Over moderation

[DaveW]

Is this joke ok?

[DaveW]

Not sure why that posted 3 times.

[Riverbrian]

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)

 

Levi... I hope you know that you are always invited to participate in the game threads.

 

Everyone is.

 

I can see the perception of contradiction that you mention. However... I believe there isn't a more moderated thread in the building. It is full of moderators every night... So it's actually kind of the opposite.

 

The current format of the game threads was evolution but slightly intentional. We just don't want to feel sad! That is challenging with a struggling club... We want it fun and moderators are always there to try and keep it fun. It's working... The game thread has more daily views than any other thread created on the site.

 

We have plenty of threads to talk about how terrible Everything is. The game thread became a place to make a comment of how I would have pinch hit here but not hang on it and be able to move away from it into anything else in the whole wide world... With that... Sophomoric humor is a natural by product because everyone has a different personality and the game thread in its current form can't exist without a little latitude.

 

However... If the advanced line gets crossed... There is a moderator to handle it and keep it on track.

 

Full disclosure as a moderator... Glunn has moderated me privately when I crossed the line and he was right to do so.

 

On the other threads the mood can get dark and topics are defined. The moderation is much trickier because fights break out and points can get hammered into the ground and discussion can get off topic. That's why it seems like a double standard in my opinion. Its a different format.

[Craig Arko]

I may be wrong, but perhaps it would be best just to acknowledge that it is a double standard, but a harmless one. And that if it becomes non-harmless it will be re-evaluated.

 

Trying to do these two-steps around it just needlessly injures credibility. Believe it or not, we actually want to get along. But honesty is a bidirectional mapping that needs to be respected on both ends.

[Squirrel]

Is this joke ok?[ATTACH=CONFIG]6450[/ATTACH]

 

In what context? Quite honestly as a stand-alone statement I read it more as tragic and sad. Are you asking 'Would this be deleted?' Again, in what context?

[DaveW]

As someone who enjoys the Seahawks very much, I find it refreshing to be able to "laugh" about losing PSH a talented (but very stupid) man.

[Willihammer]

Full disclosure as a moderator... Glunn has moderated me privately when I crossed the line and he was right to do so.

 

10 Hail Mary's and a 7 games of Twins baseball.

 

I would pay upwards of one dollar to see that post.

[Squirrel]

As someone who enjoys the Seahawks very much, I find it refreshing to be able to "laugh" about losing PSH a talented (but very stupid) man.

 

Again, it's a contextual thing. But whether or not you or I find it individually funny or sad really isn't the point. A lot of 'humour' I let slide, but sometimes a 'joke' needs to be removed not for the joke itself, but because of the responses it elicits, responses that quickly can derail a thread to a 'far off-topic land.'

[ashbury]

I may be wrong, but perhaps it would be best just to acknowledge that it is a double standard

 

Since this has been done, more than once now in this thread, and explicitly in the Comment Policy post I previously linked to, I don't know what it is you are asking for. "Civility is still the rule, but a little more is tolerated." You want the explicit phrase "double standard" in the Policy?

[bird]

As someone who enjoys the Seahawks very much, I find it refreshing to be able to "laugh" about losing PSH a talented (but very stupid) man.

 

Dave, Dave, Dave. Sigh. A brilliant man died because he was an addict and he was unable to avoid succumbing to a disease he was born with and fought. Hardly "laughable", my insensitive friend, and the name-calling reflects poorly. On you, not him. Sigh.

[bird]

There you go, moderators. Testing....testing.

[DaveW]

Dave, Dave, Dave. Sigh. A brilliant man died because he was an addict and he was unable to avoid succumbing to a disease he was born with and fought. Hardly "laughable", my insensitive friend, and the name-calling reflects poorly. On you, not him. Sigh.

 

What name calling? That I called him very stupid? Sorry, it is my opinion that if you try heroin (even once), you are indeed very stupid. Is it sad and tragic? Yes. Completely avoidable? Yes. Stupid? Yes. Completely selfish as he leaves behind 3 kids? Yes. Addiction sucks, but he knew what he was doing, plenty of other addicts have managed to not be so selfish/stupid.

 

I respect your opinion, but this is a perfect example of how people think differently.

[Craig Arko]

Since this has been done, more than once now in this thread, and explicitly in the Comment Policy post I previously linked to, I don't know what it is you are asking for. "Civility is still the rule, but a little more is tolerated." You want the explicit phrase "double standard" in the Policy?

