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

[OldRightHander]

WARNING: OFF TOPIC

KronoRed, I just noticed your post total. 43,258?!?! I am pretty new so I guess I just wasn't paying attention. Have you ever been accused of "juicing" your posts ala Bonds at the plate? Should their be some sort of 'roid investigation into your past performance?

Perhaps a change to the name of BalcoRed is in order.....

We all know Krono is on the juice. He has admitted it several times. I just don't think science has yet found a real connection between apple juice and post counts.

[Buckaholic]

I think it's noble that Boss decided to open up this thread and allow people to voice their concerns. I hope that he is sincere wanting to listen to what people have to say.

But if that's the case, I hope that moderators and administrators will listen to everyone, and not just a certain group of this forum.

There has been a private attempt by many posters here, some have spoken on this thread and many others have not, to voice displeasure in the way the forum has been run. Mainly, it has to do with the rep system, specifically how it is put in the hands of a certain portion of the forum and that portion is getting away with the treatment of other posters that newer or less prestigious posters are not.

I will cite some feedback I received through the private inbox here shortly about some of the problems on this forum (removing specific names so that it doesn't become personal) to show how some feedback seems to be overlooked.

But first, let me give my opinion on a few issues here.

Specifically on the rep system, I would make a few changes.

First, I like the idea to hide the rep points. I think the rep system does in fact create a "class society" and it also tends to be a popularity contest.

Within this thread, a certain list of posters with high rep points was used as an example towards respect and reputation of the forum. That list included...

westofyou
Cyclone792
M2
SteelSD
Caveat Emperor
RFS62

Without getting personal, as that's not my intent here, you will notice that these posters share a basic philisophical agreement about baseball when it comes to one of the absolute most controversial issues on this board - statistics versus baseball strategy and the practical use of. Sure, each of these respected posters have probably had individual disagreements in the past, but when it comes to the very most controversial issues on this board (I use Adam Dunn as an example), they will be seen sticking up for one side of the argument in every thread.

It is these threads, the controversial ones, that often create the most rep points negative or positive being handed down. It's also where many of the problems have derived.

So when a core issue is dividing the board and the rep system on said board functions on the opinions and decisions of one half of that divide, it's easy to see how a class society can be created and a popularity contest will follow.

I believe we should hide the rep points and also, I feel there should be a committee made up to reward posters with this rep system.

This committee should be made up of posters new and old. It should be made up of a group of posters that follow the rules and provide quality posts, but it should be sure to include posters from all different points of view - especially those subjects that create the most controversy on the forum.

When an alleged criminal is going before a jury of his peers, the jury selected is to include people from all walks of life. It's supposed to be diverse and made up of people that don't all think alike.

Why can't we put the rep system in the hands of a committee like that? It can be a combination of moderators and posters, but let's make sure it's fair and includes enough of a variety that it won't be a popularity contest and it will also give a fair chance to those quality posters that don't always side with the majority on the core issues.

Now on the "beating a dead horse topics.

Creating a seperate forum for topics considered to be "old and tiresome" is the most silly idea I've ever heard.

For starters, every day there are new posters joining this forum. For some of them, the topic is not old and they would like to discuss it.

Secondly, whatever happened to the ability to igore a topic you are tired of dealing with? Posters here, whether they have 1 post, 1,000 posts or 20,000 posts have the abillity and right to ignore a topic. If they choose to read it, they also have the discipline and ability not to respond.

Any topic that remains on topic of the Cincinnati Reds should be fair game. I agree with making sure there are not several threads of the same topic on the board being discussed at the same time, but as long as there is interest and a need for discussion - let it be.

Now back to the issue of concerns...

When dealing with the issues of rep points being handed out by the above list of posters and others, some of which share the same beliefs, it's easy for people to claim they do not limit positive reputation to just those who share the same belief system.

That has been said many times and many ways in this very thread. It's convenient. It's handy. It's ideal if true. But it's not being carried out as said.

It was back in April, I believe. There had been another topic on Adam Dunn's productivity (or lack thereof in the eyes of some people here) with runners in scoring position.

