Vent Thread

[valpocrewsader]

There is no vent thread right now. Someone tried to start a new vent thread. It was shut down. It had two posts in it, one a very lengthy set of thoughts contributed by a regular.

 

While this forum's staff's overwhleming denial of the existence and relevance of negative opinions is well-documented, even this shameful display of censorship and over-protectiveness was surprising to me. The double-standard is maddening. Over-exuberant and impulsive posts on the side of happy are never ever questioned or scolded, even if the quality of the post is terrible. Yet negative posts of all shapes, sizes, and colors are candidates for locked threads, condescension without reprimand, and sudden "quality assurance" scrutiny.

 

I know, if I don't like I can go somewhere else. Or I can voice my opinion to the community when I see room for improvement....

[1992casey]

Losing the vent thread is more about post quality than anything else. Some of the lousiest post quality on this board tends to land in the vent thread.

 

I think you make a reasonable point by mentioning that the locked thread contains a message that was mostly a "set of thoughts." It would have been a fit elsewhere, though, and if that member wants to make that message fit into another thread, he's welcome to.

 

Nobody among the mods or staff is against the idea of expressing negative opinions. The issue involved is that like the vents: post quality tends to go downhill as negativity goes up. Discussing the negative is certainly as important, if not more important, than discussing the positive. However, members can certainly address the negative without making a foray into obnoxiousness.

[PeaveyFury]

While this forum's staff's overwhleming denial of the existence and relevance of negative opinions is well-documented

 

Yeah, that 200-page vent thread during the season is a shining example of that denial...

 

And my goodness, I assume you've read threads here the past couple of days- can you seriously claim that negative opinions are denied existence here? They're all over the place, in nearly every thread in the Major League forum and are in numerous trade rumors threads. I'd think if there was an"overwhelming" suppression of negative opinions by the forum staff, that wouldn't be the case, right?

 

Over-exuberant and impulsive posts on the side of happy are never ever questioned or scolded, even if the quality of the post is terrible. Yet negative posts of all shapes, sizes, and colors are candidates for locked threads, condescension without reprimand, and sudden "quality assurance" scrutiny.

 

I assume you can provide examples? If what you claim is valid, I should think that you should be able to easily provide examples of each of the above mentioned behaviors without much difficulty.

 

Personally, I think the negative opinions far out-weigh the positives here right now. If that's the case, I can't see how that side of things is being pushed down in anyway, because it's everywhere. And just because a specific thread was locked that was started to lump the negative opinions there doesn't equal oppression. In fact, by locking that thread, it implies that the negative opinions are fine in the other threads instead of them being put in one specific place. As was posted in the thread in question:

 

If one truly feels that strongly opposed to something, it's preferable that they formulate a well thought out argument that contributes to discussion in an already existing thread or stimulates discussion in a new thread of its own.

 

I don't see why that should seem unreasonable to you at all, really.

[DougJones43]

Does this mean that there will be no vent thread during the season? I know that there were "non-quality" posts in the vent thread that were somewhat impulsive and emotional, but I thought that was sort of the point -- so that that stuff didn't end up ruining other threads of substance.

 

If you think that eliminating the vent thread will eliminate posts of irrational frustration, I think you're wrong. My guess is they will still be present, but end up contaminating productive discussions in other threads.

[1992casey]

Does this mean that there will be no vent thread during the season?

 

Any decision would be up to b19, but I can tell you that mods have discussed this. This is what we've been telling new members for the past several months:

If you want a place to blow off steam by declaring players or team staff worthless when the Brewers play poorly, this is not the forum for you. If you want to discuss the Brewers intelligently and respectfully, then this may indeed be the place for you.

[Fatter than Joey]

Some of the lousiest post quality on this board tends to land in the vent thread.

 

There are lousy posts in every thread almost. I don't think the vent thread was any worse -- if you are truly looking at lousiness. If you didn't like the message in the vent thread, you could easily avoid it.

 

The issue involved is that like the vents: post quality tends to go downhill as negativity goes up.

 

You could say the same thing about as positivity and excitement as well.

 

However, members can certainly address the negative without making a foray into obnoxiousness.

 

Agreed, however, because a post is a vent, does not make it obnoxious. Wouldn't be easier to just delete and warn obnoxious posters?

