Over moderation

[DaveW]

I was just upset at the time that my joke got deleted. It wasn't in even that poor of taste, contained no foul language etc.

[Blackjack]

My main concern about moderation is that sometimes it seems people who moved over from that site are treated preferentially from those who joined here for the first time.

 

I agree with that!!! If I read one of the originals write 'Occam's razor' instead of explaining his argument, I'm going to puke, yet I'd be chastised if I called him a snob. 'Straw man' also falls in the same category. Easier to throw out some cute phrase than it is to explain why your post is wrong.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I agree with that!!! If I read one of the originals write 'Occam's razor' instead of explaining his argument, I'm going to puke, yet I'd be chastised if I called him a snob. 'Straw man' also falls in the same category. Easier to throw out some cute phrase than it is to explain why your post is wrong.

 

To be fair, "Occam's Razor" does explain the poster's argument. The simplest explanation is the most likely explanation. That's all there is to it.

 

And yes, you'd be chastised for calling anyone on Twins Daily a "snob" because that is blatantly against forum rules.

 

The most comical part of the "BYTO favoritism" argument is that half of the people I've seen attributed to BYTO never posted on the site. Some people assume that posters like Thrylos, Jokin, and others came from BYTO but that's not the case... They were here in the early days of Twins Daily.

 

Considering that a LARGE portion of BYTO was banned after the migration to Twins Daily, the "favoritism" argument doesn't hold much water. I can count on my hands how many longterm BYTO posters are extremely active on TD and still have enough fingers left to form a fist.

[tobi0040]

I personally think the mods do a wonderful job on this site. If it is to tight or not enough freedom to say what you really want, go read the the Star Tribune comments or the comments of a yahoo web page story. I love this site because I can read and cipher intelligent opinions and stories. I refuse to even go to the Star Tribune anymore.

 

I agree completely. This thread has become very nit-picky about what should and should not be deleted. If you take a step back, I can see why 20 people out of a 100 would be offended by the comment. Those are probably the people who complained.

 

These guys put up and maintain this site and we all benefit from it. You can find no better alternative news and analysis for all things Twins. As far as I can tell, the creators and contributors to this site are not multi-millionairs, this is rather a passion for them. They should have a little leeway even if you disagree.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

A while back I quit posting because I felt that the moderators of this site were to concerned about protecting the "dignity" of certain individuals rather than allowing the general population to attempt to hold those individuals accountable. Since then I have been a semi-regular lurker, but have not had a real interest in posting any more on this site as I was not a member of the clique. From the looks of some of the comments on this post, it appears that certain groups continue to get preferential treatment. That is disappointing.

 

That being said, I have supported the moderation in general. With the exception of the favoritism, I feel that the tone of this site has kept the focus on Twins related information. The attachment to ESPN means it needs to be PG, and jokes and comments that go past that should be addressed. Individuals looking for personal battles need to go to ESPN, the Trib, etc. Go work out your frustrations there.

[Brock Beauchamp]

A while back I quit posting because I felt that the moderators of this site were to concerned about protecting the "dignity" of certain individuals rather than allowing the general population to attempt to hold those individuals accountable. Since then I have been a semi-regular lurker, but have not had a real interest in posting any more on this site as I was not a member of the clique. From the looks of some of the comments on this post, it appears that certain groups continue to get preferential treatment. That is disappointing.

 

To be up-front about this, the average poster has no idea how frequently we address posters for their behavior.

 

If a user is banned for a week for violation of policy, the average poster won't even notice. We don't confront users publicly and we don't publicize infractions and bans.

 

So remember that just because you got an infraction (using the general "you", not you specifically Fire Dan Gladden), don't assume that the "other guy" didn't get an infraction as well, maybe even a ban.

 

Because honestly, how would you even know? Do you notice if I'm gone for a week? No, you don't... Because one poster, even one as prolific as myself (I'm near the top of all TD posters in frequency and count) isn't noticeable on a board that has several hundred active users at any given point.

