Over moderation

[B Richard]

Maybe so. But this thread is in a part of the TD site, "Questions about Twins Daily", where it's an appropriate topic. As in other parts of the site, if a subject isn't to one's liking, no one compels anyone to read it, and certainly there is no compulsion to contribute. Indeed, posting (in effect) that the subject of the thread itself is not worth discussing, is covered in the TD Comments Policy.

 

Ha, ha. Yes, I am more than familiar with the policy. No harm was intended- though I do appreciate the depth of your stilted response.

[snepp]

Ha, ha. Yes, I am more than familiar with the policy. No harm was intended

 

If it makes you feel better, I laughed at it.

 

[Squirrel]

If it makes you feel better, I laughed at it.

 

 

My thought was 'yeeesh ... no kidding!'

[ashbury]

though I do appreciate the depth of your stilted response.

 

Uh, thank you, I think.

[Guest USAFChief]

 

Many posters, including some of the moderators, successfully include sarcasm among their rhetorical devices, without running close to the boundary.

I got nothin'.

 

Sometimes I disappoint me.

[Bark's Lounge]

I actually think this site is under moderated. If a dress code is established, and uniforms are distributed, I would probably change my mind.

[big dog]

I actually think this site is under moderated. If a dress code is established' date=' and uniforms are distributed, I would probably change my mind.[/quote']

 

Give it up, Bark. Great idea about the uniforms, but we never even got those badges we were discussing last summer in various game threads.

[Oldgoat_MN]

Give it up, Bark. Great idea about the uniforms, but we never even got those badges we were discussing last summer in various game threads.

 

We don't need no stinkin' badges.

[ashbury]

If a dress code is established' date=' and uniforms are distributed, I would probably change my mind.[/quote']

 

The idea of you in a skirt is what keeps this proposal on the table.

[DaveW]

Sarcasm has no place in our society.

[Joe A. Preusser]

Sarcasm has no place in our society.

 

Was that sarcasm?

 

Also, if there is to be a dress code we need look no further than Mr. Garza in my avatar.

[Dave T]

I definitely agree we need a dress code for our avatars. How else would we know when we'd found a good one? (What would Bartman do?)

[chuchadoro]

I have a specific complaint regarding the editing of comments. I commented a few years ago that "at least Mauer would continue to lead the league in lady b*ners". Pretty questionable, I would have had no issue if it had been deleted.

 

Instead, a mod changed the phrase to "swooning ladies". If I wanted to say "swooning ladies" I would have sent my closest chap a Western Union regarding his favorite baseballer, Cap Anson. Delete, warn, ban; do what you need. Don't put words in others' mouths.

[ashbury]

Sarcasm has no place in our society.

 

Would Dave be sarcastic? Noooo.

 

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- L. Harvey Oswald

 

:whacky028::whacky028:

 

Good one.

[DaveW]

Would Dave be sarcastic? Noooo.

 

 

 

Good one.

 

Ha!

[ashbury]

I have a specific complaint regarding the editing of comments. I commented a few years ago that "at least Mauer would continue to lead the league in lady b*ners". Pretty questionable, I would have had no issue if it had been deleted.

 

Instead, a mod changed the phrase to "swooning ladies". If I wanted to say "swooning ladies" I would have sent my closest chap a Western Union regarding his favorite baseballer, Cap Anson. Delete, warn, ban; do what you need. Don't put words in others' mouths.

 

A moderation action from "a few years ago" may or may not have involved the current crew. The moderators have discussed the topic of editing recently, and the consensus is that it is rarely superior to just deleting the post, for reasons such as you allude to. Deletion of a post isn't the end of the world anyway, and the poster can always try again with the same message restated.

[chuchadoro]

A moderation action from "a few years ago" may or may not have involved the current crew. The moderators have discussed the topic of editing recently, and the consensus is that it is rarely superior to just deleting the post, for reasons such as you allude to. Deletion of a post isn't the end of the world anyway, and the poster can always try again with the same message restated.

 

The person who executed the moderation action is still very much a part of the crew and I appreciate his hard work that goes into making this the best Twins site around. I didn't mention the editing issue to demand satisfaction but to discuss it and find out if it was an ongoing practice. I'm glad to hear about the consensus.