 

Yeah, that 200-page vent thread during the season is a shining example of that denial...

 

200 pages? -- Probably then the most posted to, and most read thread last year I would guess?

 

Good Luck, in either case.

[brewers19]

While this forum's staff's overwhleming denial of the existence and relevance of negative opinions is well-documented, even this shameful display of censorship and over-protectiveness was surprising to me. The double-standard is maddening. Over-exuberant and impulsive posts on the side of happy are never ever questioned or scolded, even if the quality of the post is terrible. Yet negative posts of all shapes, sizes, and colors are candidates for locked threads, condescension without reprimand, and sudden "quality assurance" scrutiny.

I'm sorry, where exactly is this documented?

 

And if you care to reread my reasoning for locking the thread in question, you'll clearly see that there was no intention of 'censorship and over-protectiveness.' Scoff if you will, but it is indeed about 'quality assurance.' There's no reason to flaunt a collage of negativity on our message board when many of those opinions can fit seamlessly into substantiative and intellectual discussions already taking place. Just as one generally doesn't enjoy associating with individuals who constantly exude an air of negativity, none of us want to operate, read, or participate in a forum where entire discussions are founded entirely upon the concept of impulsively expressing displeasure.

[Fatter than Joey]

Scoff if you will, but it is indeed about 'quality assurance.'

 

Honestly, I can't remember you ever making what I would consider a quality post regarding insight or opinion on the Brewers.

 

substantiative and intellectual discussions already taking place.

 

On this board? -- C'mon -- I am all for good articulate discussion, but "intellectual"?

 

Just as one generally doesn't enjoy associating with individuals who constantly exude an air of negativity, none of us want to operate, read, or participate in a forum where entire discussions are founded entirely upon the concept of impulsively expressing displeasure.

 

As PeaveyFury astutely pointed out -- your "vent thread" had over 200 pages, and probably was your most-viewed thread (I am guessing), in 2008, so based on PF's information I would find your generality, as stated above, to be patently false. Furthermore, people seem to have a hard time grasping the concept that some people are inherently pessimistic, and some are inherently optimistic. While I certainly respect the people that can be forever optimistic, and wish I could be more that way, I tend to relate more to the half-empty point of view.

[brewers19]

Honestly, I can't remember you ever making what I would consider a quality post regarding insight or opinion on the Brewers.

True, but what important information that you chose to ignore is the fact that I don't make low-quality posts either. The vast majority of my posts are administrative in nature, but that doesn't mean that I don't read and take great interest in what discussions are taking place throughout the forum.

 

It is the duty of the moderation staff to ensure that the guidelines of the community are being adhered to, as well as to come up with and implement plans to make the forum better. The fact that a thread composed primarily of isolated rants and complaints is one of the most viewed is not something that we're interested in priding ourselves upon; that's stuff that people can get elsewhere. And while your cynicism may disagree, we're going to make a concerted effort to distance this community from the mentality that that sort of discourse is something that is encouraged or valued here. Appreciate that if you will, but we're doing what we believe will be most beneficial to this site. I realize that not everyone will agree with us and our actions, but that just comes with the territory.

[Brian the Automator]

It's been a while since I've posted regularly due to some pretty intense "real life" things I've had to deal with, but I think the conception of censorship vs. rules and standards is an important one.

 

We've received a large amount of feedback over the course of running the site. Some people have left, either because our standards are too high, or our standards are too low. Some people email us with feedback or start threads like these because controls are too tough, or not tough enough. There's a pretty substantial number of people that contribute to lengthy discussions about what promotes the sites ideals going forward. We've been referred to as Yost-bashers, and Yost-apologists all at the same time.

 

It's very easy for people to criticize (and I don't mean bash) what we do hear, because it's very rare when every decision we make will line up with someone's way they'd optimally like to see the site run. Heck, there are things I've certainly compromised on regarding the site, and ultimately, I'm on the hook for everything here.

 

I'm confident that we've made far more good decisions than bad decisions since we've opened the doors in 2001, and I really think our traffic and our loyalty among site members shows that. That's not to say that we may make decisions that are going to push some people away. I'm not trying to say "deal with it", but at the same time, we're doing what we believe are the best things to make this the premier place to talk about Brewers baseball, and if it means sacrificing posts and views and perhaps even the ability of users to find it unacceptable to post here anymore, we're going to live with those choices.