 

I think continuing to beat my head against a wall is an exercise in futility. I'll stop now.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Is this joke ok?[ATTACH=CONFIG]6450[/ATTACH]

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

Levi... I hope you know that you are always invited to participate in the game threads.

 

I think my point might have been missed in my example. I'm not bashing anyone or implying a double standard per se......just pointing out that if 10th grade immaturity alone is standard by which one's contributions are to be measured (As John pretty heavily laid down): one could argue our very moderators are an awful example of that standard.

 

To which I'd say, maybe we should be less heavy-handed and dismissive of someone who does say something immature in another context. They could certainly argue a double standard exists. We should be wary of allowing immaturity run rampant in one place and then having a heavy hand in others. If nothing else it sends mixed messages.

 

So go ahead - be as silly and as immature as you want. I certainly don't care. Just be aware that you have purposely created your own little bastion for that, written that into the rules, and relish in it. If someone slips into that in another part of the forum, I'd like to think that would be met with far more sympathy than what Pseudo was referring to earlier.

[snepp]

Is this joke ok?

 

Too soon!

[Guest USAFChief]

As a moderator, I've had to learn to walk a tighter line than I was used to...and perhaps tighter than I want to. But I don't think it's fair to characterize the game threads as "silly and immature."

 

Often filled with attempts at humor? Sure.

 

A little looser than regular threads? Yeah, I guess so, but let me be clear about this...we don't discourage humor anywhere in the forums. We do ask that we keep the vulgarity and language at moderate levels, but we have limits in game threads, too.

 

Finally, this has been said many ways by many folks...everyone is welcome in game threads. We tried having a more "baseball centric" game thread last year, and if there's a demand, I'm confident that will be an option going forward. But I will also say that I at least reviewed, if not participated in, at least 90percent of last years game threads, and nobody ever got flack for talking actual baseball. So by all means...join the fun. I can pretty much guarantee you'll be welcomed.

[ashbury]

if 10th grade immaturity alone is standard by which one's contributions are to be measured (As John pretty heavily laid down)

 

No. The more we try to explain the Comment Policy, the more we are whipsawed by various people saying a) so this example of what not to do is all that is not allowed?, so this example of what to do must be followed every time?, and c) but what about this funny little case instead?

 

John Bonnes responded to someone saying his 10th graders get away with this much and more. It made for a good response (he avoided using the term "sophomoric" which I would not have been able to resist), but don't try to generalize it beyond hope. He said such a post risks deletion. It's hard to think of any characteristic about a post "alone" that will cause (or avert) moderator action. No, VodkaDave, don't take that as a challenge.

[TheLeviathan]

No. The more we try to explain the Comment Policy

 

My use of "alone" might have muddied my point. There is no reason to be defensive here. Game threads are fine. I don't care about how sophomoric any part of the forum is. I'm not going to be posting about "bewbs" or "boners" or anything else. I have no dog in the fight. I know people get a lot of therapy joking around in there during these awful years. Go nuts.

 

But you have repeatedly said "we say in the policy it's more ok in the game threads" but out of the other side we hear "things aren't any different there". Well, they are. That's why you've loosened that specifically in the comment policy. And that's fine, but you're not trying very hard to see both sides if someone says "hey! my sophomoric post isn't all that different than the game threads I see every day largely populated by mods....why did I get warned?"

 

And your response is: "Well, yeah, the policy we wrote allows us to do that there". I hope it's fairly apparent why that isn't a satisfactory answer for someone. So just keep that in mind if you have to moderate sophomoric hijinks. Nothing more.

[DaveW]

No, VodkaDave, don't take that as a challenge.

 

Why am I being singled out? Seems like a personal attack

[ashbury]

but out of the other side we hear "things aren't any different there".

 

Where? I can't think of anything like that since I started moderating in June.

 

"hey! my sophomoric post isn't all that different than the game threads I see every day largely populated by mods....why did I get warned?"

 

If moderation were mostly about explaining to a new member why a thinly veiled poop joke didn't get bleeped in a game thread, the job would be a snap.

 

/ wait, what, someone veils their jokes in the game threads?

[TheLeviathan]

Where? I can't think of anything like that since I started moderating in June.

 

I was referring to comments by both RB and Chief that the differences between game threads and others are not that different. It's clear they are, it's why a different standard is literally written into the policy.

 

Look, I'm not accusing anyone of doing anything wrong. But no less than three people in this recent discussion have voiced confusion about that double standard. I'm simply suggesting/hoping moderators are aware that built in double standards exist and should be taken heavily into consideration in cases of confusion. That's all.

