Jake, you asked for input and for vents. I think your response to 37red is a bit harsh.
Printable View
It can work, if people treat others with respect and stop instigating fights with one another. That's really the only reason we're here, I don't feel we're asking much of anyone. We've stated the new policies, and really they are not much different than what you agree to when you sign up for redszone. The bottom line is the game threads weren't working, and need extra moderation. I understand the emotion of a game thread is going to lead to some "less than stellar" responses, I've been guilty of it in the past myself, I'm personally not going to punish people for "one word" reponses unless they are profane or people start complaining about them.
I think what we are trying to get across, is that the rules have now been clearly stated and are not hard to follow. If you don't understand something, feel free to ask one of us, as it is near impossible to cover EVERYTHING in the grey areas. Now here comes the part that people seem to be struggling with, and I can see how it comes across as rude, is that the game threads were closed for a reason, they were a mess and people were warned. Now the warnings are over, so those that feel they cannot abide by the rules may be better off not posting in there at all, for their own sake if nothing else. I am here to be part of the solution, and am honored to do so, so if ANY of you need anything, please don't hesitate to ask me.
WV...there is hope. Just give it/us a chance.
I am sorry if that seemed rude, or harsh, but we cannot outline every possible scenario good or bad that we might have. I snapped a response after I asked for vents or responses and that WAS unfair. I apologize 37Red if you took that personally - it does read that way but that wasn't my intent.
I certainly hope there will be respect on both sides of the equation for this.
The game threads are a part of RZ that many people enjoy (myself included). There simply will be zero tolerance for people who ruin the experience for others and/or post content to the board that is not in keeping with Boss & GIK's vision and mission statement for the website. As such, there are rules and guidelines that we should all be expected to follow.
99% of the people who post to the game threads do a great job and have fun with it. The new rules are only in place to keep the 1% from derailing the experience with baiting posts, excessive attacks on players, personal attacks on other posters and the like. The stuff we're all talking about is basic stuff that anyone on here can figure out -- if you need to be warned to not go insult other posters, troll for arguments, or start running players and coaches into the ground with multiple posts then I really don't know what to tell you. Like I said, though, the vast majority of people won't notice any difference in the moderation of the game threads because they're already doing the right thing.
The game threads are there to have fun while watching the Reds, and we (I) want to make sure they're a place where everyone can do just that. Hopefully we can all work together to make that happen.
Your Friendly Game Thread Mod,
- Caveat
Does this mean we'll get MORE CE PBP? (My favorite part of GTs, btw) ;)
No one should be punished for them just because other posters on the GT might not like it and thus complain about them. Respectfully, that is not included in the stated rules, and is not a sound guideline. You can't have some mods saying they have no problem with one word posts and won't take action as long as they don't directly violate forum policy... and then on the other hand say you'll issue out punishment if enough complain about them.
That, IMHO, is way to arbitrary and conflicting.
One doesn't issue punishment based on complaints; but only on stated rules violations.
The rules have been properly and openly stated. And IMHO, seem very reasonable and fair.
Again, you mods have a very tough job to do with this HUGE diverse crowd of MPDs. :lol:
The GTs needed more frequent and better moderation. And when I say "better moderation", please, don't any of the other mods think that is being said as a slight on your job performance. It wasn't. Only that you were too few for too many. You have lives outside of this forum and needed to increase your numbers.
Also.... are these guys going to have mod powers in chat also? Because I don't want to get booted for calling TommyJohn or RedlegJake pinheads in chat! :lol:
Quote:
Guys we want to hear from y'all. This is your chance to vent, just to let us know we're knuckleheads or that you're on board.
Quote:
we do want your input and thoughts.
Don't be shy. Let er rip.
Quote:
Without seeming too rude, I'd remind you that you don't have to post in the GTs. If the moderation here seems too draconian, please feel free to post at Cincy.com.
Obvisously it can still use some workQuote:
ANY moderation on any board is a judgement call.
One word posts aren't technically against any of the rules.
When one-word posts (e.g. "Pathetic!" or "Ridiculous!" etc.) are repeated excessively, they begin to violate Rule #5: Trolling and General Nuisance posting.
Part of what makes something a "nuisance" is when it drives people to complain about it. I'm not saying that's the sole criterion for determining when a poster is warned or bounced from the GT, but if someone is causing general nuisance to the GT forum and other people are complaining, I'm not going to sit back and just let things happen.
And seriously, are we really fighting about this? How many one-word posts does ANYONE make in a given day/game thread? Let's all back up and have a tad bit of perspective here. ;)
Well, you asked for concrete examples of what we don't want to see. I supplied a textbook example of posting before thinking.:(
Had I taken a moment to extract my foot from my mouth I might have made a better job of explaining it - like CE and Tommyjohn did. They said what I meant.
Y'all were right to call me on it. I stand chastened. Well, I sit chastened. And yes, I still want to hear the vents and concerns.
