Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Proposed Twins Daily Comment Policy - Feedback Desired

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#41 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 666 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 05:31 PM

I'm good with these rules assuming they are enforced reasonably, which I am confident they will be.

Sure, a good chunk of comments on this site could be found in violation if one were inclined to enforce every one of these rules to the letter.

But they've never operated that way here, and I seriously doubt they're go to start operating that way.

#42 deanlambrecht

deanlambrecht

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 209 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 05:36 PM

I'll give a general thumbs up and address the free speech argument. There is no constitutionally protected free speech right recognized here (or in any place like it). There is no right to free speech on a forum that you don't personally own. I appreciate your advocacy of it, John, and I would do the same. However, this isn't a "free place" in any sense of the term. It's a private website.

I only say this because I've seen, on other forums, people jump all over this to criticize and make wild claims about a right to free speech on someone else's website. They're wrong. Just like if you walk into my house and start saying things I don't want you to say, I can stop you from saying it by warning you, and eventually throwing you out if you don't stop. Same rules apply to a private website on the internets.

#43 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 August 2012 - 05:43 PM

It's you guys' website, you can obviously do as you wish.

But, since you asked for input...I don't have a real problem with any of this, but were I you, I'd be careful about becoming so straight-laced, so PC, so vanilla, that you start driving away as many fans as you attract.

This is a website about a sports team. Passions run deep, as they should. Be careful you don't damp out the reason people come here in the first place.

And, BTW, thanks again to all five of you for all the work you put into this.

#44 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,986 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 22 August 2012 - 06:14 PM

To follow up on what Chief said, just remember:

Independent. In-depth. Irreverent. Individuals.


Thanks for providing the site.

#45 DaveW

DaveW

    Aaron Hicks update (5/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS

  • Banned
  • 13,014 posts
  • LocationNYC aka Aaron Hicks Ville

Posted 22 August 2012 - 11:00 PM

The guidelines are solid, but you guys shouldn't try to rule with an iron fist. Handing out bans/deleting posts isn't the best way to moderate a solid forum.

Anyone who steps over the line should be banned, but anything borderline should prob be taken with a grain of salt until it becomes a huge distraction/issue.

Honestly I think 99.9% of the posts and posters thus far have been fine, and there is only one or two worthless posters who eventually will be banned/grow tired anyways.

#46 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,879 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 05:18 AM

And that's how we feel about it, Dave. The community has been great and barring a few exceptions, hasn't done anything close to ban-worthy. Personally, I don't expect even that to continue... As people adjust, I expect to see bans drop to almost zero. Most people aren't interested in trolling and once we sort out a few bad seeds, things should hum along just fine. If the forum is going strong and we're not getting complaints, we certainly won't go out of our way to ban people for minor infractions (none of us like banning people in the first place).

#47 Jeff P

Jeff P

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 08:07 AM

I'll give a general thumbs up and address the free speech argument. There is no constitutionally protected free speech right recognized here (or in any place like it). There is no right to free speech on a forum that you don't personally own. I appreciate your advocacy of it, John, and I would do the same. However, this isn't a "free place" in any sense of the term. It's a private website.

I only say this because I've seen, on other forums, people jump all over this to criticize and make wild claims about a right to free speech on someone else's website. They're wrong. Just like if you walk into my house and start saying things I don't want you to say, I can stop you from saying it by warning you, and eventually throwing you out if you don't stop. Same rules apply to a private website on the internets.


Yea there are some that seem to believe that their constitutional rights have been violated which of course incorrect. However others are really just saying: this is America! Stop being a wimp! And on that latter point, I have seen moderators enjoy using their power instead of letting people debate.

I think the rules posted are fine in theory, we will see how they play out in real life. I give you credit for posting and asking for feedback and believe that a posting of the rules is appropriate if you are going to be deleting posts; hopefully in practice a free exchange of opinions will be encouraged and the powers that be will err on the side of free speech and not censorship.

It's weird because I should like these rules more than I do. We have all seen posts that are just attacks or dismiss the worthiness of debating a topic. The negativity can feed on itself and be a disincentive to post of even visit the site. So I get it: rules are needed.