[ashbury]

I was referring to comments by both RB and Chief that the differences between game threads and others are not that different.

 

I didn't read either one that way. Brian has:

 

That's why it seems like a double standard in my opinion. Its a different format.

 

Chief has:

 

A little looser than regular threads? Yeah, I guess so

 

I read these as "different". And certainly not "things aren't any different there", to which I was responding anyway. They can speak for themselves of course if they see a need.

[Guest USAFChief]

I think one point we're trying to make is that "thread jacking" is something we try to discourage in regular threads, but there is almost no such thing as "thread jacking" a game thread.

 

Somewhat less than intensely interested in a 7-2 game? Want to talk about restaurants in Sioux Falls? Fine in a game thread. Maybe not so much elsewhere.

 

Another point: Might there be a little more tolerance for off color humor? Yeah probably, depending on the spirit and the crowd.

 

But game threads are still moderated. Excessive vulgarity, language, or attacks will still get our attention.

 

Another: since this is all spelled out in the comments policy, and since its been beat to death here and elsewhere multiple times, I'm not sure how there can be much "confusion" over what's allowed, here or in game threads.

 

It also occurs to me that few, if any, of the game thread regulars have many complaints. Or have trouble making what, if any, changes are necessary when they go outside the game threads.

 

Its late, and I just watched the Gophs lose in triple OT, so forgive me if this seems harsh...but it almost seems as if there is an intentional effort to create problems where none exist. To parse words, looking for cracks to exploit rather than accept the intent.

 

This is a great place for us Twins fans. Lets try to enhance it.

[twinsnorth49]

This is an interesting discussion, I've been away and unable to commit any time to participating so far, but here goes.

 

I really don't see any double standard occurring in the games threads. The comment policy on game threads was not written after the fact to provide mods with an excuse for breaking site rules while enforcing them elsewhere. They don't exist for our benefit and are open to anyone who wants to participate, with the same looser rules applying. A bastion? That's pure hyperbole, neither is it a clique or applying a double standard. It's an open double standard for everyone if anything, everyone is invited.

 

Does the same double standard not apply to this thread? TD policy clearly states that open discussion about moderation is against site rules, yet here we are allowing anyone to openly comment about it.

 

The fact that mods happen to most often populate the game threads has nothing more to do than the fact that they are typically amongst the busiest posters on the site. Additionally, as a thread that is wanting to be more inviting to newer or prospective members, having the mods actively participate is a great way to welcome those members into the fold and make them feel comfortable. It's one of the better threads to actually get to know someone a bit better and not feel intimidated by the often higher level of discourse that can occur in other threads.

 

Game threads are simply an invitation to have some casual banter about really nothing in general, they are often quite directionless, a way to blow off steam during another 90 loss season without the typical vitriol that can occur in more serious threads.

 

I don't think most people want that in other threads that pertain to more specific baseball related topics. Sure, everyone wants a bit of humour now and again but too often when the 10th grader language starts it's a sign that the thread is degenerating and getting personal. I think ChiTown has it right by saying that it really often depends on the context, too often those type of comments are not in context with the topic and serve only to derail it.Poor taste is a fine line and everybody has different tolerances to it and that's just the way it is. A pretty easy rule of thumb is that, if we're having a discussion about whether something is distasteful or not, it's probably distasteful to somebody, which makes it too close to the line. It will never be perfect but I do not see it as biased.

 

I don't get this whole BYTO bias thing, I don't know who any of you are save a couple who self identify as such, so its not coming from here. I really don't see any comments from the other moderators that lead me to believe they feel that way either, honestly it never gets discussed.

 

Anyway, stilted rant over....

[Riverbrian]

I think one point we're trying to make is that "thread jacking" is something we try to discourage in regular threads, but there is almost no such thing as "thread jacking" a game thread.

 

Chief nails it here... I would say it slightly different... I would say "in regular threads we discourage thread jacking... In game threads we encourage it"

 

That's the difference.

 

The regular threads have subjects and we try to keep them on the tracks of that particular subject and after a couple of pages those subjects start turning sour and then the moderation phone starts ringing and we have to moderate it or not moderate it depending our individual and collective assessments. We don't always get it right but we are trying to get it right.

 

The phone never rings on the game thread. Everyone is happy!!! No one is fighting with each other. We are throwing the likes around like high fives and entertaining each other.

 

That's the difference.

 

Levi... I get your point and I accept the perception that you are pointing out but I don't know what can be done about it.

