Standards For Game Threatiquette
by Nico on Mar 30, 2007 7:44 AM PDT
in News
173 comments
If there are any updates on the status of our injured and dead players, baseballgirl will add the latest info. Meanwhile, as we await the A's-Giants game tonight at 7:15pm...
Regular season game threads are coming and you know what that means. "FIRE GEREN NOW!!!" "We're all gonna die!!!" and "game over" will meet the ire of the more sanguine, analytical, or "big picture" folk among us. And a few ordinary people with extraordinary responsibilities--AN's administrators and sub-committee members--have to figure out where the line is regarding acceptable standards for game thread commentary. (The game threads will be monitored a little more closely this year.)
What to do? From my point of view, it's easier to start with the two things not to do:
* You don't stop people from having spontaneous reactions just because their in-the-moment emotions are negative or extreme. Once you allow "Hey, teams have been known to come back from down 6-0," but bar "With defense like that I'll be surprised if we win 75 games!" you have effectively reneged on your commitment to free speech.
* You don't allow the commentary to become such that your most veteran users, your most loyal users, your own administrators and sub-committee members themselves, shy away from the game threads to avoid the "vocal minority".
And the latter has happened, a lot. I know, from public comments, from private feedback, from peer conversations, and from my own behavior. Sometimes the game threads just get too petulant and it does seem to be driving a fair number of users away.
To which I ask you, before it's too late to consider your input in time for Opening Day: What are the standards and policies you would like to see applied to the game threads?
0 recs |
173 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I would like a ban on the use of the name...
"Dan Johnson" and instead use the name "Loretta". Unless it's a game in which Mark Loretta is playing, in which case we should use the name "Geraldine".
by McFood on Mar 30, 2007 7:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
but seriously...
the only thing that really turns me off is when people personally attack those who don't agree with them.
by OaklandSi on Mar 30, 2007 7:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
That, and the "so-and-so is so bad at his job that he should DIE!" thing.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I blame you!
You suck!
-Nick Swisher
by kaweahkaweah on Mar 30, 2007 8:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing...
The only thing that bothers me is people that attack other people without supporting their arguments and Blez. I hate Blez. He's an idiot. I give you no reason why. I just hate him. He should die.
by bzn5150 on Mar 30, 2007 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he sold out
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The obvious joke would be . . .
let Susan Slusser decide.
My serious comment would be that I generally avoid the game threads for two reasons: 1) I'd in general rather watch the game then spend time posting about it; 2) the stupid comments that constantly get made in the threads tend to be pretty boring to me. Not sure how you reason #2. I get pretty sick of the "game over" followed by "you aren't a true fan" dialog repeated 300 times on a daily basis, and I'm sure I'm not alone.
by BlameChannel53 on Mar 30, 2007 8:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You aren't a true ANer!
But I like that you have the word "blame" in your handle.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 8:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Still Relatively New to AN but ..
.. I thought the ST open-game threads were OK .. so long as fellow A's fans don't make personal attacks on one another, practice tolerance and restraint {the "golden rule"}, etc. -- hopefully it will be OK. I am like blamechannel, and probably won't be at my PC when the game is televised. Maybe radio-only games I will check-in to the AN open-game threads to see what is being said ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 30, 2007 8:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Brace yourself.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 8:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As Poppy said "Brace yourself"
The game threads tend to devolve quickly once the real games start.
by BlameChannel53 on Mar 30, 2007 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mwahahahahahaha.
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2007 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"magical"... <snerk>
I'm looking forward to Randy Bell, who seems like a pretty nice guy, just losing it in a game thread one day and going on a violent, profanity-laden tirade on someone... ;)
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And it WILL happen
Game threads bring out all kinds of stuff we didn't even know we had inside us.
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blogs =the Internet's Stanford prison experiment?
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2007 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Randy Bell, gonna be looking for your posts if
gameday etc is like it was for game last night against Sacramento. I gave up quickly after gameday did not fit on my screen. Radio did not work for Minor league baseball broadcast, etc. I just decided it was a minor league game and said forget it.
I have seen good postings during spring training on this site. No longer does scout appear to be user friendly in that it takes two minutes to make a post and then get control of computer back to the game. Here info flows freely as posts are made and I like that. Keep up the good work.
by Charlie Brown on Mar 30, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thought Police!
No, but really.
I think an anarchist, free-for-all $#%!show game thread is the best, most outrageous way to do it. Think of the hilarium and devastation.
