolerate this interjection for the first week of the game threads. Use that first week to establish a quality product for the participants and readership. In that first week train, teach, lay a good foundation for the Redszone community, use the first week to show in real time what the expectations of the game threads are. Posters allow, accept, tolerate, work with, go along with the moderators during that first week and do not take offense when we as a group are trying to make this a better place for each.
After that enforce the code consistently. Go ahead and blow that off, and you will have problems that were not necessary to have to begin with and that could have been reduced if not eliminated.
The first week back to game threads should be utilized in a manner that leads to problem solving and future quality. Moderators, “show the people what good performance looks like” in the game thread department, because the game threads are different from what is acceptable in the other threads, it is not all about positive or negative human behavior, behavior being what people think, say, and do alone. Example: If the minor league game threads are what is sound and good, then tell us, show us. Yes, that is the laborious part of leadership, but it is necessary because of the diverse behaviors that come from the various value and belief systems within people and generations, even within ORG, non-baseball and the minor league standards and acceptable norms.
Another example is the use of “you” statements . And the use of the that “rolling eyes” icon. Get rid of them. They are too easily inferred as condescending and demeaning responses which are not conducive to achieving the goal of improved game threads. That rolling eyes icon has long been an accepted norm and it should not be if you want the group to contribute more constructive input and feedback and not provoke negative behavioral responses.
Don’t attack the message, improve the message with good input/feedback and clarification processes and practices.
Last edited by Spring~Fields; 05-10-2008 at 03:57 PM.
Sorry, aside from adding mods to game threads, I don't see the benefit. What I see is the fostering of the peception that Redszone is over moderated and suppresses ideas. I know that really isn't the case, but that will be the impression.
Suck it up cupcake.
Nor should it be.If people want to avoid extended vacations from the forum, they'd better figure out how to discipline themselves pretty quick.
"I was ticked off" doesn't fly as an excuse anywhere else, it shouldn't fly as an excuse here. If you (the general "you") cannot control your emotions enough to follow the forum rules while watching the game, then the game thread probably isn't the place for you.
And I applaud you guys for volunteering to do this. You'll find it's a thankless job (in my seven years as moderator of a message board, I really found that out), but one that someone has to do. When I said it wouldn't work, it was in reference to Jake's comments to 37Red, which he apologized for and realized the reaction from several of us. I appreciate that. I was an early supporter of mods for the GT and still am, I just think you guys need to get together like an umpiring crew and make decisions on what is and what is not an infraction so we have consistency. That's all I ask.Part of the reason, according to my understanding, that the system wasn't properly utilized was due largely to the fact that moderators weren't always around in the game thread until after things had gotten out of hand. With the additional moderators, hopefully they'll always be at least one mod available to enforce the system that has always been in place.
"You only have to bat a thousand in two things; flying and heart transplants. Everything else you can go 4-for-5."
IMO, there were too few for too many.
I personally don't feel the forum is over-moderated at all. If it had been then we wouldn't have had any problems on the GTs.
Last edited by GAC; 05-10-2008 at 06:26 PM.
"panic" only comes from having real expectations
I don't think RZ is over moderated. I'm proud that my son can visit here and I don't have to worry about what he reads. But I've been here 8 years now. I know what this place is. I also know what the perception is on other boards. My hope is that RZ's rep as a place for discussion trumps all other perceptions.
Suck it up cupcake.
Just finished watching the documentary This Film is Not Yet Rated for the first time.
So many parallels.
As usual, we overcomplicate things.
The old rules would have worked fine, we just didn't have mods who agreed to read the entire game thread every night and enforce them. That's a big commitment.
Now, they've got the mods to do the job.
Give it a chance before you pass judgment.
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
~ Mark Twain
I've tried to stay in the background because RedLegJake and I talked about it and every thing worked out fine. Sticking my foot back in the water is a little frightening but here I go. I'll try to express what I think without making any waves, excuse me if I do. I feel the new regulations were tightened too far, the old ones were fine. I also know the mods have worked hard to bring the GT under control, it was a bit out of hand, they are all committed to making it more acceptable, we all know that. Some people feel it should be open to spontaneous reactions, I agree if they are within the same limits on profanity that we already have. I don't give a darn if people throw out a word now and then without an explanation, it's not a commentary. The game thread is different by nature than the Zone commentaries, it IS spontaneous. Some have said that there weren't enough mods to keep a handle on it, no doubt that's the case, I've always wondered how do these guys spend all of their time on the Zone.
If I had anything to add, and this is where the water gets deeper, I still think a single warning before being tossed would be a fair thing to do. The discretion of what is appropriate is fuzzy to me. I think that makes it harder for the mods as well as the posters, thus I feel a single warning per GT, before getting booted, would help everyone get a handle on what is expected. A single warning, just one, before getting removed would give the poster time enough to consider what they said that the moderator objected to. If we give it a couple weeks of tolerance and single warnings, again sticking my foot as well as my head back in murky water, I suggest we start a follow up thread, after a few weeks to this one, and see how everyone feels. I know without question that this may be a bad idea and may need a special moderator just for it, but I also feel that we as a group may see one thing or another is working or not and stick with it. Boy am I asking for trouble or not on that one LOL. One thing that will rub the moderators the wrong way, and I understand this, is that they spent weeks working on what they thought and feel was the right solution to cleaning up the GT.
I can't wait for the reactions to these comments. RedLegJake, would you give me your take on this, in the PM. Anyone else that doesn't want to post in the thread, would you please do the same.
If anything is over-complicated, it's killing game threads for a month in order to set up a system to properly enforce something that should have already been enforced.
"The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer
"The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”