 

We can't let the regular threads run free. We know what happens when we do... We all make mistakes as moderators but we are not hypocrites.

 

We haven't had grenades tossed at each other in game threads yet cuz the mindset is just different. The game threaders understand that grenade tossing would stand out like a sore thumb in context of what is going on around them. There is a respect paid to all in that room and everyone is invited in... As long as they take their shoes off before they enter. If they come in with steel toe boots and start denting things. You'll see moderation and it will be immediate because moderators are obviously there enjoying the party. Its a safe zone from combat.

 

There are grenades all over the regular threads. The JFK joke may stand on the game thread because those in the room are in that mindset to accept that joke or similar when they enter. The direction of the thread is anywhere so the joke fits the context.

 

It ain't that way on the regular threads. People get offended by everything and when they get offended. They let us know... They let the offender know and they let everyone who reads it know and pretty soon we have people at each other's throats and the topic of discussion is blown to hell and very few enjoy the feelings displayed.

 

Sometimes moderation is pre-emptive because we've seen it before and what happens next.

 

Thats the best I can do to explain it. I'm sure you know what I'm saying and I know you are not suggesting a change in the game threads.

 

You are probably asking for a little more tolerance in the regular threads like we seem to give ourselves in the game thread. We can't... Cuz of the grenades.

[Paul]

To me, the shoes / steel toes thing is an apt analagy Brian. Well said. I view myself as a guest here and behave appropriately. But I can understand people who frequent the site and their desire to take "ownership/host responsibility" and share in the culture creation here. I think that's good for the site. I think the push/pull going on is a healthy thing for Twins Daily. The one caution I would make is the old "power corrupts" thing as it applies to the moderators. In the moderation process their dynamic should be the attractiveness of the site for all, not their own personal attractiveness.

[glunn]

Nothing would please me more than to have Crarko, Levi and everyone else participate in game threads. This is a place where we can simulate watching a game together in the outfield bleachers, and a good way to get through a losing season. Hopefully it will eventually become a place where we can get more enjoyment from a winning season.

 

Believe it or not, we love you guys, even when you sometimes test the gray areas of TD policy. If there is a clique, then we want you to be part of it.

[TheLeviathan]

Levi... I get your point and I accept the perception that you are pointing out but I don't know what can be done about it.

 

Thank you for trying RB, I get the impression that some are losing the forest for the trees. To answer this - I don't think anything should be done about it. I'm not campaigning for anything to change. I'm just trying to make people aware how unique I feel this is. I've never seen a message board that openly says "this tone is allowed here but not here". Typically, the board just has it's own tone and you get that in any forum. TD is unique in my experience to pin a thread 162 times that is allowed a totally different tone. I could see how new and even regular posters could struggle with how to mix those. An appropriately and well-intentioned rib (inspired by the game thread) could be perceived as a deliberate violation for instance. I was just offering the idea that mods should be aware that reasonable people could make well-intentioned mistakes because of this inconsistency in tone.

 

So do absolutely nothing about it. Go on with your bad selves in the game threads. Just be aware that those different standards could be reasonably confused from time to time.

 

I am, however, disturbed by the fact that I feel compelled to apologize for making an observation in a thread designed for observations. Perhaps Psuedo's most salient point is the need for more diversity in thought. There is a lot of clique-y insularity in the responses. There is some unfortunate irony in how often people say they welcome others and then have proceeded to entirely miss the point in order to rally around one another in shunning another perspective.

 

So thank you RB for resisting that urge and hearing me out. I'll slink back to the political forum now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Thank you for trying RB, I get the impression that some are losing the forest for the trees. To answer this - I don't think anything should be done about it. I'm not campaigning for anything to change. I'm just trying to make people aware how unique I feel this is. I've never seen a message board that openly says "this tone is allowed here but not here". Typically, the board just has it's own tone and you get that in any forum. TD is unique in my experience to pin a thread 162 times that is allowed a totally different tone.

 

I've administrated five large forums over the years, one of them much larger than Twins Daily (something like 3m pageviews a month).

 

Three of those forums have had different sets of rules for different forums or topics, usually found in the Off-Topic forum (one even had a NSFW forum, which obviously had different rules applied to it). Twins Daily is hardly setting a precedent in this regard, particularly because the rules are virtually the same between the forums and game threads with only a slight variation for thread-jacking and off-color humor. The other three forums had vastly different rules for the Off-Topic forum, which I never felt worked particularly well.