Thread Deletion

[DaveW]

Why was the Terry Ryan/Plouffe/RBI thread deleted? It wasn't getting out of hand and brings up a legitimate concern/issue. It seems that ANYTHING that is even close to negative gets instantly deleted, especially in regards to the Twins "brain trust"

Disappointing.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Ditto.

 

Which leads to another question. Rhetorical question. Would you rather have a really good original post and then watch the thread turn to trash and then killed instantly with a "Moderator note:", or would you like to see if a thread that starts as a joke or backhand compliment might actually turn into a good discussion. For a moment, I thought the RBI thread was turning into an actual discussion.

[DaveW]

Agreed, it was going fine, nobody was bickering etc at some point you guys need to allow some free form discussion to form

[USAFChief]

We felt the thread had reached the point where insults and bickering had replaced discussion.

 

There were posts that got deleted before the thread went away. If you missed those posts, perhaps that helps explain your confusion.

[diehardtwinsfan]

That thread hadn't hit its first page and there were already reports and deleted posts (and I find your comment that it was going fine amusing given that you reported a comment in that same thread).  Perhaps if it had been constructed in a manner that wasn't designed to stir the pot, it would have stayed.  But given that it succeeded in doing that right off the bat, it seemed wiser to just delete it. 

Believe it or not, most of us have a pretty low tolerance at this point in dealing with bickering and even more so when the thread was designed to encourage it.  It gets old Dave.

[DaveW]

That thread hadn't hit its first page and there were already reports and deleted posts (and I find your comment that it was going fine amusing given that you reported a comment in that same thread). Perhaps if it had been constructed in a manner that wasn't designed to stir the pot, it would have stayed. But given that it succeeded in doing that right off the bat, it seemed wiser to just delete it.

Believe it or not, most of us have a pretty low tolerance at this point in dealing with bickering and even more so when the thread was designed to encourage it. It gets old Dave.

Reports should remain confidential, very dissapointed you would make that public.

 

I reported one specific comment that could have derailed the thread, it was deleted like it should and then you decided to delete the whole thread.

Whatever do what you want, it's your site.... if you don't want people to inject a little sarcasm from time to time the forums are going to be boring as hell (the posting has already slowed up quite a bit anyways)

[twinsnorth49]

 

Ditto.

 

Which leads to another question. Rhetorical question. Would you rather have a really good original post and then watch the thread turn to trash and then killed instantly with a "Moderator note:", or would you like to see if a thread that starts as a joke or backhand compliment might actually turn into a good discussion. For a moment, I thought the RBI thread was turning into an actual discussion.

Moderator notes are used to keep discussion on topic and to prevent threadjacking and bickering, which ruin threads. If you feel that kills threads then I think you need a new perspective, we allow plenty of leeway, if you don't believe that I suggest you read most of the threads up at the moment.

 

In response to your rhetorical question, I would rather have a really good original post not turn to trash with the same boring rhetoric most people around here are tired of.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Reports should remain confidential, very dissapointed you would make that public.

I reported one specific comment that could have derailed the thread, it was deleted like it should and then you decided to delete the whole thread.
Whatever do what you want, it's your site.... if you don't want people to inject a little sarcasm from time to time the forums are going to be boring as hell (the posting has already slowed up quite a bit anyways)

GIve it a rest Dave, first off Diehard didn't say you reported a post, he said there were posts reported, so you outed yourself and no confidentiality was breached, he didn't name a single name in fact.  

 

Your first sentence is just ethical grandstanding, very noble. I think you're overreacting, the group felt this was just another tired thread about the same tired topic that was ultimately going to go in the same tired direction. Protests about not allowing sarcasm from time to time are ridiculous, there is plenty of leeway given in that regard. 

 

And you have no idea on site traffic, that's merely a shot and you know it.

[DaveW]

 

GIve it a rest Dave, first off Diehard didn't say you reported a post, he said there were posts reported, so you outed yourself and no confidentiality was breached, he didn't name a single name in fact.  

 

 

 

 

(and I find your comment that it was going fine amusing given that you reported a comment in that same thread)

 

[DaveW]

 

 

 

And you have no idea on site traffic, that's merely a shot and you know it.

