Over moderation

[oldguy10]

I am not playing around and I did not realize that I had already addressed this issue somewhat, sorry about the ambiguity and misunderstanding. Another member/poster may be able to frame it all better than I can.

[Riverbrian]

I am not playing around and I did not realize that I had already addressed this issue somewhat, sorry about the ambiguity and misunderstanding. Another member/poster may be able to frame it all better than I can.

 

It's all good!!! You are doing fine.

[oldguy10]

And correct me if I am wrong on this - most criticism about management is directed at Ryan it seems, I would like criticism directed more toward the Pohlads and their penurious ways and statements of what they planned to do and then backed off. I believe they have publicly stated that they would spend more money once Target Field was up and running and franchise income increased. But I do not believe they have delivered on that promise, do any of the other posters here?

[JB_Iowa]

And correct me if I am wrong on this - most criticism about management is directed at Ryan it seems, I would like criticism directed more toward the Pohlads and their penurious ways and statements of what they planned to do and then backed off. I believe they have publicly stated that they would spend more money once Target Field was up and running and franchise income increased. But I do not believe they have delivered on that promise, do any of the other posters here?

 

I think that if you go out an craft a good post about the Pohlad's willingness/unwillingness to spend including some background data, you will find that there are a number of people who agree with you or who have concerns about Twins spending. There have been plenty of references to the Forbes numbers and attempts to quantify income from time to time. The talk died down somewhat this winter as the Twins showed some willingness to take on free agents but it has not escaped me (and others) that projected 2014 payroll is not much above 2013.

 

You will find others who are staunch defenders of the present spending system -- especially with concerns about having payroll space in 2015 and later.

 

But there have been plenty of lively discussions about spending, how the Twins pay their debt on TF, etc. and I suspect there will be more in the future.

[ashbury]

I am not playing around

 

OK. As Brian said, it's fine, if your questions were sincere. Hopefully the answers have been clear.

[oldguy10]

I appreciate these recent posts greatly as regards the spending or not with the Pohlad family. I had not thought about waiting to spend more when the young prospects are up so as to surround them with productive veterans that have playing experience.

[Bark's Lounge]

Maybe this has been said before and maybe not. I believe the moderators are doing an excellent job. I believe it is there ability to have a sense of humor and also a seriousness that lifts them above the average poster, that has lead to them being chosen for the task of being a Moderator.

 

A lot of these guys/gals have families/important jobs in real life and they still dedicate their time to this site. To me, that says a lot. I really have a hard time believing that members are being singled out for infractions and what not - there is no Good Ol' Boys Club on this site. To me, what is being said in a negative fashion is either inexperience, sour grapes, or some weird kind of form of jealousy... for the most part. I am sure there are some exceptions.

 

The Fellas and my Mom do a great job... be happy that you have them.

[Physics Guy]

Maybe this has been said before and maybe not. I believe the moderators are doing an excellent job. I believe it is there ability to have a sense of humor and also a seriousness that lifts them above the average poster' date=' that has lead to them being chosen for the task of being a Moderator.

 

A lot of these guys/gals have families/important jobs in real life and they still dedicate their time to this site. To me, that says a lot. I really have a hard time believing that members are being singled out for infractions and what not - there is no Good Ol' Boys Club on this site. To me, what is being said in a negative fashion is either inexperience, sour grapes, or some weird kind of form of jealousy... for the most part. I am sure there are some exceptions.

 

The Fellas and my Mom do a great job... be happy that you have them.[/quote']

 

Couldn't agree more. Keep up the good work. Some of the "discussions" still get a bit heated or sidetracked at times, but has continued to get better since I have been coming to the site, thanks to our moderators.

[Paul Pleiss]

I was recently told by a moderator that comments about moderation are against comment policy, but I went and read the latest comment policy and see no mention of commenting about moderation. I made an off-hand comment about moderation "Oh joy, moderation already" or something to that effect and my post, along with relevant content, was deleted. I think the moderators are generally doing a good job, but deleting anything that is "borderline" offensive is going to far. This isn't Disneyland. It's the internet. Jeesh.