[Fatter than Joey]

True, but what important information that you chose to ignore is the fact that I don't make low-quality posts either.

 

I am not sure what the value in "not making low-quality posts" is, or how that qualifies as a contribution -- but, rock on.

 

And while your cynicism may disagree, we're going to make a concerted effort to distance this community from the mentality that that sort of discourse is something that is encouraged or valued here.

 

When I was a kid, I used to go through my dad's albums -- of course he had what I thought was a horrible taste in music... This album always stood out to me.

 

http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/I/61B6TKyaX%2BL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

 

At some point in everyone's life, you have to realize that 50,000,000 Elvis fans can't be wrong.

 

Appreciate that if you will, but we're doing what we believe will be most beneficial to this site.

 

I am certain you are, but the vent thread, at the end of the day, much like Elvis, had as many views as it did for a reason. I am not sure what "mentality" or "discourse" you encountered that made you lock that thread, but the posts were certainly decent enough IMO. If locking that thread preserves BF.net for the oncoming year, then I applaud the rigid stance that you took. Otherwise I fear, you are going to lose tangible contributions, and be left with your "non-low quality" posts.

 

I realize it is your site, your rules, my opinion isn't worth rendering, etc... I think you guys are missing the mark though.

[brewers19]

I am not sure what the value in "not making low-quality posts" is, or how that qualifies as a contribution -- but, rock on.

I was simply responding to your implication that because I don't frequently make insightful posts about the Brewers, I'm somehow going against what we're trying to promote. If that wasn't your intention, then I'm afraid I don't really know why you felt need to comment on it in the first place.

 

This site is not a democracy (or like Arby's, for that matter). And it doesn't directly matter how many people visited the vent thread or like Elvis; we don't have an strict obligation to cater to those individuals. We may choose to, but we're not required to. As long as we're not completely alienating our entire membership, we're going to do what we think best adheres to the original goals that this site was founded upon. This site fills a niche, and we're not claiming or striving to appeal to every type of fan out there. Somewhere to blow off steam is something that people can get any number of other places; quality, in-depth discussion about the Brewers organization is something that causes this site to stand out and be successful.

 

There's a lot that we could easily do to bring more traffic to this site if that was our only goal, but it's not. We're not going to betray our ideals just to be more popular.

[PeaveyFury]

I am not sure what the value in "not making low-quality posts" is, or how that qualifies as a contribution

 

It has long been this site's stance that we don't expect everyone to be making posts dissecting the merits of batting the pitcher 8th on the 2nd tuesday of every month when the moon is full, but that we're not going to have the 'OMG, what is Melvin doing!!!!!???!?!??!' posts that are most other places as well.

 

Any new members agree and acknowledge this when they submit their membership application now, BTW.

[Fatter than Joey]

I was simply responding to your implication that because I don't frequently make insightful posts about the Brewers, I'm somehow going against what we're trying to promote. If that wasn't your intention, then I'm afraid I don't really know why you felt need to comment on it in the first place.

 

Quality is a subjective thing, you have never given me anything, that I have felt, was worthwhile to read. Ultimately, your definition of quality stands because of your position, rather than your understanding of what the community views as quality or interesting.

 

There's a lot that we could easily do to bring more traffic to this site if that was our only goal, but it's not.

 

I have never mentioned bringing traffic to the site, nor am I concerned about it.

 

We're not going to betray our ideals just to be more popular.

 

Again, not a concern of mine. I am more concerned, that you do not understand your "niche", nor the contributions that most people value. The vent thread was not a tool that brought in traffic, or made BF.net "more" popular, it was something that was popular with people already here either enjoyed reading, or posting on.

 

I am really not trying to be snarky here, but I sincerely think you guys are missing the mark. In either case, I hope it works well.

[Fatter than Joey]

but that we're not going to have the 'OMG, what is Melvin doing!!!!!???!?!??!' posts that are most other places as well.

 

I appreciate this, and I certainly support more articulate discussion... but the posts in the thread that were locked, were not "OMG posts". Getting rid of the "AOLspeak" is awesome, but that seems to be a different issue than "negativity" which is what I am addressing.

