New Game Thread Policy

[TeamCasey]

Originally Posted by Joseph

Do you honestly want a thread of say 300 posts where 250 of them are essentially one of the following....

"Wow!"

"OMG Dunn!!!"

"Trade him!"

Or other variations of course. Particularly when there are 6, 8, 10 of them in a row? Does it serve to make Redszone a better place at all? Chat is best served for emotion, the game thread is supposed to be, and should be a log of the events that happened in a game. If its during an emotional moment during the game, that can be conveyed in longer posts discussing the situation. Most people seem, and let me emphasize the word seem, to want to be the first one to post a reaction or that a player homered [or other outcome].

We aren't all members of the media out to scoop one another, the game threads should be about the games, not folks sitting around at the corner bar grunting at the TV.

Sure! Don't mind that at all. It's captures the moment although I like some play by play and discussion mixed in there as well.

It's discussion during a live event by many people. You're going to see multiple posts by multiple people on a single event.

[RedlegJake]

Originally Posted by TeamCasey

Sure! Don't mind that at all. It's captures the moment although I like some play by play and discussion mixed in there as well.

It's discussion during a live event by many people. You're going to see multiple posts by multiple people on a single event.

That's what we're after with the one word post guideline. Just someone post a pbp for those who aren't watching the game live or listening live on radio. THEN we are getting a game thread that logs the events of the game along with everyone's reactions. Maybe we should have said 'Please post a pbp following your first reaction if someone else hasn't.'

[Heath]

Originally Posted by TeamCasey

Sure! Don't mind that at all. It's captures the moment although I like some play by play and discussion mixed in there as well.

It's discussion during a live event by many people. You're going to see multiple posts by multiple people on a single event.

And to piggyback onto Jake's posts, we weren't getting the play-by-play or discussion recently. We were saddled with the other junk.

Again, we aren't here to minimize participation.

[coachw513]

Guess I'd better come up with something a little more creative after Votto's 3rd HR tonight ...

In all seriousness, I am not a regular gamethread person for the reasons that caused the temporary ban...but I'm hopeful this worked out as I truly missed it the other day, kindof' "jones-ing" for some comments about how Volquez was dealing and Votto was mashing while I was at work...

Finally, much appreciation to those who have given their time in advance and will continue to do so for this stuff to take place...I keep hoping the Reds themselves will raise themselves to the level of "play" that this site strives for...

Belisle and Arroyo this weekend...that's good, right??

[Caveat Emperor]

The very nature of the game thread (50+ people all posting at the same time) makes it ineveitable that you'll have 5-10 people posting the same thing at the same time.

That isn't the problem.

Nor is it a problem when someone homers and everyone posts their excited reactions. Everyone understands that -- that's why its a judgment call and not some hardline rule for determining when excitement or anger jumps the line from solid participation to annoying and useless noise.

Be respectful, have fun, and the game threads will have no problems as far as I'm concerned.

[Team Clark]

Originally Posted by gm

This ain't a Pirate's game thread, matey

Seriously...stop watching Pirate movies!

I like the new rules and look forward to returning to a civil game day thread.

[HumnHilghtFreel]

Crap!


Is that the type of thing you're trying to avoid?

[KronoRed]

Looks good mod kings

[smith288]

I probably wont be attending very many game threads for fear of upsetting the delicate balance that is the mod's mood.

[cumberlandreds]

Actually the rules set are really no different than for the rest of board and what they always have been. It's just there will be mods during the games watching over us. Which is not a bad thing at all and was something needed all along.

[LoganBuck]

So.......

Example of not ok?: Dusty Baker stinks!

Example of ok?: Dusty Baker stinks for leaving Volquez in so long.
or
The manager should not have left Volquez in so long.

Where is the line for commentary on a bad decision? If a manager(Dusty) makes what is perceived to be a bone headed tactical maneuver(likely). What would be the appropriate measured response?

I only have limited activity in game threads, mostly drive by criticism or praise, or discussion of a specific play or decision relating to the game at hand.

Thanks for bringing the game threads back!

[Tommyjohn25]

Originally Posted by cumberlandreds

Actually the rules set are really no different than for the rest of board and what they always have been. It's just there will be mods during the games watching over us. Which is not a bad thing at all and was something needed all along.

Exactly. I'm not sure why the fuss over something that we set as a "guideline" for better conversation. I'm not going to ban anyone for using the one word posts (unless it's profanity or baiting) but we worked very hard on working towards a better game thread, and made suggestions accordingly. That's all there is to it, I think some are looking too much into this.

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by Tommyjohn25

Exactly. I'm not sure why the fuss over something that we set as a "guideline" for better conversation.

If you read the policy as it's written, it sounds like corrective action will be taken for one-word posts.

"one-to-two word posts add nothing to the substance to the thread if you don’t describe what happened to deserve your emotion. Take the time to think first than type. You aren’t getting paid to scoop other posters. Make a thoughtful, reasonable post. If you think that what you are going to type might get you an infraction, chances are that it probably will."

The proximity of the mention of "one-to-two word posts" to the warning about being careful to avoid an "infraction" makes the issue seem larger than was apparently intended.

[Ltlabner]

Sounds like a simple and straighforward policy. Not sure where there'd be any confusion.

Thanks for all the hard work Boss/GIK & mods.

[WVRedsFan]

NO problems here at all. I think it's reasonable. My problem has been the rudeness and arrogance, as well as something happening nd not knowing what went on several minutes later--especially when I'm away from radio or TV.

But, all in all, not bad.