[snepp]

Interrupting a thread with discussion of forum moderation also constitutes thread-jacking. If you have specific concerns about moderator actions, PM one of the moderators civilly instead, as we are more than willing to discuss this with you. Or if you wish to publicly discuss the moderation at Twins Daily and help us improve the site, feel free to create a thread in the "Questions About the Site" forum and open a discussion. This policy is not an attempt to stifle conversation about moderation; its purpose is to improve baseball-related discussion and prevent thread-jacking.

 

 

http://www.twinsdaily.com/showthread.php/8837-Twins-Daily-Comment-Policy-latest-revision-September-2013?p=164885&viewfull=1#post164885

[Paul Pleiss]

My fault I suppose, I wasn't aware that mentioning that moderation exists in the course of a comment was thread-jacking. I also didn't realize there was 10 comments going into minute detail of what the simple rules were. My appologies for only looking at the original post. A rube like me has no palce on Twins Daily.

[Paul Pleiss]

It just seems strange to me that there can be a podcast which opening encourages drinking to excess and general drunkenness, but if someone mentions "boobs" in a post, WHAMMY, it's moderated. I don't know where the line is for Twins Daily. Grand Drunk Railroad is okay. Throwing up in a cab and laughing about it is okay. Boobs are not. Unless maybe I'm in New Orleans for Mardi Gras. Then maybe it's okay. Or maybe it's not. I'll make sure to let the moderators censor me to find out.

[raindog]

My fault I suppose, I wasn't aware that mentioning that moderation exists in the course of a comment was thread-jacking. I also didn't realize there was 10 comments going into minute detail of what the simple rules were. My appologies for only looking at the original post. A rube like me has no palce on Twins Daily.

 

[video=youtube_share;ReYfu5E-hOE]

[diehardtwinsfan]

My fault I suppose, I wasn't aware that mentioning that moderation exists in the course of a comment was thread-jacking. I also didn't realize there was 10 comments going into minute detail of what the simple rules were. My appologies for only looking at the original post. A rube like me has no palce on Twins Daily.

 

The comments you saw later were due in large part to additional follow up from other threads where things went off the tracks. It doesn't make you a "rube" that this got missed the first time. It happens. I'd also add, that this is one of many reasons why moderators will issue a simple warning as opposed to an infraction. Warnings don't count... at least towards anything long term on this forum... infractions do.

 

I'm not going to argue with you when you say that sometimes the line is gray and you don't know where it is. That's true... it can be. That is probably the biggest challenge we face and the reason why this thread is now 10 pages deep. I can say that we do have discussions over just about every moderation action and if I were to feel that one of my fellow moderators went too far, I could tell him/her that they did so and why I feel that way. No one would take offense, and sometimes infractions/warnings get reversed. That happens too.

 

What I can say about some of this is to consider your audience. This isn't an all male forum. Mentioning "boobs" in a post is going to elicit different responses from different people, and I'm not so certain the women on this forum will appreciate it as much as the men. Drunkenness is me being... well whatever... (and I say this as someone who is 'decompressing' on vacation right now). If one of the women who posted here were to be referring to 'penises' in their posts, I can guarantee that there would be people reporting it, and that right there is a HUGE difference (no pun intended, don't go there ) between anatomy and alcohol. The only place where we have been clear that there is a greater leeway is the game threads... outside of those threads, think long and hard about your audience.

 

Simply put, stay away from the line... and that's coming from someone who has crossed this particular line on these forums before. Audience is king. Be respectful of that and I doubt anyone will ever be moderated.

[biggentleben]

What I can say about some of this is to consider your audience. This isn't an all male forum. Mentioning "boobs" in a post is going to elicit different responses from different people, and I'm not so certain the women on this forum will appreciate it as much as the men. Drunkenness is me being... well whatever... (and I say this as someone who is 'decompressing' on vacation right now). If one of the women who posted here were to be referring to 'penises' in their posts, I can guarantee that there would be people reporting it, and that right there is a HUGE difference (no pun intended, don't go there ). The only place where we have been clear that there is a greater leeway is the game threads... outside of those threads, think long and hard about your audience.

 

No pun intended once, shame on me

No pun intended twice....

[Old Twins Cap]

I can appreciate the sentiment. I was warned for deriding a poster's complaints about keeping Aaron Hicks on the Twins roster as sounding "like a high school guidance counselor". That assumes there is something inherently wrong about being a high school guidance counselor, which I thought, by itself, is an act of pre-judgement by Twins Daily.