At the time, I had taken a passive approach to the "batting average/ batting average w/RISP" argument versus the sabrmetric argument including stats such as OPS, Runs Created, etc. My contention at the time was that although I believe the new metrics were probably useful, I didn't think anyone could say with 100 percent certainty that one stat was better than another.

Contained within post #90 on this thread, one user says...

If you want rep points for effort rather than contribution, you won't get them unless said effort results in you making an actual point. There isn't a poster on this board who is immune to being wrong. That being said, there isn't a poster on this board who has the right to be right just because he thinks so.

In attempting to use my argument that sometimes other statistics were still useful, I provided statistical evidence that although Austin Kearns' OPS was lower in the RISP situation than Adam Dunn through that time, he would have been considered "clutch" in terms of coming up with more run-scoring hits off his own bat because he had also plated more runs than had Dunn.

I had entered the argument with 16 rep points, I ended the same argument with 16 rep points.

Again, I countered later in the argument with the 2005 statistics of Garrett Atkins for comparing RISP numbers to Dunn and provided ample evidence that he came through with run-scoring hits at a much higher rate than did Dunn.

Once again, despite provided statistic analysis to explain my point, I was stuck at 16 rep points.

I was told by one poster that my statistics were just plain wrong, even though they were of a factual argument and no one recognized the fact I was providing ample statistical arguments with reasonable theories. I was not, as people have claimed happens, given any reputation points for making a reasonable counter argument - even if it disagrees with their beliefs.

Post #90 goes on to say...

But if you want to talk about baseball at an exceptionally high level and if you might be willing to shut up, listen, and learn about that which you don't know or you want to provide information above and beyond the general knowledge level of the forum then this IS the place for you.

That's the real problem. I didn't shut up, listen and admit I was wrong even if I and many others didn't believe I was. In fact, I was told I was 100 percent wrong in this case and because I either didn't A) conform and agree or B) at least give the speech about "how thankful I was to be shown a new way of thinking", I didn't receive any rep points.

My belief in that particular argument, was that some people didn't understand the difference between fact, statistical trends and opinions. For instance, a fact is that 715 is more than 714. It's a fact that Barry Bonds has hit more home runs than Babe Ruth in his major league career. That's a fact.

When comparing two statistics, saying that one statistic is better than another because it correlates 90 percent of the time compared to 85 percent of the time is not a fact - that's a statistical trend because not every time will one stat correlate at a higher rate than the other. Merely saying player A is better than player B is an opinion, because that cannot be statistically proven. It's subjective in nature.

But here's what really disproves the notion rep points are handed out to people of all opinions.

Despite my factual posts of providing statistics that viewed the situation differently (and no rep points being handed down), I continued the argument and unfortunately, after I lost my temper and was verbally attacked in an abusive manner, I countered with a personal attack. I shouldn't have done that, and after the incident I did in fact apologize.

The previous attack my direction did not receive any negative rep points and no one made any mention on the thread of this attack. It's important to note this poster was of high reputation as well. But after my attack, I went from 16 rep points to -65 rep points and had no fewer than seven (7) posts quoting my attack and threatening I was violating board rules and there was no room for my conduct.

Only when I messaged a moderator and pointed out the attack towards me was anything said to the other poster. Ironically enough, in this very same thread, the same has happened.

I have seen a case in this thread where someone was called out by name and been talked down to, another poster responded (admittedly over the line), but while no one had made any mention of the post directed at this poster.... the poster was quoted three times and scolded by others for getting off topic and doing as Boss had asked everyone not to do.

But here's the kicker to my above point.

After Cyclone had respectfully asked me to run some statistics analysis on my own computer to show what he and other posters had been trying to get across, I willingly agreed to open my mind to the experiment.

I took 15 years worth of national league stats and ran correlation tests in Excel to see which stats in that chunk of time best correlated to run production. I was intrigued by the results and quite impressed with the test.

I admitted as much on a new thread I posted, and included my findings. My reputation jumped from -65 to 145 because of the thread.

There is a problem with the fundamental perception I gained on the positive feedback of my post. When I was citing actual statistics to support my argument (which may have been in the minority) against statistics such as OPS in situations like RISP, I continued to be told I was plain wrong, and before I had lost my temper, even my statistical arguments never received any rep whatsoever. But the minute I come back to the board a few days later to provide stats that backed up the philosophy of the presitigious majority on this forum, I was repped heavily.

