Martini Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 If you wanted to get people talking about the rules in a serious way you have succeeded. I hope that this will generate the results you were looking for without the need to lump people together in a group where they all wear the same stupid avatar like a prison uniform. For the most part you mods have a thankless job keeping this site in order. I recognize all of your efforts in merging and closing threads. Thank you. I have read all twelve pages of replys and I still think its a good idea in concept and the wrong thing to implement. Long Live the Message Board! :helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor The Invincible Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Note to self: Start posting redudent topics for future discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washskins81 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Well, I read the entire thread on this subject and saw some decent arguments both ways. I, honestly, have mixed feelings about the whole thing, so I will break it down into two logical, opposing arguments. I completely understand the need for something like this and, if it does go into effect, I will support it. Not simply because I am forced to, but because the powers at be find a need for it, and face it people, they do all the damn work. In my short time here, compared to most, I do believe that Art, TK, Om, etc etc etc, are genuine and fair guys, and they do a fantastic job managing a site that, frankly, is filled with as many jackasses as it is sensible, friendly fellow redskins fans. Also, we shouldn't all be naive to think that these gentlemen don't have lives too, as was stated in an earlier post. If this is something that will help them manage and, more importantly, maintain a site that they, and we, have come to love so dearly, then I think Art was generous in even presenting it to us pre-application. And, if this helps at all to tone down the innumerable amount of negative response posts a thread starter receives from said "jackasses", then I am altogether for it. That, I agree with some others, is a bigger problem than repetitive posts. Two birds with one stone, metaphorically speaking. Now to the argument. I do not know if I can put this side of the coin into any better words than the other opposers have, and not get bashed immediately by Die Hard for it (just joking dude), but I will try. Principle is the first word that comes to mind. I do not want to compare this to real life, but the lot of us come here on a regular basis, so, in effect, isn't it part of our regular life? Most of us here are EXTREME SKINS FANS, hence the name of the site. Just because someone might be more knowledgeable about redskins history, NFL history, stats, blah blah blah, doesn't necessarily mean he loves the redskins anymore than I do. I am one of the biggest Art Monk fans on the planet. Could I rattle off his yearly stats or, even better, his lifetime stats from the top of my head? Probably not. Does that make me any less of a Monk fan? Some would say yes, i'm sure, and those type of people are as obvious as the day is long. But most, I hope, would say no. I seem to have gone off on a tangent there, so let me reel it back in. There is a deffinite hierarchy on this website, I don't think anyone can argue that. The most learned fans tend to be the most respected and, most of the time, rightly so. I am just afraid that us common folk, people who don't have photographic memories nor libraries of stats inside our heads (or post counts over.....whats the proverbial cutoff? 5000?), will mainly be the ones who suffer for it in the end. Its easy for the vets to express themselves, they've been here long enough to know the ropes. But this will make a lot of others (can't say all cause some people just aren't afraid of $*) afraid to or, at least, a little timid in posting anything, let alone starting a thread. This is supposed to be a site thats FUN to go to, right? I think making people afraid to say anything by "laying the law down" might be taking a chance on obtaining poor results. Not poor in some individuals eyes, but poor for the potential growth of this site. There is also the issue of the determination and enforcement of rules. I know you have to agree to the rules and regulations before you can log on, but really, what percentage of the inhabitants of this site do you think took the time to read them over? Not saying its ok not too, just saying its not probable that most did. I, for one, am a rebel at heart. The "rules are made to be broken" cliche fits into a lot of people's way of thinking. Its not always necessarily an intentional slap at the lawmakers, just an inherant trait in people not to like to be told what to do, say, or feel. Who does 55 in a 55 zone, honestly? Not the greatest example, but just a quick one. People will get caught doing wrong from time to time, they always do, but the implementation of this new group will make it a lot easier to be singled out and, ultimately, punished for making a mistake that was or was not intentional. People get ticked off about things like that, whether we care if they do or not, and we could lose members that we didn't necessarily want to because of it. I could make a few more points for the con side of this issue, but i'm sure I will get mauled for this posts length as it is. The argument for the new group is what it is. Its solid, makes sense in a convenience fashion, and appeals to a lot of people. Which is why it only takes one paragraph to explain it. The argument against it is more porous, by nature, but hits on more of the legality of the situation, for lack of a better word, hence the reason for more explanation. Don't think, because of anything I have said, that I will not try my hardest to comply with the rules every time I am here. I will. I started threads early on, but stopped after a bit and just started posting replies. Its just easier that way. I know that the mods will make the best decision possible for this site, no matter what that may be. I like this site a lot, and hope to be a member for years to come. HTTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 :cry:Man... For some reason seeing all of those words depressed me... But I think that it would be a good idea for this new group. Help keep everything clear instead of having to spend a lot of time sorting through junk that I do not want to read. It is a good idea as long as the mods use discretion (sp?) when adding people to the group. I would hate to have someone new come on, or anyone for that matter, and get added just like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 After reading through this thread... I vote "Good Idea" Go Art Go!