For more reasonable banter, just make secret game threads in the diary section, all titled "Hey who wants to talk about Dan Haren's fabulous beard." It's a brilliant plan.
by walk off bunt on Mar 30, 2007 8:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
by the way
Bay Area broadcast channel 36 (KICU) is listed in tv guide as broadcasting tonight's game between the A's and the Giants...
by OaklandSi on Mar 30, 2007 8:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe this whole "moderate the game thread" thing
is more or less impossible, without a lot of intervention by the committee?
-Nick Swisher
by kaweahkaweah on Mar 30, 2007 8:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's the personal attacks
that need to be monitored. The other, spontaneous posts of anger or excitement need to occur, and are difficult to eliminate.
I avoid the game threads because I'd rather watch the games and just don't sit with my computer while I watch. I think there is a segment of us on AN that come to the site to discuss the games, trends or situations after they occur. I know I generally impose an overnight rule on myself. I need to sleep on something before I state it publicly or it will probably sound even more ridiculous than it does when I wait.
by IndianaAsfan on Mar 30, 2007 8:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In that case, "enforce the law" ..
.. issue CGV to anyone who makes personal attack that is in clear violation ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 30, 2007 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess I'm intolerant
I just can't buy the 'spontaneous reaction' argument. Watching something bad happen to your team in your living room and swearing out loud is a spontaneous reaction. Watching something bad happen, entering the Game Day thread, typing a swear word or something else negative, previewing and then posting it is hardly spontaneous.
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 8:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Damn preview button!
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah! Dam review butt on!
by McFood on Mar 30, 2007 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But... what if you type really, really fast?
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2007 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only one
that has personal attack macros on their machine?
I don't have to type "there goes ArakSOT drinking his dinner again," it's just shift-F10.
by jeepers on Mar 30, 2007 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
<types opt-cmd-j>
jeepers sucks
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
<types "ArakSOT: CTRL-ALT-T">
ArakSOT: tired act
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
{types <ctrl - alt - del>}
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've...
...stayed off AN for some time. Simply got tired of the bad language used by some. In the beginning, Blez asked for this not to happen. It did anyway, and as BG indicates - it will happen.
what I'm not getting is why you let it happen?
by doubleplayer on Mar 30, 2007 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why *I* let it happen?
What am I supposed to do about it? I'm just the community drunk. Well, one of them, anyway.
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
AN Day 3 becomes
AN Night 1, in which we pile into saint's bar (or whatever bar he hangs out at), and we all go get blotto. Who's in?
by hunter on Mar 30, 2007 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
AN day 3 already happened, last year.
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Preview button wasn't
required last year, so some of us are still getting used to that. I was quite possible that rather than seeing something bad happen and swearing out loud, that people were in the thread while watching the game and took out their frustrations with a post. That, most certainly, is spontaneous, and can be done in a fit of anger. That doesn't excuse it, merely explains it.
by IndianaAsfan on Mar 30, 2007 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hi Everybody
I'd like to fire more people, not just Geren. :D
Getting ready for 2007.
LET'S GO OAKLAND!!!!
by haroldMD on Mar 30, 2007 9:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Is it time for multiple game threads?
I think the real problem is just that there are too many of us now. When I first discovered AN, game threads were a lot of fun because you had just a handful of people on them and they were mostly trying hard to be clever. Now there's just a huge number of people in there and maybe they feel like they have to shout to get heard. (Though to be honest I'm not really sure what's going on because I pretty much quit following game threads half way through last season.)
I suspect the only way to recapture the old community feel is to limit the number of people who participate in a game thread, and open more than one as needed. The big question would be how to allocate people to threads. Some options:
- First come first served: you have to register to participate in a thread and when one fills up another one is created.
- Do some sort of assignment, maybe randomly by where people are in the alphabet.
- Do by affinity or interest: "sabermetrics fans," "posterior watchers," "people who want to fire Geren now," etc.
...?
It's not an easy problem.
by matthias on Mar 30, 2007 9:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
oooh ...
Through the rating system, people could earn their way into the most-desirable game threads ... it would be performance-based. There would be a system of promotion and relegation as in non-U.S. professional soccer.
Of course, somebody would have to fix the ratings system ...
by rubin sierra on Mar 30, 2007 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i like this idea
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say
appoint someone like, oh, me, to immediately ban anyone who causes trouble.
My second suggestion is to eliminate comments and go with all tags.
by mikeA on Mar 30, 2007 9:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have no real suggestions.
For me, New AN took the fun out of game threads.
Good luck.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 9:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
On a related note
Will the "new" which accompanies new posts ever work properly in the new version?
by jeepers on Mar 30, 2007 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My issues:
Sometimes I can't expand a comment without it functioning like a link and going to a new screen. It's really annoying.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Happens to me, too.