 

In short, we work very hard to make sure we do not play favorites and it's a little insulting to imply otherwise when you only see ~10% of what's going on in the forums.

[Craig Arko]

To be fair, "Occam's Razor" does explain the poster's argument. The simplest explanation is the most likely explanation. That's all there is to it.

 

And yes, you'd be chastised for calling anyone on Twins Daily a "snob" because that is blatantly against forum rules.

 

The most comical part of the "BYTO favoritism" argument is that half of the people I've seen attributed to BYTO never posted on the site. Some people assume that posters like Thrylos, Jokin, and others came from BYTO but that's not the case... They were here in the early days of Twins Daily.

 

Considering that a LARGE portion of BYTO was banned after the migration to Twins Daily, the "favoritism" argument doesn't hold much water. I can count on my hands how many longterm BYTO posters are extremely active on TD and still have enough fingers left to form a fist.

 

My mistake. See, I'm a snob about intellectual honesty. That doesn't address the perceptions of selective moderation, but instead tries to turn it into another joke. That's just kind of unfortunate.

 

You guys are good. Really good. Don't let that prevent improvement.

[Brock Beauchamp]

My mistake. See, I'm a snob about intellectual honesty. That doesn't address the perceptions of selective moderation, but instead tries to turn it into another joke. That's just kind of unfortunate.

 

You guys are good. Really good. Don't let that prevent improvement.

 

We constantly strive to be better and our moderation crew is excellent.

 

Just as we're never going to be "perfect" in everyone's eyes (because, frankly, that's completely impossible), I only want posters to realize that they don't see the entire situation... Nothing even close to the entire situation.

[Blackjack]

To be fair, "Occam's Razor" does explain the poster's argument. The simplest explanation is the most likely explanation. That's all there is to it.

 

And yes, you'd be chastised for calling anyone on Twins Daily a "snob" because that is blatantly against forum rules.

 

 

Bingo, we have a winner!!

 

I'll bet if you surveyed the readers of this site that less than half would even know what 'Occam's Razor' meant. Even when I go look it up on Wikipedia I shake my head and go WTF?! And by referring to 'snobs' I really should have expanded it to say 'English Major snobs'. By that I mean the guys that are more concerned about correcting your phrases/spelling/punctuation/or being cute with catchy phrases then they are about addressing the content of your post. You don't see that on very many other forums. The one exception would be if someone uses all capital letters, people will frown on that.

 

Like any other forum you learn which users/posters to pay attention to and which ones to skim thru their posts. There is a poster on here that was particularly unhappy even when the Twins were winning division titles he kept whining that they weren't getting to the World Series, now his rant is that they aren't spending enough money, after awhile you learn to ignore his posts. Just like people learn to ignore mine

 

That being said this is a great site for information, you can moderate it anyway you want, if I or anyone else doesn't like it I can take my bat and ball to a different ballpark/website.

[ashbury]

after awhile you learn to ignore his posts.

 

This is part of the reason the moderators try to foster respectful discussion between posters. Oftentimes an overly personal attack amounts to an attempt to short-circuit this process by urging the reading audience (in effect) "ignore everything this poster says", for instance by bringing up old and irrelevant topics. If you keep the rebuttal focused on the topic at hand, rather than making it be about the other person, you're on a lot more solid ground. People will then figure out for themselves to whom to pay attention.

[DaveW]

Yeah, for the most part I think moderation has been pretty well. I tend to think that they are a bit too quick to pull the trigger once in a while, but it is what it is. At least we don't have statfreak stinking up this joint.

[PseudoSABR]

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.

While, it's hard to disagree with the sentiment of John's point, the language and tone here feels a bit confrontational and dismissive. Indeed there's an awful lot of gray area between flame-bating and being provocative/driving-home-a-point, between an immature joke and actual malfeasance.

 

Part of the problem is that the moderators and owners contribute to a polemic community; sometimes their posts (and articles) are provocative, sometimes they, themselves, are adversarial, sometimes they make bad jokes. I suppose it's the owners rights to do with their site as they wish, but accusations of insularity are hardly unfounded.