You tell me that opinion doesn't matter with reputation and I'll tell you the evidence does not support that claim.

I later relayed these issues to board moderators and boss himself, along with my apologies for my posts that did in fact cross the line - provoked or not.

Within days, however, I received messages from no fewer than 10 people on the subject. I am going to share messages that I saved from at least 5 of them where they voiced the same exact frustrations and issues to myself and to board administrators but I will leave out the names included in the message because I'm not trying to call anyone out. However, I'm going to refer to the individuals in these messages with the same name so that I can illustrate how many people have had a problem with the same posters and how they come at others.

Concerned Redszone member #1

Subject: "You Can't Win"

"You definately are not alone. I have had quite a few messages similar to the one I sent since I started posting here, all from argueing with AnonymousPoster#1. Basically I will argue with him now for about 2 posts back and forth now before I just dont respond anymore becuase it just starts to drive me insane at his inability to actually concede that anyone else can ever have a thought contrary to his and maybe be correct. What's worse, the same people stick up for him and nothing is ever said when he attacks us."

Concerned Redszone member #2

Subject: "It's a lost cause"

"I saw the problems you were having in that thread but I wanted you to know I've had the same problems. I got into an argument recently with AnonymousPoster#2, AnonymousPoster#3 and especially AnonymousPoster#1. He kept telling me how I was wrong and refused to listen to the facts and anything I said to the contrary was basically 'strawmen'. I finally retaliated to his cheap shots and I got warned for it, everyone jumped down my throats and nothing was ever said to him."

Concerned Redszone member #3

Subject: "RE: Keep fighting the good fight"

"I don't disagree with things said, I just thing you have to dig deeper than just purely looking at numbers. If baseball was played on paper the Yankees would win every year. But, you are right, they aren't listening to what I've said at all. They never do and when someone tries to explain to the moderators that they gang up on people, no one ever cares. It's the same people doing it and no one listens."

Concerned Redszone member #1

Subject: "RE: You Can't Win"

"There are quite a few of them that have said they had the same problems with the same people, I dont remember anyone off the top of my head, but I have had at least 3 to 5 people let me know that they dislike [B]AnonymousPoster#1[/B} for the way he tries to talk down to people and sometimes will insult them, becuase he thinks he can get away with it. I actually had him cuss at me once in a thread and no one said anything for about 2 pages until I called him an idiot, only to get told I need to watch myself and my language until I had to point out that he had cussed at me earlier. Guess what, no one bothered doing a thing about it. There is a group of people, AnonymousPoster#3, AnonymousPoster#1, AnonymousPoster#4, AnonymousPoster#2, and AnonymousPoster#5 who usually stick together on anything. I just usually tend to stay out of most arguements involving any of those guys, because otherwise you end up argueing with all of them on 18 different points, you'll lose your temper, one or two of them will take a shot at you and you'll be the one to get in trouble for it."

Concerned Redszone member #4

Subject: "hahaha"

"Give it up, it's useless. You can't argue with those guys. They're always right, you're always wrong and unless you suck up to guys like AnonymousPoster#1 and AnonymousPoster#3 with how thankful you are for showing you the way, you won't get anywhere. Have fun with those jerks."

Concerned Redszone member #5

Subject: "hey"

"My name is (removed). I saw your posts and just wanted to say I share your frustration. I've had the same problems but be warned: i tried telling the moderators about it and how a few of them were getting away with things and it fell on deaf ears. I'm not the first one to complain either cuz I know there is a few people to say the same thing to me but oh well. I just wanted to say hello and keep the faith."

These concerned messages do not (and should not) suggest there is a problem with conflicting opinions. On the contrary, the world is made up of people with different views, different outlooks, different philosophies and different ways of living.

Educated and reasonable minds can and have disagreed. Most of life is not black and white, it's the gray area.

The problem here is that there is a consistent opinion from people that have crossed paths with one fundamental group on this forum that they are told there's no "gray area" essentially. The viewpoint and fundamental beliefs are not the problem directly, but when you have an influential person or persons talking down to other posters and refusing to see other arguments, it becomes a real big issue on many levels - especially when the same group of people dictate a reputation system that runs the forum and when you have numerous complaints that aren't being dealt with.