The "expand always" setting also often decides to be "I'll collapse new comments if I feel like it. Nyah!"
by jeepers on Mar 30, 2007 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I haven't had that problem with 'expand always'
UNTIL the diary got to about 100 comments. But I think that was fixed a couple of weeks ago, wasn't it?
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could be.
I've been around less lately.
by jeepers on Mar 30, 2007 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just keeping "it" to yourself.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you can't select 'expand' (always)?
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
are these options unavailable to you,
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
moral conviction? sheer ennui?
good, old-fashioned stubborness?
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
She's on probation.
The version of AN she has access to has fewer options. She can't see the rainbow background and animated unicorns & manatees frolicking on the page, either.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I refuse to use them.
I like the comments shrunk. I didn't mind all the comments expanded on Old AN because I didn't have an option I liked. I have choices now. Ones that I like... when they are functioning properly. I have issues, kay. The comment titles all lined up and neat makes me feel better. If I want to read something, I expand it, read, and close it when I'm finished. Nice. Neat. Organized. Just like someone shutting off a light when they leave a room.
That's one reason I haven't followed the game threads. I don't want to read something before I'm ready to. When the expand button goes haywire, it forces me to look at comments I didn't really want to. Not to mention it screws up all the [NEW] tags.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
is that the sound of a baby crying?
or is it just AN, collectively?
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously....
This is only bothering me.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
<sniffle>
Games won't be worth threading without you... THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just New AN issues, either.
They stopped being fun. Again, I have no suggestions.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well then we need more Alternate Universe threads
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
good, old-fashioned stubborness
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a thin line
between my eyebrows.
Honestly, the only thing that bothers me is the overabundance of F-bombs whenever something goes bad. Frustration can be expressed in other ways. Other than that, I don't see a point in policing the gameday threads. Perhaps I've always missed the point of them, but I always thought that they were for commenting on game action.
by JediLeroy on Mar 30, 2007 9:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Keep it simple
Big rule should be no Ad Hominem.
Anything past that is more of a marketing decision.
by MrIncognito on Mar 30, 2007 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
me too
by closetasfan on Mar 30, 2007 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never missed him.
Got him right between the eyes.
by Ozzz on Mar 30, 2007 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personal attacks are the only thing that bug me.
Well... and whenever someone names the type-of-game-that-shall-not-be-spoken-of. I do believe in respecting superstition in the sports community.
Some of the personal attacks got bad, but honestly, the craziness and the utter emotion of the game threads... I like them. When I'm watching a game, I'm riding on a wave of emotion and it's nice to share the ups and downs with people here. Yeah, when things go bad, the threads get a little scary, but I'm not sure that there's any way to limit any particular style of posting in the thread without becoming an even more unfriendly environment.
I'm not particularly skilled at being impartial or analytical, so it's nice to know there's a time and a place that I can screech and feel bliss and fire managers along with the rest of AN. :)
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2007 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The game that dare not speak its name
Slide, Jer...
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Mar 30, 2007 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
**twitch**
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2007 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
getting personal about the players
really bothers me. i feel like there's a big difference between saying 'E-Lo is pitching like crap' and 'E-Lo is a piece of crap', but i seem to recall seeing too much of the latter last year. too many barbs like that and this friendly neighborhood starts taking on the tone of Halos Heaven, which i think got extremely negative about their team towards the end last year. nobody wants that - in the end we're all A's fans that just like to enjoy the season together. oh, and it'd be nice if we could do it without the f-bombs too ;)
by wonderbat on Mar 30, 2007 9:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
As far as I'm concerned,
it had not one thing to do with his pitching.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
fair enough
maybe a bad example, considering he had personal problems that might qualify him as a 'piece of crap'. but there were plenty of other examples, i was just copping out and picking the obvious one.
by wonderbat on Mar 30, 2007 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't see anything wrong with getting personal
if it's done in a clever manner. certain fans really know how to give a good personal ribbing at games, especially at Warriors games.
for a baseball example, i remember going to a game at yankee stadium and i forgot who the opposing on-deck batter was but one yankee fan yelled out "hey so-and-so, i hear you're having problems potty training your kid....crap or get off the pot!!" the batter looked back, shook his head and started laughing. i don't see anything wrong with that. when you make a comment like "didn't i see you outside home depot, frankie?" that's when things get personal on the wrong end.
by fadedash on Mar 30, 2007 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I recall correctly
and I didn't read the threads very often, but there were a few members who were wishing some players would die. It got that bad. I wouldn't say they were threats but IMHO that's really pretty bad, far beyond the "Chavie sucks/has no heart" stuff that is just normal fan complaints.