Jake
I get where you're coming from GAC. I guess my assumption is that people won't complain about them unless they are in violation of a rule is some way, such as excessive bashing or offensive etc...obviously if someone complains it will be reviewed, meaning there won't be a "knee jerk" reaction so to speak. The complaint must be a valid one, I think it just may seem conflicting to some since everyones definintion of "excessive" may be different. That's why we have a team here, to determine what is valid, it is the cross we have chosen to bear. :)
I appreciate the feedback GAC and others, please continue to express your concerns/questions and we'll do our best to address them.
P.S. ...... OK. Everyone, IMHO, needs to take the night off and chill out. We all need our beauty sleep because we have a double header tomorrow of Dusty Baker lineups. :lol:
All the moderator's attempts here were good and well intentioned. So lets not any of us try to misconstrue that, and try to "read between the lines".
The bottomline is (and we all agree)..... the GTs needed more moderation. And Moderation is good. Unless you're in chat! :beerme:
Can we at least wait till the GTs are re-instituted and see what problems may arise before we all start complaining? It will be a period of trial and error.
Just remember one thing.....
These moderators had nothing to do with the hiring of Dusty Baker.
Pinhead would be an improvement on some of the things I've been called:cool: But then my wife has certain latitude.
No, no, it was good that it found it's way into the discussion as a help aid, I think.
Honestly, I was thinking the same as you are expressing above, it was like we were role playing an example in real time. To me it was like a bit of a case study and we learn from it that we are all human.
I don't see that as a negative.
You're right Caveat. The only reason I brought it up was because others may construe "if enough people complain about it" as being too much of a generality and arbitrary in reference with dealing with regular board members who know each other well and interact on the GTs daily. I really don't participate on the GTs much at all. But if I did, I could care less if a member I see daily on there says one worded responses like "pathetic" or "ridiculous" a lot on the GTs.
If Corey Patterson gets five ABs, is five "pathetics" and "ridiculous'" too much and considered trolling? :lol:
Time for me to go to bed :lol:
"Everybody's talking 'bout Dusty Baker, lineups bad, will he get it, Bronson Arroyo, he's been had, good ol' Griffey, Patterson iffy, Adam Dunn, walks, no runs, bullpen arms, down on the farm, defense poor, WHY CAN'T WE SCORE!
But all we are saaaaaaying.....
After reviewing this thread, I'm pretty confident that the "issue" hasn't been fixed. It's interesting that the announcement about the "Infractions System" has now been removed. It was a solid system that, if properly utilized, would have actually made this whole discussion (and closing the game thread forum) moot.
There was simply no reason to close the game thread forum in the first place as there was already a system in place to properly moderate it. And now we've waited nearly a month to hear about a solution that appears to be far less tolerant than the system already in place but never used?
I'm not even a consistent game thread poster, but I'll be darned if I enter that venue to do anything but read it going forward.
One more comment from me. I like that the administration has decided that there should be ground rules, even if they were the same ground rules that were in place anyway. The problem is, like Steel has said, the rules were never enforced per se. The little outburst in the final thread that closed the game threads could have been handled with a swift banning of the parties involved, but instead we closed the game threads and came up with the new rules, which are pretty much the old rules with a couple of zingers about one word posts and the like. Now we have a whole new group of guys who will operate as overseers of the game thread watching the every move, but I imagine ignoring the one thing that causes the conflict--arrogant and flippant posts made to prove someone is more intelligent that the other poster. About baseball and the Reds.
OK, so where does that put us? Back to square one IMHO with a new layer of administration that will, being human, use their own predudices to make decisions on banning or whatever. Redleg Jake made it all the more obvious with his flippant post to 37Red, which he has admitted was a little over board, but that is the crux of the problem. In a game thread, who has the descipline to think before posting? It's a game and things happen during the game that raises emotions. We all have our ideas and hopes for a game thread, and we all have our expectations of what it will be. Unfortunately, we don't all think the same and off the cuff remarks can spark flippant remarks which cause conflict. What is over the line is now up to the new mods (I do not envy you).
Some time ago, i complained publicly about the game threads being a little too nasty for my tastes because of rudeness and the arrogant attitudes I expressed earlier. One of the results of this was the forming of the membership ORG forum, which should have solved all our problems, but it did not. We forgot that a losing team breeds strong opinons and they will exist until the team starts winning again. So here we are with a new game thread to begin on Monday with the same people and more administration. Will it help. I seriously doubt it. Only when the fans on here respect opinions that might be the direct opposite of others will we get along. And I don't expect that anytime soon unfortunately. But if game threads do not exist, this is a pretty boring place, so have at it, but be careful and respect others whether you like them or not.
It takes two to tango -- if you have a problem with people being arrogant, then just put them on ignore or don't respond to them. Arrogance isn't a crime, it isn't a violation of the board's rules until it gets into the realm of trolling, nuisance behavior or beating a subject to death. And yes, that has been and always will be a judgment call. I welcome your help on that subject -- please report posts that you think ARE nuisances and do cross the line from being merely arrogant to deliberate attempts to bait others into an argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by WVRedsFan
Bottom line is, we're not talking Bushido stuff here; your honor as a Reds fan or a baseball fan is not at stake over anything that is said on the message board. Naturally, feel free to debate and go over the points, but simultaneously don't feel compelled to make the counter argument just because the point is sitting out there unrefuted.