[DougJones43]

I think it's kind of sad that the moderators have decided to try and dictate the "mentality" of the board, although it is obviously your right. The mentality of the board should be steered by the mood and mentality of the fans and posters. That's not to say you shouldn't have rules. There was still no swearing or personal attacks allowed in the vent thread. For the most part I have always thought the rules of this site were fair and made sense, but this goes beyond rules. It seems like an outright attempt to shift the overall tone of the fanbase segment who posts here, in order to fit in with the outlook of the staff. Will the "Silver Lining Thread" be banned as well?

 

Excuse me if this comes across as rude, but I think that some of the moderators here are starting to take themselves and their role a little too seriously. I'm not sure how I feel about continuing to post here if the goal is a sterile environment where the mentality is driven by the moderators.

[PeaveyFury]

but that seems to be a different issue than "negativity" which is what I am addressing.

 

Again, if people have examples of negativity being curbed outside of this vent thread being locked while annoying positivity has been promoted, this would lend credibility to this claim. As of yet, I haven't seen any examples provided.

 

I think the point of the lock is really missed here. I completely admit that I was considering locking the thread as well before B19 did it, but it was because what the poster that started the thread EXPRESSLY stated in the opening post of that thread was that he started it so that a couple of posters who were posting the same thing over and over in every thread were doing it there instead of in every thread. The lock allows negativity to continue in other threads, the issue we have here is giving the same posters who were posting repetitive stuff another avenue to post the same stuff yet again.

It seems like an outright attempt to shift the overall tone of the fanbase segment who posts here, in order to fit in with the outlook of the staff.

 

Again, you're basing that on the locking of ONE thread, by one moderator, which was openly admitted to have been set up to give a couple of specific posters an avenue to express their grief for the 16th time on that particular day?

[Brian the Automator]

Excuse me if this comes across as rude, but I think that some of the moderators here are starting to take themselves and their role a little too seriously. I'm not sure how I feel about continuing to post here if the goal is a sterile environment where the mentality is driven by the moderators.

I agree with you that, as a whole, we're a very organic site, and our coverage and our tendencies move with the flow of the crowd. We used to be an extremely self-policing site, moderators were few, and everything flowed free and easy. The problem, as I see it, is that there are a few people who tend to try to dominate conversation, and feel that through thought repetition and the refusal to just let things die a natural death, it ends up being detrimental to the site. It's very hard to "legislate away" that sort of thing... because what do you do?... post limit counts? limits based on the number of times a particular sentiment occurs from a poster in a given period? It's impossible.

 

I think we've taken moderation more seriously, because the situation has required it. We're sort of into uncharted territory here as far as sports forums go... If there's a model of a forum this big that's been around for a while and hasn't decayed into anarchy, I'm always VERY interested in studying their successes. We've looked at Sons of San Horn and RedsZone.com and are trying to go with a best-of-breed approach to keeping the site strong.

[Fatter than Joey]

if people have examples of negativity being curbed outside of this vent thread being locked while annoying positivity has been promoted, this would lend credibility to this claim

 

I have never made this claim. The only thing I argued was that "as negativity goes up" post quality goes down -- which is probably true -- but I would counter that post quality will always suffer when people are emotional -- be it positive or negative.

 

I took issue with the below --

 

Just as one generally doesn't enjoy associating with individuals who constantly exude an air of negativity, none of us want to operate, read, or participate in a forum where entire discussions are founded entirely upon the concept of impulsively expressing displeasure.

 

***************

 

The lock allows negativity to continue in other threads, the issue we have here is giving the same posters who were posting repetitive stuff another avenue to post the same stuff yet again.

 

It seems to me last year, the Vent Thread was posted to by many different posters.

 

I've said my piece.

[Brian the Automator]

I have never made this claim. The only thing I argued was that "as negativity goes up" post quality goes down -- which is probably true -- but I would counter that post quality will always suffer when people are emotional -- be it positive or negative.

I guess I disagree with that. Geno's always been one of my favorite posters. He's generally negative, and usually emotional. He channels it into something that's always interesting to read, and I think a lot of what has to do with it is that he picks his spots, instead of taking a shotgun approach to things. I will agree that USUALLY post quality is inversely proportional to emotion, but I think there's definitely the opportunity to combat that.

[Fatter than Joey]

I know I said "I've said my piece" -- but I need to add the following....