-Nick Swisher
by kaweahkaweah on Mar 30, 2007 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Players Are Public Figures
Personally, I tend not to post non-snarky attacks on the players (though I do loves me the snark), but it seems to me the players (and the managers, owners, umpires, broadcasters, mascots, and sponsors) are fair game. They're public figures. We're here to talk about them. All comments (except the truly indecent....this is a family blog) should be acceptable.
More generally, let me echo the sentiment expressed above: the only thing that should be policied is ad hominem attacks on fellow ANers. Otherwise, anything goes. And if you don't like that kind of conversation, you don't need to read the game threads.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Mar 30, 2007 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Once you allow "Hey, teams have been known to come back from down 6-0," but bar "With defense like that I'll be surprised if we win 75 games!" you have effectively reneged on your commitment to free speech.
Oh yeah.
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 9:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I for one see nothing wrong with either. But the
word "kill" other than to refer to a rally or to use gross profanity are real turnoffs.
There will be more posters as the game posts have looked like they will be a thing of the past on scout.com. But that should be no problem. Some have just signed off period...
by Charlie Brown on Mar 30, 2007 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
<deletes sal's comment>
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The reason
I never go to regular season game threads (at least last year) is because I saw a lot of whining and complaining with no backup or no suggestions for improvement. It seemed to me like everyone wanted to be heard and figured that being dumb or negative would do the job...
Also there was WAY too many arguments. I am really cool with a good baseball discussion about the merits of some player. But when the discussion is more about the merits of the other poster and the baseball player is a coverup, things got frustrating.
I really just didn't like the atmosphere, to be honest. I love the A's dearly but my method of rooting is a little less conditional than a lot of people, so I just didn't like being in a place with such negativity.
I'm not sure what to suggest for improvement - some of those things are pretty much impossible to improve. I pretty much solved the problem last year by disappearing.
by Squeaky on Mar 30, 2007 10:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Time to dust off the bubble! ;)
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am firmly enconsced in it
I'm too busy to take it off. ;)
No, actually, it's been dusted off because I've dared to venture back. :)
by Squeaky on Mar 30, 2007 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
no profanity
that and maybe attacks back and forth between to or three people be limited to maybe 10 posts?
by closetasfan on Mar 30, 2007 10:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I hate it when people hog game threads by
posting over and over.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
and then replying to themselves
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
as if they are all that and a bag of
weed
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or ostentatiously displaying schizophrenic
symptoms.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and NO, I'm not making a personal attack on
cutthemullett.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or sesquipedilian lexicograpical prowess
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hooray! Bring on the terpischorean ecdysiasts!
And bring me the head of John the Lackey.
by The Dogfather on Mar 30, 2007 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a big head for one guy to bring.
I suggest hiring a crew.
by Ozzz on Mar 30, 2007 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, unless it is game activity...
by Charlie Brown on Mar 30, 2007 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in all sincerity, I agree with you here.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man, you use large words and I presume can
correctly spell them. I would have to use a dictionary on that one "skitso" LOL
by Charlie Brown on Mar 30, 2007 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, we're all in agreement, then. Good.
So, Nico, are you gonna write up the minutes? Will they be shorter than the thread?
BTW, should it be threaDiquette? Or are we talking about threaTs?
by The Dogfather on Mar 30, 2007 10:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
threats
It's important to be as civil and respectful as possible. Such as, "Please stop whining about Chavy's forearms, because I'd really rather not tear your arms off and beat you with them, but I feel I should warn you that I am about to do precisely that. Thanks, and have a nice day!"
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
who cares... 0pening day is in a few days!!!
It feels like the 1st day of school is around the corner after a nice summer break, and I'm going to get to see my pals from school who I couldn't see during the summer vacation, like amnesiac, LAXile, and BBG... I miss you guys...
I am ready for some baseball and "watching" the games with AN... of course some of the posts are stupid (and I have nothing to support that thought), but that's only because some people are stupid (again no support)
Let's play some baseball...
by Erik being Erik on Mar 30, 2007 10:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey Erik! What's up?
Good to keep your attacks anonymous.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what up...
I'm giddy.
by Erik being Erik on Mar 30, 2007 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Erik!!!!