 

Moderation of course is best when it is lenient with cosmetic breaking of the rules and focus on systemic behavior intent on making a negative experience for others. It's difficult to juggle that, we all realize. When a moderator takes the time to exchange private messages with me about an issue, it makes me want to invest in the community here. However, when I find that my post has been deleted, without the opportunity to amend it before hand, I feel shunned. It's rude. (I've experienced both methods from a variety of moderators). While I understand the logistical problems of avoiding blanket deletion, such polices aren't exactly welcoming.

 

I have no right to expect graciousness from the owners or the moderators, but it would go a long way with me at least. That some of us came over from BYTO has always seemed something of stigma with the moderators, I felt more that "we're keeping an eye on you", rather than welcomed. Many of us have been discussing Twins baseball for more than a decade at a variety of domains, many of us know each other and have a cultural discourse that goes further back than TD or BYTO. There was something of a community in place that allowed this website to exist, and in turn, that community couldn't exist now without this website.

 

Something else I'd like to point out is that the moderation is almost exclusively made of the most active posters in Game Threads, while I think all of these people are great, it's not exactly a diverse sampling of the posters on the board.

 

As far as solutions, I would love to see an under review option for suspect posts, and opportunity for posters to clean up their own posts. I know I've been asked to clean up things before, which I'm happy to do.

 

While we have no right to expect respect to be a two way street, I hope that the owners and moderators acknowledge that there really isn't any other place to have meaningful Twins discussions; and for me personally, to interact with people I regard as friends, even if it's just baseball we're talking about. I'm thankful for Twins Daily, but some of the complaints lodged recently have some legitimacy.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Bingo, we have a winner!!

 

I'll bet if you surveyed the readers of this site that less than half would even know what 'Occam's Razor' meant. Even when I go look it up on Wikipedia I shake my head and go WTF?! And by referring to 'snobs' I really should have expanded it to say 'English Major snobs'

 

I think it's a bit unreasonable to ask a poster to use smaller words or different phrases because somebody else doesn't want to google it.

 

By that I mean the guys that are more concerned about correcting your phrases/spelling/punctuation/or being cute with catchy phrases then they are about addressing the content of your post. You don't see that on very many other forums. The one exception would be if someone uses all capital letters, people will frown on that.

 

Twins Daily is a forum. Forums involve word choices and some of them will be bad word choices. Yes, arguments sometimes descend into bickering over semantics as one poster misunderstands another. It's the nature of the beast.

 

But if a user continues to hammer catchphrases over actual, substantive content, feel free to report them for it. That's against forum rules. I've personally handed out plenty of infractions to posters who take jabs at the front office or players by refusing to acknowledge them by name (BYTOers will not-so-fondly remember one poster's continued usage of "slap single" in reference to Mauer) but I hardly see how "Occam's Razor", a perfectly legitimate response to some of the complex machinations posters devise to explain something quite simple, is a good example of such an occurrence.

 

What matters is the content, not the lowbrow or highbrow manner in which it's delivered. If a poster refuses to engage your point with actual content or a reasoned argument, then that's a problem. If you don't like the way the other poster delivers that content but they stay within the boundaries of Twins Daily policy, well... there's nothing we can really do about that because everyone's viewpoint is different. There is no "right answer".

[DaveW]

Oh man, I had forgotten all about Dankind

[Brock Beauchamp]

Oh man, I had forgotten all about Dankind

 

I'll never forget Dankind.

[D. Hocking]

I'll never forget Dankind.

 

I believe I have seen this name mentioned cryptically before, but was not sure if it was real or a myth. Do I need to say the name three times in order for him to appear?