 

1.) Geno rocks.

2.) Your use of "usually" is better than my use of "always".

[DougJones43]

Again, you're basing that on the locking of ONE thread, by one moderator

I'm really not though.

"Just as one generally doesn't enjoy associating with individuals who constantly exude an air of negativity, none of us want to operate, read, or participate in a forum where entire discussions are founded entirely upon the concept of impulsively expressing displeasure."

This quote, referenced by FTJ earlier, along with other quips in this thread seem to paint a picture that the staff has collectively decided to rid the site of "impulsive expressions of displeasure." That's a philosophy I just can't agree with. I wouldn't want impulsive expressions of happiness to be banned either. It's true that these posts might not be of the highest quality, but they contain the emotion -- and emotion is as big as a part of being a baseball fan as stats or anything else. When something bad happens to the Brewers, I want to come here to share my frustration with other fans. Same thing when something good happens and I want to share my unbridled excitement. I don't like the idea of emotions being suppressed at brewerfan.net.

 

I'm not attempting to tell you all how to run the site. You've done a great job building my favorite sports-related website. Reading Brian's post, I realize it must be incredibly difficult to find the proper balance. However, if the major problem is a handful of posters dominating discussions with repetitive arguments (something that I agree is problematic), I guess I don't see how that relates to the vent thread. However, I digress. Just wanted to share my opinion on the matter.

[logan82]

Are the in game threads going to be held to the same standards as the other threads or are they going to still be a place for people to post whatever comes to mind at that particular time?

[PeaveyFury]

This quote, referenced by FTJ earlier, along with other quips in this thread seem to paint a picture that the staff has collectively decided to rid the site of "impulsive expressions of displeasure."

 

As a member of the moderating team, I can assure you that no such thing has been implemented, decided upon, or even discussed.

 

It seems as though the concerns here have stemmed largely from reading too much into the locking of one thread.

 

However, if the major problem is a handful of posters dominating discussions with repetitive arguments (something that I agree is problematic), I guess I don't see how that relates to the vent thread.

 

The first post of the locked vent thread:

 

I am growing weary of every topic including a new form of...

 

"This offseason is looking like my worst fears realized. "

 

The first response:

 

Well clearly this thread was intended for me and my pessimism towards this offseason. Before I share my thoughts I want to apologize to all those I have annoyed with my negative and panicky rantings.

[JJHardy7]

I respect the mods here and at LL.net, but I do somewhat question not having a vent thread. I don't want to call out posters, but there have been posters who have said pretty much the same negative thought in multiple threads...PF has even called out one poster on exactly what I'm saying. I don't mind not having a vent thread, but I'm sick of the negative posts and how the Brewers are going to the cellar....it's December. I guess I compare it to posts of 'game over' in the in-game thread during the first few innings. It's not needed and IMO there should be a vent thread or some negative posts need to be deleted. It's fine to share good and bad thoughts, but after every move that is made or not made I really don't need to read posts about how the Brewers suck. Again, the mods here are good and I don't have a problem with any of them. I just think not having a vent thread may lead to more and more negative posts in other threads and it appears to be coming from the same posters. I know Brian questioned one of my posts as a 'I told you so', but to be honest I won't post it, but it will be exactly what I'll think when the Brewers make some moves and aren't in the 'cellar'. I think it does the mind well to step back and think with one's head and not on emotion. A team with Braun, Fielder, Hardy, Hart (who is still probably not peaking, made the all-star game, and now sucks according to some), Yo, Parra, CV, etc. is not a team that sucks. If the players grow like we believe they can and a guy like Weeks reaches his potential and guys like Bush, McClung, Dillard, Riske, etc get back on track or develop a bit more I think we'll have a competitive team.

 

I guess my post has become an anti-vent thread in its own, but to be honest there's no need to have 'the sky is falling' in all these threads. I still believe when the dust settles months from now the Brewers will have one of the best off-seasons in terms of total value. It's easy to forget the economy sucks and most are still projecting free agents will be cheap this year. I believe come January and February the Brewers will be signing players that will be great value and reasonable. The sky isn't falling anytime soon in Milwaukee and I would really like to see some negative posts/posters having a thread to hang out and bash the team in December. This team is good and let's remember Braun and Prince haven't reached their prime yet...that's scary.