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
why dont you just use REAL GAME standards
just follow what seems to be the normal process for stuff like this at the actual games
the way i see it is like this: there are regular atendees at baseball games, season ticket holders. there is always going to be the person around you who is saying "you suck" "you're a bum" at every bad play a player makes. you can't really restrict a person for speech like that. whining and complaining are what some fans do. it might be disruptive to you, but there's nothing inherently wrong/immoral/unethical about what that fan is saying. you might find it annoying, but so what? you might also find the person's shirt in front of you annoying, you're not going to restrict them from wearing it, are you?
when a fan starts cursing at a game or threatening players or fans around him, thats when the ushers and security get involved, and thats when anyone should get involved here.
but if someone wants to call chavez a bum every time he steps up to bat, why cant he? because it doesnt make a "regular" feel comfortable?
by fadedash on Mar 30, 2007 10:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If regulars, either at live games or in threads,
are consistently uncomfortable enough due to excessive negativity that overwhelms an activity they used to enjoy, they're going to stop going to the games/threads -- and what will be left (either in the ballpark or online) is bunch of obnoxious people just spewing because they like to hear/read their own vents.
By the end of last season, there was a clearly observable decrease in posts by people who had previously been having fun and not being obnoxious. I'm not going to name names of regulars who vanished, or of those whose constant negativity helped run some other users out (no, I'm not talking about oaktoon vs. anyone).
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever you do, don't spill beer on my
mac.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're talking about booze, right?
'Cause I'm all for that!
Seriously, that's a very good suggestion.
by McFood on Mar 30, 2007 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The one thing I'd REALLY like to see is this:
And it's not in game threads, but post-game threads: Box scores posted after the game.
Heck, even a line score with a list of who had the best day would suffice.
Or, failing that, a recap?
But post-game threads that say "Well, the A's did it again today, but at least nobody got injured, and as we all saw, Bobby Kielty is the man - tomorrow we play the Giants, fire Geren now"... really don't help folks catch up on what happened over the course of the game.
I'm sometimes busy duriung game time, and yeah, I know I could check MLB.com, but I kind of care what the boffins at AN think more than I care what the MLB-paid beat reporter thinks.
So it would be nice if the front pagers could do a game summary for us folks who didn't see what happened.
by Ozzz on Mar 30, 2007 10:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree on the post-game threads.
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well if YOU suggest it :-)
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We usually do...
I know for me, Spring Training is simply too hard to recap, mostly because I don't really care (and it's hard to figure out what actually happened anyway), but for regular season games, we do try an put our own spin on a recap.
Box/line scores are a good suggestion; it's really up to each writer how much time they have to dress up a recap. I know for me, I like having the recap up directly after the game ends, so it makes final box scores a little tricky sometimes. I'd like to try it, though :-)
Good suggestions...
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OT....
...but as long as we're on this subject of things to be posted, why is there not a schedule posted on the front page...at least of the next month or so and preferably of the whole season?
by GreenNGoldSooner on Mar 30, 2007 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont mind much of it...
The attacks, the cursing, whatever, that happens. The freaking "Game Over" crap when it is 2-0 in the 2nd drives me nuts. So stupid.
by OaktownPower on Mar 30, 2007 10:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think anyone who says "game over"
should be "banned for the day" and then reinstated for the next game. Hey, all I did is take you literally.
by Nico on Mar 30, 2007 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually couldn't agree more
Unless Kennedy is pitching and gives up a grand slam in the first and the second.
Then I think it's not only okay to say, but probably accurate as well.
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's oppressive
to Bill Paxton fans everywhere.
by rebus on Mar 30, 2007 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see a good solution
It's simply impossible to satisfy both of the "*"-ed points that Nico makes. What has driven me (and apparently many others) away from the game threads isn't (for the most part) personal attacks on other users or profanity. It's the constant bitching and moaning about the batting order, about everything Ken Macha, about every runner not driven in or erased by a double play (and the doom-and-gloom predicting of such as soon as a runner even gets on).
These kinds of posts can't/shouldn't really be banned, and the problem isn't so much that people express these particular opinions, as that the sheer volume of it seems to overwhelm the more interesting, productive, or just amusing discussions that I used to enjoy in the game threads, and that fortunately we still have elsewhere on AN.
People don't have Macha to kick around this year, but I doubt that will make much of a difference. See you all in the DLD.
by andeux on Mar 30, 2007 11:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
it's 'game over' for game threads
by ArakSOT on Mar 30, 2007 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. Thank you.