 

On topic, I think the board does a pretty good job moderating. With this many people and so many opinions, you are never going to please everyone all of the time. I have seen enough boards that have devolved into spiraling arguments that get personal, so after a couple of years all that is left are handful of posters who think they are sports (or whatever the topic is) geniuses, and they tend to be more than a little glass half-empty. I think the Strib and some other boards have a few soft ball players posting that are sure if they would have gotten the right break, they could have Joe Mauer’s contract, and they would hit with the power they think he should be hitting.

 

If the moderators err on the side of caution when deleting comments they think might fans flames of division rather than discussion, the board is robust enough to handle it. As someone who can veer to sarcasm, I know it is easy to misinterpret something in print that is meant to be a good natured kid, but comes off as a straight-out dig. Not always easy to detect tone in written words.

 

Soon enough there will be more baseball to discuss, and while compelling, the topic of to moderate or not moderate will slide down the discussion priority list.

[Brock Beauchamp]

While, it's hard to disagree with the sentiment of John's point, the language and tone here feels a bit confrontational and dismissive. Indeed there's an awful lot of gray area between flame-bating and being provocative/driving-home-a-point, between an immature joke and actual malfeasance.

 

Part of the problem is that the moderators and owners contribute to a polemic community; sometimes their posts (and articles) are provocative, sometimes they, themselves, are adversarial, sometimes they make bad jokes. I suppose it's the owners rights to do with their site as they wish, but accusations of insularity are hardly unfounded.

 

Moderation of course is best when it is lenient with cosmetic breaking of the rules and focus on systemic behavior intent on making a negative experience for others. It's difficult to juggle that, we all realize. When a moderator takes the time to exchange private messages with me about an issue, it makes me want to invest in the community here. However, when I find that my post has been deleted, without the opportunity to amend it before hand, I feel shunned. It's rude. (I've experienced both methods from a variety of moderators). While I understand the logistical problems of avoiding blanket deletion, such polices aren't exactly welcoming.

 

I have no right to expect graciousness from the owners or the moderators, but it would go a long way with me at least. That some of us came over from BYTO has always seemed something of stigma with the moderators, I felt more that "we're keeping an eye on you", rather than welcomed. Many of us have been discussing Twins baseball for more than a decade at a variety of domains, many of us know each other and have a cultural discourse that goes further back than TD or BYTO. There was something of a community in place that allowed this website to exist, and in turn, that community couldn't exist now without this website.

 

Something else I'd like to point out is that the moderation is almost exclusively made of the most active posters in Game Threads, while I think all of these people are great, it's not exactly a diverse sampling of the posters on the board.

 

As far as solutions, I would love to see an under review option for suspect posts, and opportunity for posters to clean up their own posts. I know I've been asked to clean up things before, which I'm happy to do.

 

While we have no right to expect respect to be a two way street, I hope that the owners and moderators acknowledge that there really isn't any other place to have meaningful Twins discussions; and for me personally, to interact with people I regard as friends, even if it's just baseball we're talking about. I'm thankful for Twins Daily, but some of the complaints lodged recently have some legitimacy.

 

As always, thanks for the input, Pseudo. You bring up some valid points here and I'll have to mull a few of them over for a bit.

 

Also, TL;DR.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I believe I have seen this name mentioned cryptically before, but was not sure if it was real or a myth. Do I need to say the name three times in order for him to appear?

 

 

If it makes you feel better, we did not seem to know either. But that guy had such an irrational hatred for Mauer...

[Fire Dan Gladden]

To be up-front about this, the average poster has no idea how frequently we address posters for their behavior.

 

If a user is banned for a week for violation of policy, the average poster won't even notice. We don't confront users publicly and we don't publicize infractions and bans.

 

So remember that just because you got an infraction (using the general "you", not you specifically Fire Dan Gladden), don't assume that the "other guy" didn't get an infraction as well, maybe even a ban.

 

Because honestly, how would you even know? Do you notice if I'm gone for a week? No, you don't... Because one poster, even one as prolific as myself (I'm near the top of all TD posters in frequency and count) isn't noticeable on a board that has several hundred active users at any given point.