 

And then, I was cited for "being a prat" for calling the Twins decision to keep veterans Kubel and Bartlett for nostalgic reasons -- "stupidity".

 

Sorry for my foul language guys. The Twins are a lousy team again this year. If we aren't allowed to say that, or question the team's decisions in any meaningful way, what exact purpose does this website serve?

 

Lighten up. I actually think this is an improvement on other Twins' sites. It's not like we are swearing or being misogynistic or racist or even off topic. I'm a senior citizen who is losing his last baseball years to ineffectual Twins management, and can't even complain about that because overzealous moderators are somehow invested in controlling what visitors say in comment threads.

 

You don't have a great product guys, i.e. the Twins. As time goes on this year, it's going to be "beggars can't be choosers". The team is that bad and no one is facing up to it. Roll with the punches, it makes it more interesting. And everybody understands that comment threads are a random toss of humanity on a computer screen. It is not a reflection of the fine efforts of your blog team.

[clutterheart]

consider your audience

 

I suggest this site not be so full of itself. At its heart this site is a copy of Dickie Thon Twins Forum with better writers and better formatting. So don't make it more than it is. Your audience is people who are used to reading on the internet and the words boobs and penis shouldn't elicit any negative response.

And if it does, what does it matter?

[diehardtwinsfan]

I suggest this site not be so full of itself. At its heart this site is a copy of Dickie Thon Twins Forum with better writers and better formatting. So don't make it more than it is. Your audience is people who are used to reading on the internet and the words boobs and penis shouldn't elicit any negative response.

And if it does, what does it matter?

 

I think this is a fair point... to a point. I'm not sure the audience agrees. We usually see reported posts on a daily basis and on some days, we can see quite a few posts. Some of the things that get reported are quite obvious and need attention. Some are things that have us scratching our heads as to why it was reported. This isn't about making this site into something it's not. It's about making this site conform to how the site owners want it to work. That is why it matters. They want this site to be an environment where people who are not fond of those words don't feel unwelcome.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Sorry for my foul language guys. The Twins are a lousy team again this year. If we aren't allowed to say that, or question the team's decisions in any meaningful way, what exact purpose does this website serve?

 

No one is saying that you cannot question the team's decisions. It's one thing to say "I don't get why they kept the Jasons, it doesn't make sense" (which on that sentiment you and I are in agreement I might add). It's another thing to say "Keeping the Jason's was stupid". One invites continued discussion. One has the potential to inflame others, as there might be someone out there who thought this was a great idea. They aren't going to take being called "stupid" lightly.

 

Last summer this site went into a pretty nasty tail spin due to the bickering that was going on due in large part to this type of commenting. Some of the site owners admitted to hating going to the forums on their own site. The comment policy you see to day is largely a reaction to all of that. It may appear overzealous to some (and as an ex-BYTO person, I can tell you first hand what can happen to a good site when there's little moderation), but it's there because the people that own the site want it there.

 

It's a pendulum swing, no doubt, and I personally expect it to swing back a bit at one point, but I don't see that happening until the site's culture is firmly established.

[JB_Iowa]

As one of the women posting here, I can tell you that most of the references to "boobs" or "t*tt*es" don't bother me much. Female sports fans have to have a lot thicker shell than that or they'll never last. And face it, guys have that part of anatomy, too (Seinfeld, anyone?) But I do keep in mind that we can have some pretty young posters here so that is one reason to keep language modified (although many of them use words that are worse than a lot of their elders).

 

I had a real problem with "Grand Drunk Railroad". I get that it was a play on Grand Funk Railroad but while I have no problem with people talking about drinking, especially in game threads, the idea of "Drunk" being a goal is very problematic for me. And having it as part of a TD-sponsored event was very disappointing to me. Especially given the statistics on alcohol use and problems at sporting events.

[Paul Pleiss]

As fans (short for FANATIC) we should be allowed a place to call organizational decisions stupid. I understand wanting to protect the forums from being a place where users are insulting each other, that I appreciate, but slinging mud towards the franchise on a FAN site should be allowed.

 

Was putting Bartlett on the roster stupid? I think so. It's definitely a head scratcher. I'd take much more offense if people were throwing around terms like "retarded" or "gay" or other hot key words. Stupid? If that's offensive people should stay off the internet.