Not that I think ANer vs. ANer is appropriate -- it's not. And it does bother me, but I can pretty easily just scroll past that fight wherever it happens to be skewing itself across the page. You can't find a way to avoid the barrage of rantbombs that occur throughout the thread for 3+ hours.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are ways to combat that, though
A warning given to an excessively negative poster in the thread, and then a ban for the rest of the game if they seem to be disrupting the thread will take care of that.
by baseballgirl on Mar 30, 2007 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
AN has to decide whether it's a democracy
or dictatorship.
The dictatorship is easy - Blez or whoever just bans people he thinks are being jerks. No need for CGV or anything like that. Everything at the admins' discretino. Your suggestion leans more toward dictatorship (or oligarchy), wherein you institute an official police system instead of a community police system. Who's going to give out the warnings? Do you want to spend all your time on AN doing that? Nico? What if you disagree on what is warnable/bannable? It's no fun, and it encourages small acts of protest like the silly tags we see showing up in the diaries for the past few days.
The democracy is by necessity messy, but it ought to be the guiding principle of AN. Things like not deleting a diary because of offending tags, having a CGV system, not putting the request of individuals (coughSlusserUrbancough) over the better judgement of the community as a whole are what I feel is best for AN. Blez is obviously the boss and he can do whatever he feels is right, but AN is changing quickly, there are specific reasons for these changes, these changes are generally not positive, and that doesn't seem to concern admin.
Blez often cites the community as the primary feature of AN, and he's right. It's why I started the DLD and was specific that it had no ownership or particular set of rules. It's also why I try to confine my participation in AN to the DLDs as much as possible. The DLD is the one place that I hope site admins never try to make an "official" part of AN. It's an organic feature, one that I'm very proud to be a part of, the site of many of AN's best (most interesting, most humorous, etc) discussions, and -- to be perfectly frank -- the stomping grounds for AN's most articulate and interesting posters. Like andeux said, I'll see you in the DLD.
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I agree. maybe.
I am one person who avoids game threads because of the number of jerks in the threads. It's that simple. It's not the negativity, it's not cussing, it's just the feeling that some people don't care that they are bugging the crap out of you and they won't go away. I don't think you can put it down as a series of five precise rules, but most people who don't want to annoy others know how to not be a jerk.
For instance, look at the heart attack game thread. Lots of negativity, no jerks. Can't quantify it, but most people know it when they see it.
I think it would be too hard to for Nico or any other admin to enforce not being a jerk.
One possibility is for people to voluntarily open up a "jerk-free unicorns and rainbows" game thread where you join only if you promise to behave like a kind adult. Is that for everyone? Absolutely not. And if people come in and start annoying people, then if they don't leave the thread, cite them for a CGV.
In some ideal world, one could open up a thread and own it and ban people from just that thread. But that doesn't seem practical.
by Apricot on Mar 30, 2007 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We actually did...
have some "alternate game threads." I think they might have started out as a change-the-mojo kind of joke because a game or a week was going badly, but we also used them as our Happy Place.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I loved those threads!
by Loon from Left on Mar 30, 2007 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can I just say again
I didn't ask for the diary to be deleted. I told Blez I thought the tags went too far - he decided to delete the diary because he can't change or remove tags. I had no wish to delete any diary, ever. It was Blez's call, obviously.
I just was trying to stick up for a friend and colleage who I felt was being unfairly slammed - and the tags seem worse, somehow, like some sort of official designation. I took offense to it, posted thoughts of my own in that since-deleted diary, and mentioned the tags to Blez. That's all. I'm not for censorship.
by slusser on Mar 30, 2007 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course not Susan.
That was a commentary on the actions on the admin based on the requests of an individual. Yours is hardly the first time that's happened. And of course, by engaging the community in discourse (even though many disagree), you're doing the very thing that helps keep AN ticking. That's awesome of you.
I worded it poorly and snarkily, suggesting that you asked for the diary to be deleted. It's clear that that is not what happened. What I meant was that your discomfort with the tags was what precipitated the deletion (which you had nothing to do with, apparently). To anybody who is still confused SUSAN SLUSSER DID NOT ASK FOR THE URBAN THREAD TO BE DELETED.
The fact remains, however, that your status and relationship with admin certainly played a role in the consideration of your request. Blez's putative reasons for being upset with oaktoon last year was that the need of the individual was put before the need of the community. I think the need of an individual was given higher priority than the need of the community when that diary was deleted. That's not on you, that's on admin.
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
everyone is equal
but some sportswriters are more equal than others
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like the problem is
having something (tags) that even the site's owner can't administrate. Why have tags if even Blez can't adjust something that is offensive or otherwise bad for the site, and can be posted anonymously (as far as I know)? Why have tags at all, actually? I don't even get the appeal; I just get the problems.
by Nico on Mar 30, 2007 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought tags were for...