So that brings me to my original thesis - I love the fact we're allowing people to voice their concerns, but are you going to listen to every person or just some people? Many people have had the same complaint, but it hasn't been addressed. And if it has, nothing has changed.

And before anyone suggests I'm singling out a group of people - I'm not singling out a certain belief, I'm singling out those who refuse to accept other arguments and who belittle those who disagree. There are some individuals very much doing those things and nary a word said to those individuals.

I agree that respect needs to be earned. But the problem here is, the respect should be judged by ALL people on this board, not just those who agree with them or those who are most popular.

There should be a better system of checks and balances. One that truly people can be judged for their abillity to reason, their ability to provide statistical arguments in all forms, not just one that the majority agrees with and also how they act towards others regardless of how many posts they have.

There are some who have not earned respect, but there are also some who are in position to demand this of other posters when they don't conduct themselves in the same manner.

Let me conclude with another portion of post #90.

The lesson is that if you see the game as an emotional AB-by-AB sprint instead of a marathon and don't have the ability to look past what's right in front of you, that may not be the best plan. If you harbor resentment against a certain type of player or game without factual basis, this may not be the best forum for you. If your plan is to attack posters rather than concepts, this isn't the place you should be. If your M.O. is to emotionally escalate a debate, there are folks here who are better at that game than you. If you feel you have a right to have an opinion but can't handle a challenge to it, go elsewhere. Please. If you want rep points for effort rather than contribution, you won't get them unless said effort results in you making an actual point. There isn't a poster on this board who is immune to being wrong. That being said, there isn't a poster on this board who has the right to be right just because he thinks so.

I believe every fundamental issue with this board can be found in this post.

No where on this forum should posters be told they need to see baseball in a certain way to be a successful poster. Is baseball a marathon? You bet it is. But this is also a forum where posters want to discuss their emotions and feelings on their favorite team. Some of them don't want to be lectured on those emotions and they don't want told they're wrong for thinking the way they do.

Is it true that others have a right to respond with a different opinion? You bet. But remember that it's just an opinion and they should not be criticized for their way of thinking.

People nor concepts should be attacked. Both can be critiqued, but if your M.O. is to degrade the poster FOR their concepts or opinions, that too is conduct that shouldn't be expected here.

Lastly, no one minds having an opinion challenged. People can tolerate that. But it's the 'how' that bothers them.

People have a problem with contrary opinions being declared as fact. They have a problem with being insulted. They also expect the 'leaders' of the board to follow in line with the same conduct expected of them. If they don't have that peace of mind, they will not trust in the board's foundations.

There are clearly two large groups that divide this board on a controversial issue. There needs to be more middle ground at the top and as a whole.

How would you like to be a Republican and having to earn your respect from a Democrat to earn a seat in the Senate? Or visa versa.

There needs to be more monitoring of the conduct and rep system by those who are in position to give it... whether the person has 250 posts or 20,000 posts.

How would you like to be arrested for DUI by a cop that was also under the influence?

And finally, all opinions within the topics of the Cincinnati Reds both new and old need to be heard - not just those that haven't grown tiresome.

A pro-life or pro-choice demonstrator would be upset to learn his or her protests in front of a government building has been rehashed too many times to be allowed any longer, but just 20 feet away, an anti-gun or pro-right to bear arms demonstrators continue to speak their mind.

I think these are the problems that exist. I'm sorry for being long-winded, but I felt this was the proper time to speak up.

[pedro]

wow, no offense but I think some of you may spend too much time back channel talking about this stuff.

I also think it was innappropriate to post those messages here, even though you stripped out the names.

[savafan]

I'd like to go back to having five reps to give per day. Two just doesn't seem like enough.

[KronoRed]

wow, no offense but I think some of you may spend too much time back channel talking about this stuff.

I also think it was innappropriate to post those messages here, even though you stripped out the names.

Wow, 100% agreed, people here complain about cliques and such, PM bashing of other posters seems like a pretty clear sign of a clique to me.

[KronoRed]

I'd like to go back to having five reps to give per day. Two just doesn't seem like enough.

I disagree, 2 is more then enough.