 

I like this site. I like the users. I like the content. I just feel some of the moderation is a reach, as discussed above. And I am glad that this particular forum exists so we can have a discussion about moderation. That's a positive. If only we could get some more positive things happening on the field.

[Riverbrian]

As fans (short for FANATIC) we should be allowed a place to call organizational decisions stupid. I understand wanting to protect the forums from being a place where users are insulting each other, that I appreciate, but slinging mud towards the franchise on a FAN site should be allowed.

 

You are allowed to do that just use a different adjective or a less aggressive approach... That would be my suggestion.

 

"Adding Bartlett to the roster is questionable".

 

"I don't understand why they kept Bartlett".

 

"I wouldn't have kept Bartlett and Neither would my Wife".

 

Saying its stupid leads to the food fights and things get out of control. Using the word stupid lacks respect. We've seen what the word stupid leads to so just avoid saying its stupid... Even if it's stupid.

[Twins Daily Admin]

The line is gray and the point at which moderators choose to take a stand varies. That is the nature of the beast. If I stumble into that area occasionally, I don't take it personally. It doesn't make one a bad member of Twins Daily. It just means I found myself at a point where the moderators felt they needed to step in.

 

 

(In truth, they might have felt the need to step in for reasons far beyond my post. They might have thought it was similar to a post where they failed to step in. The might have felt that there was a rush of questionable posts and they needed to tighten the bolts a bit. It might have just been that a moderator was having a bad night. Or it might have been that I was. Whatever. It happens.)

 

 

Regardless, if we believe they generally do an outstanding job (and I do) then I try to handle the conflict like an adult and get on with the rest of my posts. Which, by the way, might include posting something in this thread to suggest a differing opinion. That's fine, but I try not to let it fester. This is easily the best place to talk Twins baseball on the web. It would not be if not for an enormous amount of extra work (and self-examination) by the moderators. One hand slap is a small price to pay for that, IMHO.

[Guest USAFChief]

If I could add one point to the excellent post above, it would be to also remind posters that every moderator is open to a PM asking for clarification on why a post was/wasn't moderated. It might take a day or two (we don't all hang out here 24/7, even if my smarter half thinks I do), but I'm confident all of us will eventually respond to honest questions.

 

I do it myself...I often have to PM Ashbury so he can explain his jokes to me.

[Paul Pleiss]

Not being able to use the word stupid is stupid. Saying that I should avoid using the word stupid even when something is stupid is... stupid.

 

Time to go back to baseball discussion.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

You are allowed to do that just use a different adjective or a less aggressive approach... That would be my suggestion.

 

"Adding Bartlett to the roster is questionable".

 

"I don't understand why they kept Bartlett".

 

"I wouldn't have kept Bartlett and Neither would my Wife".

 

Less aggressive, or more creative? Instead of using the "s" word, perhaps one could make reference to the Twins Kubel/Bartlett clubhouse as an Assisted Living Complex/Salvage Yard/Charitable Thrift Store for Twins from a bygone era? Is that approach more germane to the sophistication of Twins Daily than resorting to the "S" word? Acceptable, or no?

 

It's your website, guys. I appreciate tending to the high level of moderation. We get to play here, but you make the rules, and play umpire. Thanks for the chance to play. If you build it, we will come.

[clutterheart]

You are allowed to do that just use a different adjective or a less aggressive approach... That would be my suggestion.

 

.

 

You are making this man sad:

[Ultima Ratio]

Euphemisms….

 

 

 

this is just an April Fool's wind up right?

[old nurse]

I suggest this site not be so full of itself. At its heart this site is a copy of Dickie Thon Twins Forum with better writers and better formatting. So don't make it more than it is. Your audience is people who are used to reading on the internet and the words boobs and penis shouldn't elicit any negative response.

And if it does, what does it matter?

People being so full of themselves is part of the charm of the site.

[old nurse]

Not being able to use the word stupid is stupid. Saying that I should avoid using the word stupid even when something is stupid is... stupid.

 

Time to go back to baseball discussion.

 

Explain why something is stupid and you shouldn't have to use the word. If it isn't obvious from what you wrote, then it isn't stupid.