 

In short, we work very hard to make sure we do not play favorites and it's a little insulting to imply otherwise when you only see ~10% of what's going on in the forums.

 

I do not need to see every "hand slap" or "talking to" to understand how the wheels spin.

 

Brock, I have had e-discussions with you before. I believe I understand what you and the guys are hoping to accomplish, But as Joe Average peruses this site and sees the same individuals pushing the envelopes on their comments, sees the same individuals attacking, but keeping it just enough vauge to not be a direct attack, what else can one think.

 

You may not realize it, but perception is everything. If you feel insulted because you believe you are "trying your best", so be it. I was here early on when you were still trying to establish an identity. I have watched the direction of comments, articles, and the like. My perception is that there continues to be a Members Only mentality. I truly would like that to change.

[glunn]

As head moderator, I want to make a few points here:

 

1. There has never been any bias against BYTO alumni. I was never on BYTO and have never given this any weight. Some of my fellow moderators were on BYTO, but I have never seen this influence any of their decisions.

 

2. Echoing Brock, people should know that we discuss virtually every warning and infraction that is issued by any of the eight moderators, and we all work hard to try to get people to follow TD policy. We are happy when violators start following the TD policy and we are sad when we finally decide that warnings are not working and we have to ban someone. More than 90% of what we do happens behind the scenes, but I can assure you that there is tremendous due process before anyone is banned.

 

3. As head moderator, I have chosen to not get involved in the heated debates. When Gardy's contract was extended, I vomited quietly in my mouth, and I issued warnings and infractions to people who I agreed with when they went too far and violated TD policy. I will continue to avoid getting entangled in such debates, so that any member has at least one person who they can come to who is not taking any substantive position. That said, the other seven moderators are volunteers who all work hard to promote our shared goal of fostering debate that is BOTH vigorous/spirited AND respectful, and I see no reason why they should not be able to participate in such debates so long as they follow TD policy. Also, in those rare instances where a moderator approaches the gray area, they get a message from me.

 

4. We are ALL Twins fans, and that is a special bond. Because we care so much about the Twins doing well, we may vigorously disagree. I believe with all of my mind, heart and soul that Gardy should have been let go last year, and that anyone who disagrees is grievously mistaken. However, although we may disagree, we all share an obsession with the Twins getting back to being competitive, and our love for each other as fellow Twins fans should be thousands times stronger than our frustration at what we perceive to be the occasional ignorance of our fellow fans.

 

5. As I have said before, I think that it helps to remember that in the deepest sense, we are all brothers and sisters due to our common obsession with the Twins. We should be able to fight without acrimony and disagree without being disagreeable. We are better than White Sox fans and Yankees fans.

 

6. TD is a special place and I am grateful to the founders for providing a site where there are so many great articles and where people can debate without flame wars and disrespect. As moderators, we feel that we have a sacred trust to foster the goal of debate that is both vigorous and respectful. We are not perfect. We make mistakes then try to learn from our mistakes. But I can say without reservation that we care about every member (even those with whom we disagree) and we spend tens of hours every month doing our best.

[glunn]

I do not need to see every "hand slap" or "talking to" to understand how the wheels spin.

 

Brock, I have had e-discussions with you before. I believe I understand what you and the guys are hoping to accomplish, But as Joe Average peruses this site and sees the same individuals pushing the envelopes on their comments, sees the same individuals attacking, but keeping it just enough vauge to not be a direct attack, what else can one think.

 

You may not realize it, but perception is everything. If you feel insulted because you believe you are "trying your best", so be it. I was here early on when you were still trying to establish an identity. I have watched the direction of comments, articles, and the like. My perception is that there continues to be a Members Only mentality. I truly would like that to change.

 

I am sorry that you have the perception that there is a members only mentality. With all due respect, I believe that this is an exaggeration. That said, if you see a post that you believe violates TD policy, please click on the triangle icon below the post and we will all take a close look at it.

 

I am not insulted by you saying that there may be bias. It's almost impossible to eliminate all bias. All we can do is our best, and that will never result in perfection, because we are not perfect.