Jeff

#48 ofx1

ofx1

    Member

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 04:48 PM

And that's how we feel about it, Dave. The community has been great and barring a few exceptions, hasn't done anything close to ban-worthy. Personally, I don't expect even that to continue... As people adjust, I expect to see bans drop to almost zero. Most people aren't interested in trolling and once we sort out a few bad seeds, things should hum along just fine. If the forum is going strong and we're not getting complaints, we certainly won't go out of our way to ban people for minor infractions (none of us like banning people in the first place).


you **** stupid ***** ****face

#49 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,879 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 04:51 PM

you **** stupid ***** ****face


I will bounce you out of here faster than a Frogtown "lady" at church on Easter if you keep it up, mister.

#50 ofx1

ofx1

    Member

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 04:55 PM

you **** stupid ***** ****face


I will bounce you out of here faster than a Frogtown "lady" at church on Easter if you keep it up, mister.


Your quote, I'm still trying to figure out what it means... :)

#51 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,879 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 04:58 PM

Your quote, I'm still trying to figure out what it means... :)


Drink more. That always helps me think.

#52 ofx1

ofx1

    Member

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 04:37 PM


Your quote, I'm still trying to figure out what it means... :)


Drink more. That always helps me think.


No drinks, but I'm on moderation now. What did I say that violated the new 725 posting rules? I admit to not reading them.

#53 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,879 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 04:40 PM

No drinks, but I'm on moderation now. What did I say that violated the new 725 posting rules? I admit to not reading them.


If we ever moderate you for anything, just consider it a pre-emptive strike.

#54 ofx1

ofx1

    Member

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 04:45 PM


No drinks, but I'm on moderation now. What did I say that violated the new 725 posting rules? I admit to not reading them.


If we ever moderate you for anything, just consider it a pre-emptive strike.


You already did, I was just trying to figure out why. That said, I've already spent too much of my weekend wondering why - it is what it is, I guess.

#55 powrwrap

powrwrap

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 462 posts

Posted 25 August 2012 - 11:30 AM

I'm on board with these rules, esp. #2.

You might want to consider a rule about not allowing discussing what goes on at other forums on Twins Daily Forums. Example: "Did you see the flamewar between Mike and Dave over at MajorLeagueTwits?" and then there may or may not be a link to that material. I assume you don't want Twins Daily to be a source for more eyeballs to see a flame war or other futile discussions at other sites.
[FONT=comic sans ms]"Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand." [/FONT]

#56 iastfan112

iastfan112

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 248 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 01:20 PM

It's you guys' website, you can obviously do as you wish.

But, since you asked for input...I don't have a real problem with any of this, but were I you, I'd be careful about becoming so straight-laced, so PC, so vanilla, that you start driving away as many fans as you attract.

This is a website about a sports team. Passions run deep, as they should. Be careful you don't damp out the reason people come here in the first place.

And, BTW, thanks again to all five of you for all the work you put into this.


Big fan of what Chief said here, its why I'm not a fan of rule #1. This is part of the site is a forum not a blog and not every post needs to be meaningful and constructive imo. Everything else seems pretty reasonable.

#57 Twins Twerp

Twins Twerp

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 845 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 02:18 PM

"PLAGERISM, if you use someone else's work, quote them. If you are found to be plagerizing, you will sent to the principal and your reply will be thrown away" (Ryan, 74).

#58 Ultima Ratio

Ultima Ratio

    Assistant to the General Manager

  • Members
  • 2,346 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted 29 August 2012 - 02:21 PM

"PLAGERISM, if you use someone else's work, quote them. If you are found to be plagerizing, you will sent to the principal and your reply will be thrown away" (Ryan, 74).


Insufficient citation. You need a footnote, endnote or works cited to accurately reference and attribute your quote. Parenthetical in-text citations won't do.

Should'a gone fishing


#59 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Baseball and thought

  • Members
  • 8,638 posts
  • LocationThe ballpark of the mind

Posted 03 September 2012 - 05:12 PM

Is this proposal near adoption, or do you anticipate a round (or so) of revision?

Thanks.

#60 ashbury

ashbury

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,661 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:20 PM

I can try to cut down on the swear words but it won't be easy.