[savafan]

I disagree, 2 is more then enough.

Not when I give 'em out and then I find another great post I'd like to award, but have to wait 24 hours and then 24 hours later I can't find that post again. Maybe that's just me.

[Buckaholic]

Wow, 100% agreed, people here complain about cliques and such, PM bashing of other posters seems like a pretty clear sign of a clique to me.

It's not about a clique, it's about people trying to voice their concerns and are getting nowhere with them.

If because myself and others are not fond of the way people are treated for disagreeing with the unsilent majority, and that makes us a 'clique', fine. Then I'm a clique.

This thread was asking for people to voice their concerns. Do you want us to pick and choose who gets to voice theirs or should we continue to turn a blind eye to some of the problems?

The ironic thing, Krono, about your response - people get lectured for not taking issues private. Some of those same people took the issues private. They pointed out there were others doing the same thing and getting away with it. No matter how many times someone voices those concerns, it doesn't change.

Some may think it's improper to share these messages publicly. If those people want to speak publicly, they will, and that's exactly why I left their names out of it. No one else knows who they are and it will remain that way unless they request to be heard.

But if we're truly looking out for the best interests of the board, if people really want to find out the problems with the forum and how it can be better... then I believe we should address these issues and not sweep them under the rug and accuse people of being a clique just for raising the concerns to begin with.

[remdog]

wow, no offense but I think some of you may spend too much time back channel talking about this stuff.

I also think it was innappropriate to post those messages here, even though you stripped out the names.

People here spend a lot of time talking (PM'ing) about a lot of different topics. It's their time, they can talk about anything they want for however long they want. (shrug)

I think the posting of the messages was handled just fine if he had the author's permission to use them under the conditions that he did.

Rem

[redsfanmia]

People here spend a lot of time talking (PM'ing) about a lot of different topics. It's their time, they can talk about anything they want for however long they want. (shrug)

I think the posting of the messages was handled just fine if he had the author's permission to use them under the conditions that he did.

Rem

I agree whole heartily.

[saboforthird]

wow, no offense but I think some of you may spend too much time back channel talking about this stuff.

I also think it was innappropriate to post those messages here, even though you stripped out the names.

With all due respect, Pedro, what he did was the PERFECT thing to do in this thread. He didn't mention any names, per Boss-Hog's request, didn't call anyone names (again stuck by the rules of the thread). There are some in this thread that, for one reason or another, refuse to acknowledge that there is a *problem at RedsZone*. It is those posters that the post you are talking about was probably geared toward. Sometimes the truth does hurt.

[RBA]

Maybe we need is a RedsZone "Trading Places" where the Dan Ackroyd moderator changes places with Eddie Murphy RedsLive poster to really see how the other side lives. Sorry, Jamie Lee Curtis is not included in the deal.

[KronoRed]

Maybe we need is a RedsZone "Trading Places" where the Dan Ackroyd moderator changes places with Eddie Murphy RedsLive poster to really see how the other side lives. Sorry, Jamie Lee Curtis is not included in the deal.

hey..Dan Ackroyd could use the work

[pedro]

That all fine, it's just my opinion that due to the fact that Buckaholic gave a list of posters and then proceeded to post some pretty nasty PM's that were obviously (IMO) about some of the posters on that list that it came across as a sneaky way to attack said posters. It's too bad too because I'm not sure that was his intent.

Now, I didn't neg Buckaholic, or send him a nasty PM, or report his post to the mods, I just said what I thought. If some of you don't like it, too bad, I really don't give a crap.

[gonelong]

I think it's noble that Boss decided to open up this thread and allow people to voice their concerns. I hope that he is sincere wanting to listen to what people have to say.

But if that's the case, I hope that moderators and administrators will listen to everyone, and not just a certain group of this forum.

I think they will do there best. The majority will likely win out as you won't be able to please everyone no matter what your decision is.

There has been a private attempt by many posters here, some have spoken on this thread and many others have not, to voice displeasure in the way the forum has been run. Mainly, it has to do with the rep system, specifically how it is put in the hands of a certain portion of the forum and that portion is getting away with the treatment of other posters that newer or less prestigious posters are not.