 

Before we had any moderators, I would sometimes jump into the middle of a heated discussion in an attempt to get my fellow fans to be more respectful of each other. I see no reason why you or any other member cannot do the same, so long as you follow TD policy. In my view, blessed are the peacemakers, because they allow us to focus on baseball instead of needless quarreling. Also, I think that we should all have the humility to always keep in mind that it may be the other guy who is correct. Before last season began, I was pretty sure that Correia was going to be a disaster. As it turned out, I was wrong. We are all going to be wrong sometimes, and it seems to me that we should all keep this in mind when we perceive that someone else is wrong.

[Blackjack]

When Gardy's contract was extended, I vomited quietly in my mouth,

 

Classic!!!!

 

 

 

4. although we may disagree, we all share an obsession with the Twins getting back to being competitive, and our love for each other as fellow Twins fans should be thousands times stronger than our frustration at what we perceive to be the occasional ignorance of our fellow fans.

 

 

Well put!!!

 

Thanks again to all the founders and moderators for their hard work!!!

 

Onward!! Rumor has it that pitchers and catchers report in a couple of weeks!!

[Oldgoat_MN]

Just have to say.... I love the title of this thread.

 

Over Moderation

 

It's like a guy who can't do anything right.

[bird]

I was just upset at the time that my joke got deleted. It wasn't in even that poor of taste, contained no foul language etc.

 

Dave, are you sure it wasn't deleted because it failed to budge the needle on the Funny Meter?

 

Which segues to my question: is gentle needling allowed?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Which segues to my question: is gentle needling allowed?

 

I'm considering banning you for even asking that question.

[TheLeviathan]

I'll never forget Dankind.

 

Someone needs to find that epic mullet picture. That's begging to be an avatar.

[TheLeviathan]

Something else I'd like to point out is that the moderation is almost exclusively made of the most active posters in Game Threads, while I think all of these people are great, it's not exactly a diverse sampling of the posters on the board.

 

I like Pseudo's point here. And, no offense to those people, but game threads are the most common place on this entire forum to be filled with 10th grade immaturity and posts that push the line of "high standards". It's all in good fun we all know, but that doesn't detract from what feels like hypocrisy.

 

Which is fine, it's often funny and always with the best intentions it seems, but the lines are mostly certainly blurred in that particular "area" of the board. So I too share a bit of hesitation with that response. It could easily get applied to virtually every game thread I've read here. (Again, no slight, just find it a bit contradictory)

[bird]

I'm considering banning you for even asking that question.

 

And it would be based on the weakest excuse I've given you guys in years.

 

Thanks to all of you for your work and the joy you add to each day for so many of us.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I like Pseudo's point here. And, no offense to those people, but game threads are the most common place on this entire forum to be filled with 10th grade immaturity and posts that push the line of "high standards". It's all in good fun we all know, but that doesn't detract from what feels like hypocrisy.

 

Which is fine, it's often funny and always with the best intentions it seems, but the lines are mostly certainly blurred in that particular "area" of the board. So I too share a bit of hesitation with that response. It could easily get applied to virtually every game thread I've read here. (Again, no slight, just find it a bit contradictory)

 

As much as it seems like a double standard, we intentionally enforce different rules in game threads than we do everywhere else. We want to open up game threads to be a bit more open and fun for everyday posters... Like glunn says, "like sitting in the outfield bleachers with a bunch of season ticket holders".

 

As for moderators being active game thread participants, that was not intentional, just how things ended up working out. To find good moderators, we needed active users who spend a lot of time on the forums. Active users tend to participate in game threads... Nothing more than a correlation between the two, certainly not any kind of cause and effect.

[ashbury]

And, for what it's worth, the status for game threads is documented in the Comments Policy thread.

 

http://twinsdaily.com/showthread.php/8837-Twins-Daily-Comment-Policy-last-revision-September-2013?p=164889&viewfull=1#post164889

 

It's not a secret exception.