[DaveW]

So just to be clear, the word boner is not allowed? This is a semi serious question, where do we draw the line on language?

[ashbury]

So just to be clear, the word boner is not allowed? This is a semi serious question, where do we draw the line on language?

 

I can't do better than point to the way John Bonnes said it a while back, contained in a longer essay that is found in the Comment Policy thread:

 

[T]here is no line. There is no limit. There are a lot of them, and they're always changing and that's the way it has to be. So just stay the hell away from it.

[Joe A. Preusser]

So just to be clear, the word boner is not allowed? This is a semi serious question, where do we draw the line on language?

 

Well "swooning ladies" is over some line.

[Squirrel]

So just to be clear, the word boner is not allowed? This is a semi serious question, where do we draw the line on language?

 

There are no absolutes, which makes moderating difficult. All I can say for myself is that I try to keep a few things in mind ... context, intent, tone, poster history; it's certainly not a literal, word by word approach. Even with all that it's still difficult but we all try to remain fair and consistent even if it doesn't always seem so. Also, each of us is only human and sometimes we misread a situation, which is why our collective discussions are ongoing and endless. Mostly what we want for and from the community is respect, even if you abhor another poster's POV, so that we can have the best discussions possible.

[Bark's Lounge]

The idea of you in a skirt is what keeps this proposal on the table.

 

It's not easy being the sex symbol of Twins Daily... but what the heck, somebody has to bring sexy back.

 

[Craig Arko]

Are threads in this forum really intended to be treated as jokes?

[big dog]

It's not easy being the sex symbol of Twins Daily... but what the heck' date=' somebody has to bring sexy back.

[ATTACH=CONFIG']6440[/ATTACH]

 

Game, set, and match.

[big dog]

Are threads in this forum really intended to be treated as jokes?

 

I just hope you aren't demanding accountability.

[Craig Arko]

I just hope you aren't demanding accountability.

 

I don't demand anything. It's not my site.

[Twins Twerp]

You can't say #erection either. Had the post deleted last week. My 10th graders get away with more in class. Over moderation muchmuch

[John Bonnes]

You can't say #erection either. Had the post deleted last week. My 10th graders get away with more in class. Over moderation muchmuch

 

I will say this - if one's entry doesn't rise above that of an immature 10th grader, it risks being deleted. And if that is as high a standard as a member tends to repeatedly reach, we'll likely encourage him to go someplace else, where he can more easily fulfill his wishes.

 

If that's over moderation, then so be it. I don't think that's an unseasonable standard. At the very least, the opposite standard seems to be an odd one for which to campaign.

[LimestoneBaggy]

All,

 

I don't post much, but I do read quite a bit on this site. Has over moderation happened? Perhaps. But ask yourself this. These gentlemen have been trying to build a flagship for Twins discussions that all can enjoy (young and old). If you put yourselves in the shoes of the founders, moderators, and admin, and read some of the posts with that effort in mind, it's not hard to write threads, blogs, and posts that reflect their mission. It's their ballpark people, and if you want the field, you're going to have to beat them and maybe get a few balls from old man Mertle's yard.

 

I'm as dirty minded as the next, and quite frankly I listen to the Sportive to get my fill on that (and dear Lord those guys are hilarious and intelligent-witty), but I come hear to learn and laugh. From the time I've been involved, I've gotten to know most of you by reading your stuff, and I'm positive you can be hilarious without the cheap bathroom humor (but save it, one day maybe I'll meet you at a Twins Daily event, and we can unload it all).

 

In the end, I haven't paid a dime (outside of Seth's book) since I've been following these guys (and you), and if they say the line is here...then the line is here.

 

The real question I have is why does anyone care (off season notwithstanding)?

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

If that's over moderation, then so be it. I don't think that's an unseasonable standard. At the very least, the opposite standard seems to be an odd one for which to campaign.

 

Touche'. In the immortal words of Baron Von Raschke, "Dat is all dat da people need to know!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrxXvG9SMK4 (at 1:12)