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Thanks for the thoughtful post, 81. About the only thing I'm inclined to add/mention is in regards to your point about the how the board is supposed to be fun. Couldn't agree more ... so I'd point out that fun is also in the eye of the beholder. For every potential poster who interprets MB "fun" as being able to start threads pretty much at will, for example, there is another who interprets it as being able to come to a board and find a clean, uncluttered, unredundant list of topics to choose from. Our job as mods is to try to find a balance between giving every individual what he/she wants and expects from their MB, as well as balancing those individual wants/expectatiions against what we perceive as the wants/expectations of the community at large. There's a Mr. Spock quote in there somewhere, I think. But I'll spare us all going down that road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akorn22 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I've said just about all i can to support my view on this matter. However I do want to conclude with a few points: On page 10 of this thread, the Grim Reefa said this: I haven't gone through all 10 pages, so excuse me if the concerns have already been brought up. i felt this sentence was important because it shows that ppl don;t want to have to rummage through 10+ pages of posts just to find an answer/fact/opinion/quote/etc. If the group idea is instituted, i have a good feeling that the number of posts per given thread will increase dramatically. There are going to be PLENTY of people that will make repetative posts within a given thread because they don;t feel like reading through all the posts. Also, there will be numerous ppl in the group who will publicly complaing within threads about being in the group. There will also be the risk of threads going way off topic. (i realize that these points were brought up before, but i felt the need to restate them because they are very good and valid points that should be given thought) To the moderators: I respect what you do on this site because I love this site. I realise that you want to cut down on repetative threads but I just hope that you guys go into this issue with an open mind. One concern that i am having is that it seems like the mods already know that they are going make the new group (i base that on all the mod's posts within the thread). I hope that you think this through long and hard and make the decision that would be best for the whole site. THank you for listening to my arguements today To the ppl who make repetative threads: After going through this thread today, I am going to make every effort to stop my bad habit of repeated posting. If any of you reading this has made repetative threads, please make a concerted effort to think and search before you post. I myself am definatly going to use my head before posting. Maybe if we can dramatically cut down on repetative and useless posts, we will not have to be subjected to a group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Im still in favor of capital punishment, but hey, thats why im not a mod. Well, its one reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSF Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Well since I'm averaging about one new thread a year, it doesn't bother me too much as of right now. Personally, I'll support it, as long as it proves to be an effective tool limiting the clutter on the board and nothing more. I've been visiting ExtremeSkins for quite a few years now, mostly just to read the insight offered by others as opposed to posting my own. I admit that the clutter created from 30 threads on the same topic is a little difficult to overcome at times. However, the problem that everyone is attempting to remedy has always been present, just not to the extent we've seen recently due to the increase of members in my opinion. So therein lies the problem, will this be an effective tool that limits the clutter on the board? I'm going to guess that this won't have the desired impact you all may wish it did, unfortunately. Again though, I said I would support it and I will, as I believe your intentions to be in line with improving the quality of the board. As for my concerns.... Judging solely from my own experiences, my main concern would be that this would have a reverse effect and actually discourage the new, intelligent, yet timid fans from posting at all. In the process, losing what may be some valuable insight from a "fan". I agree with '81 that there is a definite hierarchy in place that only intensified once the board became the "Official Message Board of the Washington Redskins". I think the board has done an excellent job of really promoting discussions and allowing fans a way to interact among each other and with the team on a whole, regardless if you're a "learned" fan or not. I'd just hate to see something put into place that would negate even a portion of what has been accomplished to date. That pretty much sums up what my thinking on the situation as is. You have my vote to proceed, as long as everything is kept in perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 This is dangerous ground on which you tread. Are you sure you want to play "god"? :2cents: Art IS god, silly. Didn't you read the forum rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 WS Skinn44 I have read the rules and I apprecaiate your humor. DSF makes makes some good points. As I said before what you risk to lose far outweighs the benefits of this measure. One of the most important things mentioned by DSF is that this has "always" been an issue. A drastic measure and that is what this is, in fact anytime you open up the rule book to add to it should be considered a drastic measure, a drastic measure such as this should only be taken as a last resort. Lets face it no one wants to restrict anyones freedom to enjoy this community, the rules are meant to make it safe ( a little william wallace for ya). Some will argue that its about the enjoyment of all.....what you forget is someone really enjoyed creating that duplicate, triplicate thread. With all that in mind it seems the desicion has been made. So lets all work hard to find a good avatar, perhaps the speak no evil monkey is appropriate or an ape with a bullhorn, I dont know. I think I have created two threads one having been closed. That was enough for me to think long and hard before starting another. Try to find another means of limiting the redundant threads before removing the "new thread" button, after all we keep coming back for those new threads. :helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 I just want to reiterate something some seem to have missed in the equation. We have temp bans, perm bans and read-only features to use to maintain some order in the chaos. Those are drastic measures. THIS is hardly a measure at all. This isn't opening up the rules or changing them, SAVE to PREVENT more severe punishment for the rules. We were having to ban people to get the point across and that just felt wrong. We don't view this as drastic. We view this as a way to LIMIT punishment while still giving people direction that may help limit the need to repetitively tell people their post is already on the board. Maybe this kills two birds with one stone while STILL allowing the member to be a part of the community. It seems this would be a far more desirable method than taking away all rights or removing the member from the community altogether. Is that not fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 Oh, and Martini, you've started 8 threads. Two have been closed. One for what was deemed an unnecessary shot at opposing fans, but that wouldn't have qualified for here. The other for posting Williams was signed as the coordinator for an extension which would have . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Oh, and Martini, you've started 8 threads. Two have been closed. One for what was deemed an unnecessary shot at opposing fans, but that wouldn't have qualified for here. The other for posting Williams was signed as the coordinator for an extension which would have . Ok point made. How soon we forget these things. Thanks for the great site. I really hope this works out well. HTTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 Ok point made. How soon we forget these things.Thanks for the great site. I really hope this works out well. HTTR. The point was to mention if this group wasn't in place and you made a post that qualified for it, would you prefer THIS group for breaking the rules or a ban/read-only status? My guess is this group. We're trying to find a way not only to cure the problem, but also help make the members more attentive and responsive while not cutting them out of the equation entirely. Lessening the punishment but trying to get a tool that will allow some action to be taken other than saying "Stop, or I'll say stop again." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark327 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Instead of "blocking" people that do not behave the way you would like, why not go the other direction???Create an "Elite Members" forum. It would be similar to the Stadium forum, but would be by invitation only. And membership could be revoked if the specified ground rules were not adhered to. I would LOVE to see this type of forum here for serious fans, so we can have intelligent discourse without having to endure the issues you are concerned with OR the foul personal attacks that some make on our front office, coaching staff, or team members. Criticism is fine, but inane posts, repetitive threads, and personal attacks are so annoying it would be great to have a place to go that is free of all that. This is an idea that i hope never comes to excist here on Extremeskins. There are alot of members who just like to read what's going on with our Redskins . Myself ,being one of them . Since i have become a member , i have created at most 4 threads give or take 1 , responded to 1200 others and only because i caught the thread early enough to say what i felt or asked a question before someone else has. Most of which is usually the case with the size of membership this site has. This idea will only hurt the good reputation this site has. As for the threads original topic , i voted yes ,if it will keep a good topic on the front page for at least 10 minutes . :2cents: HTTR :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isifhan Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 There is and I believe everyone has that ability already. Let me check.Nope, I was wrong. We don't have that turned on. We might have to do that too. No reason a person shouldn't be able to delete his own posts. Chiming in late here. The above idea is great particularly for people who make honest mistakes and aren't too lazy to correct them. I also agree with the group idea and voted as such. It's not about censorship, what it boils down to not being lazy and I'm in full support of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Mods, would the "group" be restricted from posting new threads in the Tailgate, or just the Stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NattyLight Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I love the idea. Another board I frequent is structured this way, and it's a lot more "Productive". It also has a suggestion sub-level board in which the original poster and mods are the only ones that can post on the thread, and then the mods decide whether its post worthy on the main forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 Mods, would the "group" be restricted from posting new threads in the Tailgate, or just the Stadium? Everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsman4u Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I vote yes there should be a No New Group Thread.....actually you shouldn't be starting threads unless you have 4,000 posts and then they must go through a filtering process. But for the most part 98% of the time your interest has been addressed. All you have to do is search....Lets see what is my current interest? Oh! RBs, what about them? Depth at the RB position...okay now let's see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsman4u Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Best Redskins RB Ever? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A while ago I posted who I thought was the greatest QB in Skins history (Jurgensen #9). Now I'm asking whose the best Running Back? This is a tough one. I would say John Riggins but of course CP and Stephen Davis aren't far behind. The above was posted by Skinsfan: But wow look at that; Ladies and gentlemen the search key actually works! And it only took about 2 minutes to search my subject of interest. Thanks ES you have a card catalogue that covers everything that's Reedskin related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxskins Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I think its a great idea ART and I hope it works out well. This will definetly help those who only visit the board every so often and wont miss out on anything important posted. So if this idea cuts down on the amount of threads repeated or gets rid of usless threads that take up front page space, then I'm all for it. Especially me becuase I'm a front page viewer and don't have the time to search all day through threads to find new information regarding the Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this or not, but the poll numbers don't seem right. For the people against it, I counted (Each time, out of three times) 52, not 61. I didn't count those for it, so I don't know how accurate that is. Does it not list names after a certain amount have been counted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 Doesn't list guests who may have voted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.