I can understand the feeling, as we were all new here once. On the other hand that "certain portion" of the forum has basically helped build the forum into what it is today. They have dedicated time, money, and content to make it so. They are going to be given more leeway than somethat is new to the site, "fair" or not.

Within this thread, a certain list of posters with high rep points was used as an example towards respect and reputation of the forum. That list included...

westofyou
Cyclone792
M2
SteelSD
Caveat Emperor
RFS62

Without getting personal, as that's not my intent here, you will notice that these posters share a basic philisophical agreement about baseball when it comes to one of the absolute most controversial issues on this board - statistics versus baseball strategy and the practical use of. Sure, each of these respected posters have probably had individual disagreements in the past, but when it comes to the very most controversial issues on this board (I use Adam Dunn as an example), they will be seen sticking up for one side of the argument in every thread.

That will be news to RFS62

Personally I think you are selling these guys TERRIBLY short by lumping them all together as simply "stat guys".

It is these threads, the controversial ones, that often create the most rep points negative or positive being handed down. It's also where many of the problems have derived.

Likely true.

So when a core issue is dividing the board and the rep system on said board functions on the opinions and decisions of one half of that divide, it's easy to see how a class society can be created and a popularity contest will follow.

I don't buy this at all. There are many more members here that are "old school" as opposed to "stat-heads". While several of the more prominent posters that post statistics have high rep, they in no way control rep.

4 of my last 15 + reps received are from that list. (one of whom was RFS62 who is by no means a stat-head)

Only 3 of my last 15 reps given have been one of those on that list.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/membe...putation&pp=50

If you follow this link you will see all these guys at the top of the list. What they all have in common is that they post reams of content. What you'll notice is that after the first 10 or so names on the list ... it becomes darn near exclusively the domain of those that won't easily fit into the "stat-head" designation. Page after page after page of them.

That has been said many times and many ways in this very thread. It's convenient. It's handy. It's ideal if true. But it's not being carried out as said.

It is in my case.

There is a problem with the fundamental perception I gained on the positive feedback of my post. When I was citing actual statistics to support my argument (which may have been in the minority) against statistics such as OPS in situations like RISP, I continued to be told I was plain wrong, and before I had lost my temper, even my statistical arguments never received any rep whatsoever. But the minute I come back to the board a few days later to provide stats that backed up the philosophy of the presitigious majority on this forum, I was repped heavily.

You were repped because you figured out what people were telling you.

You went from this:

It's not that I'm ignoring your data, I'm simply telling you, there is no such thing as one stat positively being better than another stat, no questions asked.

to this:

I remain skeptical about the significance against that particular measurement, but I will conclude on the whole that BRA and RC along with OPS are tremendous representations of what a team will do provided they meet their projections. And in that line of thinking, I would much rather have players that as a whole, score well in these measurements.

via the help of "one of those guys"

Buck, not to be harsh, but all your analysis proved was that you don't understand how actual offensive run production occurs. Nobody here is "picking which numbers to choose," but what they are doing is using the best short-hand metrics that correlate to actual run scoring.

Here, do yourself a favor ...

Use that same sample size of 2002-2005 and break out Excel.

You tell me that opinion doesn't matter with reputation and I'll tell you the evidence does not support that claim.

It couldn't be any more clear to me that it does.

Within days, however, I received messages from no fewer than 10 people on the subject. I am going to share messages that I saved from at least 5 of them where they voiced the same exact frustrations and issues to myself and to board administrators but I will leave out the names included in the message because I'm not trying to call anyone out. However, I'm going to refer to the individuals in these messages with the same name so that I can illustrate how many people have had a problem with the same posters and how they come at others.

I have no doubts there are posters here that feel they are getting shafted. IMO its avoidable. You will find that in any situation. I am not saying we should not listen to their concerns and attempt to make this a bette place. I am just saying you can't please everyone.

Lastly, no one minds having an opinion challenged. People can tolerate that. But it's the 'how' that bothers them.

Most new posters here absolutely HATE to have their opinions challenged.

I think these are the problems that exist. I'm sorry for being long-winded, but I felt this was the proper time to speak up.

I don't agree with much of what you have said, but I am glad that you spoke your piece, and respect that. Hang around, gather your rep, and help build the site towards what you think is important.

GL