I never talked about site traffic, this is twice you have missed a key point (the first of which was saying Diehard didn't mention me)  I talked about posting on the Twins page, posting hasn't been very busy as of late. It's not a "shot" at all, there just isn't a whole lot of things to talk about currently, so I am not sure why you would remove a thread that people were actually viewing/responding to.

 

But since you bring that topic up, I DO in fact know what the site traffic currently is and what it has been each month for the last couple years, it's not my place to "report" it, as it's up to the owners what to disclosure or not to disclose. I will send you a PM with my proof, but again, I never mentioned "site traffic" I mentioned posting has been down on the Twins page, so deleting that thread made even less sense.

[Craig Arko]

I'm kind of sorry I missed that thread, in a strange watching a train wreck in slow motion kind of way.

 

But I rest easy with confidence that there will be more.

[DaveW]

 

I'm kind of sorry I missed that thread, in a strange watching a train wreck in slow motion kind of way.

 

But I rest easy with confidence that there will be more.

Honestly, you didn't miss much, it was mostly about the value of RBIs in regards to Plouffe (since Ryan said something to the effect of, why do people want to trade Plouffe? He lead us in RBIS!")

[twinsnorth49]

 

I never talked about site traffic, this is twice you have missed a key point (the first of which was saying Diehard didn't mention me)  I talked about posting on the Twins page, posting hasn't been very busy as of late. It's not a "shot" at all, there just isn't a whole lot of things to talk about currently, so I am not sure why you would remove a thread that people were actually viewing/responding to.

 

But since you bring that topic up, I DO in fact know what the site traffic currently is and what it has been each month for the last couple years, it's not my place to "report" it, as it's up to the owners what to disclosure or not to disclose. I will send you a PM with my proof, but again, I never mentioned "site traffic" I mentioned posting has been down on the Twins page, so deleting that thread made even less sense.

Yes, your point about posting slowing up clearly meant something else........

 

I'm not surprised by disagreement on some moderator action, but I think you doth protest too much.

 

 

[DaveW]

Posting on the twins forum, it's the off season, it's what happens, hence why I don't understand why a thread that was getting discussion from several people was deleted so quickly.

 

Meanwhile posting is up on several other twins daily forums and sister sites (Vikings daily wild etc)

 

Never once mentioned traffic

[DaveW]

Anyways though, it's all good, if it looked like I was taking a "shot" I apologize, as I obviously like the site, owners etc and wish them every chance of success.

 

It was more just about whybthebthread was deleted etc but all good.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Reports should remain confidential, very dissapointed you would make that public.

I reported one specific comment that could have derailed the thread, it was deleted like it should and then you decided to delete the whole thread.
Whatever do what you want, it's your site.... if you don't want people to inject a little sarcasm from time to time the forums are going to be boring as hell (the posting has already slowed up quite a bit anyways)

 

You made this public when you created this thread.  My apologies for mentioning that you reported a comment in the thread, but let's be clear, you also said in the opening post in this thread that it was going just fine (which your actions said otherwise). 

 

I don't think anyone has a problem with humor.  Your Simpsons thread is a great example of that, and it is one that I know a lot of us really appreciate.  But sarcastic digs are often found to be offensive, and hiding a personal shot behind it is a problem.  No one knows what your original intent was with that thread, but I can say that based on the comments that we deleted, people didn't find it nearly as funny as you would have liked.  I hid your thread because the bickering started immediately and the content as it was written was going to make it very difficult to preserve the thread.   

[DaveW]

Fair enough, I just think you were quick on the trigger and there was some good discussion going on (i.e. What the common fan these days do and don't know in regards to ops Obp etc) I would have just preferred you ban the bickering people (it was really only one that I saw) or tell them to keep out of the thread, maybe I will just start a new one about "what stats should front offices talk about when dealing with the average fan" etc

[formerly33]

 

Posting on the twins forum, it's the off season, it's what happens, hence why I don't understand why a thread that was getting discussion from several people was deleted so quickly.

Meanwhile posting is up on several other twins daily forums and sister sites (Vikings daily wild etc)

Never once mentioned traffic

Don't worry Dave. Twins Daily's offseason doesn't coincide with Vikings Journal or Wild Xtra's.