...categorizing diaries so they can be searchable by subject. But looking at yesterday's DLD and this story...I really wonder if the author should be the only one allowed to add tags so that stay stay concise and on topic.
"Fire Joe Morgan" started using tags a couple of months ago...and perhaps it's because it's a closed forum, the tags stay relevant. I'm not saying AN should be a closed forum, but the way this system works, giving anyone the ability to add tags making the whole functionality pointless.
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Mar 30, 2007 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if diarists are the only ones allowed to add
tags to their own diaries, tags are still useless as a search tool unless they're sorted alphabetically.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
Look at the tag page. That's absolutely incredible.
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That looks like spam.
Heh heh. The Urban diary tags are still listed, even though the diary is gone. Heh heh.
Can't those be listed in a column or something??
by Jennifer on Mar 30, 2007 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I just looked a little earlier.
Basically, if I wanted to use tags to find diaries about, say, Bobby Kielty, I'd have to go to the tags page and use my browser's "find on this page" search for "Kielty." Which I could do if I wanted to... but having a search tool that uses no search-logical sorting convention really disturbs my sense of order. So I add random tags to diaries whenever the mood moves me.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
about tags
Having tags makes it easier for a search function built into the site to find more relevant results. Previously, some computer algorithm had to sift through all the text and find the relevant information for searching. But if you harness the brains of the people who eventually do the actual searching (i.e., let people tell the machine what that diary/post/game thread is about), it becomes a lot more likely that your search is going to come up with what you want it to.
For example, I really wanted to find that spoof image of the motivators series with the picture of A.J. Pierzynski getting punched, where it says, "Schadenfreude: I don't know what word means, but A.J. Pierzynski got punched in the face.", but I searched google for a half hour without finding it. When it was posted in whatever thread it was on here so long ago, if someone had tagged the diary with "A.J. Pierzynski", "punch", "Michael Barrett", and "schadenfreude", I would have found it immediately.
As it is, I'm still looking for it. Someone hook me up, eh?
by hunter on Mar 30, 2007 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
schadenfreude
http://mccoveychronicles.com/story/2...
by andeux on Mar 30, 2007 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the AN search function
is totally useless and sucky. and yes, that is essentially a personal attack on the job performance of whoever is doing the site design. hopefully that person is not close friends with susan slusser.
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly...
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Mar 30, 2007 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm ...
"we're all gonna die": 17
"we're all going to die": 11
by rubin sierra on Mar 30, 2007 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's because...
I'm trying to track down all the "we're all going to die"s, and adding "we're all gonna die". I don't care if it looks redundant. It's supposed to be "we're all gonna die"! ;)
Hmm... I didn't add it to this one yet... hang on...
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
The tags I've seen so far have mostly just been funny, but if no one can even delete them separately from the diaries to which they're linked....
I remember not long after I first started reading AN, some White Sox fan came on the board and posted some really hateful things for a couple of days -- not even cheering his own players, just cheering for things to go wrong for guys like Harden and Street. He got banned pretty quickly, but if a guy like that can create an account and anonymously tag diaries with vitriol that no one can delete ... well, that's something that needs to be fixed.
by Loon from Left on Mar 30, 2007 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
mega dittos
Tag deletion / management is a must fix.
Otherwise some ass will come in and add Spam, racism, or just plain bloat.
Heck, I'm guilty - I added the (all tags) tag.
by MobiusKlein on Mar 30, 2007 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
some guy made that point in the DLD
but if the current problems are fixed, tags are a good idea and shouldn't be limited to just the diary writer and admin folks.
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's exactly it
and I don't think there's any way to stop it.
by mikeA on Mar 30, 2007 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sometimes it's the sheer volume, period
I occasionally leave a game thread simply because there are too many people in it posting -- whether it's "HELL YEAH!" or "HR!" or "F***!" or "Another GIDP!". What's the point of posting when nobody's going to see it among the masses?
That's why I kind of like the Friday night threads. For some reason, those are relatively quiet. Guess a lot of people just got paid and are going out on the town. Some of us would rather stick around AN. Loyal or sad -- you make the call! :)
by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Mar 30, 2007 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, alrighty then.
Yeah! Go A's! ;)
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
an ignore feature?
Is there an ignore option here? Sounds to me like the description of constant negativity is created by specific individuals. If it were the masses, something happened that is probably worth all the negative attacks.