If people want to avoid extended vacations from the forum, they'd better figure out how to discipline themselves pretty quick.Quote:
Originally Posted by WVRedsFan
"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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSD
And, I hope you do stop by Steel. Your insight is greatly appreciated and is one of the things that has kept me coming back to this site over the years.
Well here's my 2 cents: This is completely ridiculous....goes way above and beyond what a game thread should be. Regulation to this extent takes any and all enjoyment out of it.
Seriously, what the heck.... :rolleyes:
How can some say it's not "fixed" when it hasn't even been given a chance yet?
To those that say the "problem" is not fixed....
1) what do you say the problem was? Do you acknowledge that there obviously was some sort of problem?
2) what would you do (suggest) to rectify the problem? They are openly asking for our suggestions on the new policy. That doesn't sound draconian.
You're griping before it even takes effect. Geez!
Policing a forum and GT that includes so many diverse personalities and opinions is not an easy task. There is always that chance you're going to upset someone, or any actions you may take be construed as draconian, favoritism, whatever.
Everyone has their own ideas about what the GTs should/shouldn't be about as far as subject matter and content.
A wise man once said "You can please some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all the time". Of course someone ended up shooting him. ;)
But what he said rings true.
It seems to me that a few, on this thread in particular, took offense to a couple responses on here that included the statement "If people don't like the new policy or have a problem with adhering to it, then maybe find somewhere else to post, because it will no longer be tolerated here."
Some saw that to be rude and maybe arrogant. I don't think that as new mods, just given the job, that was their intent at all. Cut'em some slack.
I don't know if there is a more diplomatic or "softer" way to have put something that needed to be said without it being misconstrued as such.
C'mon.... any of us who have been on this forum for any length of time, and interacted, have got to know these mods (even these new ones) pretty well. I've even actually met with some of them outside of here at games and get-togethers. Overall (not isolated situations) they've been pretty fair and objective.
But it seems to me that some are simply looking to be critical regardless of what they say/do. Any actions taken were going to be over scrutinized, met with skepticism, and questioned IMO.
I don't think you're being fair to the mods. Especially the new ones who haven't even "clocked into the job" yet.
Way to welcome them aboard.
OK - how about if they say NO GAME THREADS PERIOD because they don't want to have to police the mess.
How would any of you like to have their job and babysit this bunch of dysfunctional, frustrated Red fans? Any takers? C'mon, step forward! :lol:
I personally don't think they are going to be "sitting on" everything that people post, putting it under a microscope, looking for an excuse to pounce. To try and do so would drive them insane and make their job very, very difficult. They know that already.
I've been on forums, like the old Cincy.com and MLB. com where there is no sense of order or decorum. It was chaos and madness.
You will always have that minority (and I think that is who is being addressed) who feel they have some sort of right to say and do whatever they please, and to use a forum to enact their own personal agenda irregardless of what actions that may constitute.
Those people, for the most part, not always, are the ones who don't like rules. They see it as an infringement.
Another wise man once said that rules (laws) were not made for the law-abiding, but for for those who break and violate them. Of course they dragged this guy outside the city limits and beheaded him.
So yeah, you moderators have a thankless job. ;)
We all are like those kids hanging out/playing at a playground, and the mods are the parents. As long as the kids play nice the parents are content staying out of the way, sitting on the benches, reading their books, eating their Quaker Rice snacks, and are simply THERE in case some kid suddenly decides he doesn't want to play nice anymore, and throws sand in another kid's face. That parent intervenes to restore order.
And lets face it.... there are some kids that just love to do that, and see if they can get away with it.... "Cause I'm a problem child!"
Play nice. Don't throw sand in other's faces - which IMHO doesn't mean you can't criticize or disagree with each other or decisions/situations that are unfolding on that field while watching or listening to the game - and I don't think we'll have any problems.
I don't know if the new system will ultimately mean improvement but the game threads have an incredible potential to be something special. Hats off to those who volunteered to moderate the GTs. Lets not forget the huge commitment and workload they've agreed to take on and IMHO, the GT mods represent enlightened choices by GIK/Boss and Co.
I've pretty much stopped spending time in the GTs and find myself considering taking a sabbatical from redszone more and more. Often making an argument means having to become defensive because it also can mean you'll be called arrogant, incurious, a parrot, slavish, simply seeking a pedestal to preen upon, a hater who really doesn't even like the Reds but really just wants to take advantage of this great community (I guess much like a leech), or even a delusional plagiarizer with a god complex but lacking an inability for original thought.
In the past, comments/discussions in the GTs have been fertile ground for stimulating threads where someone has said, "hmmmm, really?" and then dug deeper to find an answer thus stimulating more great discussion. It takes a lot of time and effort to post quality content like that though. Recently, I've at least found myself asking-given some of the grief that seems to go along with it more and more- is it really worth the effort?
I guess the point is-I welcome more moderation.
Listen to that GAC guy. He is a smart and brilliant man. :cool:
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.
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.