So, if it does boil down to certain people disrupting the balance within the thread, can you ignore them? Is there an ignore feature? Can one be created?
by fadedash on Mar 30, 2007 12:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Apricot (I think) mentioned something...
called "killfile" last year, but I think it would only work with Firefox? Or something? Sorry, crappy memory. I remember being really, really intrigued by the idea (because I've also said there should be an "ignore" feature), but I have other issues with Firefox, so I didn't look into any further.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but that was OLD athleticsnation
See the old killfile script for Firefox I posted. It would be nice if it were a site feature.
Anyway, the new site layout breaks that old killfile, but I'll talk to the author and try to have it updated.
by Apricot on Mar 30, 2007 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, here's a question:
Is there an ignore option here? Just wondering because no one's asked that.
<waits to see how many get the joke>
by Nico on Mar 30, 2007 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What, are you going to count?
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember Blez mentioning
a long time ago that there would be one in the future. I don't see one on kos though, so it won't be happening any time soon.
by mikeA on Mar 30, 2007 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really can't weigh in on this
beacuse I've been firmly planted in both camps. It is extremely difficult sometimes to refrain from posting negative stuff when the A's are going through their annual "heads in their asses" phase. And as a general rule, I don't really agree with any adult telling another adult what he/she can do or say...especially in an anonymous forum like this.
However, on the flip side, I can say from personal experience that I had my "positivity epiphany" after the Bradley walkoff v. BJ Ryan last year, and just decided that I was going to enjoy the game for the game. The rest of the year was a lot more enjoyable for me.
So, in conclusion, I see both sides, have been on both sides, and wil probably still be that way- I just try to keep it off the boards now. Sorry for contributing nothing to this discussion, sometimes I just like seeing my name up on the board.
Oh, I will add this: If swearing ever becomes officially banned, I'm screwed. Some of us just simply can't help it.
by Tony on Mar 30, 2007 1:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice post, bitches!
by salb918 on Mar 30, 2007 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the searing thing...
Although with the preview button, I now have to consciously hit a button (post) before I can post certain four letter words, instead of before.
by Jjjsixsix on Mar 30, 2007 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yahoo Sports Rumors has a word filter
It inserts [profane] for any of the magic words which match its filters .. {g} ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 30, 2007 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tag - You're out!!!!
OK – my thoughts....
1B – what is a tag??? Besides Jason Kendall’s barehanded game ender??? I haven’t officially logged on since like October but I guess it ain’t that bad – as with everything, including rules and CVG – they are etched in jello – be smart, play nice and let everything else roll off
2B – Threads – they are my lifeline during day games and if MLB EI doesn’t get on Comcast I am _-ed (insert your own word)....
3B – I will be at the Tuesday game in Seattle – section 135, row 26 (behind the M’s dugout I think)... I will be sporting "Athletics" sweatshirt and "away" hat... I will do my best to be loud and proud!!!!
HR – BASEBALL SEASON IS ALMOST HERE – REJOICE!!!!!!
by Ludawg6 on Mar 30, 2007 3:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So I've decided
that instead of reading diaries and comments, I'm only going to read the tags. I don't care if they're being misused. They crack me up.
I don't post in most of the game threads, but I loved the one from the 15-inning Dodger debacle. I don't think I could have made it through that game without one. I also loved the Maury Povich-rain delay game thread.
by TurnTwo on Mar 30, 2007 5:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My Only Regrets about the deleted Diary ..
.. {the Mychael Urban one that was deleted) .. is that I composed two of my best rants against the Giants in that diary .. {g} ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 30, 2007 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maury, who's my baby daddy?
That was the best rain delay ever.
by Poppy on Mar 30, 2007 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say let the energy flow...
Emotions aren't analytical or big picture. Are you gonna clamp down on walkoff win celebrations too?
Why do you hate freedom?
by calvin on Mar 30, 2007 5:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We need tags for the tags at this point.
Nicely done, AN. Nicely done.
by LAXile on Mar 30, 2007 6:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
yay!
Hell yeah, go A's! I'm so happy to be watching baseball!!! Skeet Skeet Skeet Skeet Skeet Skeet Skeet!
by elfgirl on Mar 30, 2007 7:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
since susan slusser is participating
in this thread, i'd just like to preemptively clarify that i'm not responsible for any of these tags.
by xbhaskarx on Mar 31, 2007 8:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm only responsible for five of them.
by Poppy on Mar 31, 2007 8:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm responsible for
the really long ones at the end. Then I decided to start tagging other diaries with "tooth-brushing", "toothpaste", "toothbrush", etc. but when I got to my third diary and clicked "Add Tags" new AN came back with "Permission Denied." Ouch!
by rubin sierra on Mar 31, 2007 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
