Sign in to follow this  
Gandalfthecat

Are mods really necesssary?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, oban14 said:

 

Censor personal attacks, spam, etc. No need to be as heavy handed as they are here. I have had dozens of posts deleted. 

I never called you or any mod Nazis. It was a metaphor, allegorical if you will, about how just because a society requires cops, they don't have to be Nazis.

 

To be honest Tony, you are the problem. The users know it. The other mods probably know it and don't have the heart to tell you. The example quoted above does a fine job of showcasing why you arent cut out to be a mod. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best solution is for mods to only consider moderating threads/posts that get reported, particularly by multiple users. That way even mods with questionable judgement can do a good job, and you will know that the users wishes are being respected.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thezing1 said:

Hey all, I am one of the new moderators. It seems like there is a good bit of frustration with some things and that isn't good. Fantasy sports is supposed to be fun and if you aren't having fun that kind of sucks. I am not the kind of person that is interested in assigning blame or determining who is "right" and who is "wrong". The only thing we can do is listen to each other, see if there are ways to change to make this place better, explain some things and our points of view, and be respectful. This forum isn't going to please everyone and that is fine. There are forums that have more and less guidelines and rules. If this isn't working for you then I sincerely hope you find a forum that you are stoked about. But if you care about something like this forum, we all can make some minor tweaks to the way we go about things to better the community. 

 

I am going to kind of go through a couple of posts and provide my insight. It is pretty limited as a moderator since I am new, but maybe that is a good thing. 

 

 

oban14, I don't believe we have interacted on a thread here, but I kind of get what you are saying aside from the part I put in bold. The important thing that Tony has mentioned in his previous responses is that this forum has grown very large and the moderating resources are limited. Moderators can not be perfect. It is impossible. We don't have the time or energy to be perfect because we volunteer our time to trying to make this place better. When something grows very fast you can spend 5% of your resources addressing 95% of the problems and 95% of your resources addressing 5% of the problems. CSB and AC/BC stuff needs to get cleaned up because it isn't fair to expect people to sift through pages of that stuff on a player thread. Unfortunately, that is the reality. Now, if everyone respected the CoC and the posting guidelines than moderators wouldn't have to "clean up" so much. But we can't get to that point until more moderator resources are added and CoC is more closely followed. 

 

Now for the bold...that is your interpretation and you get to have that personal opinion. I can't go off of broad strokes and lumping a bunch of things (the stuff I italicized) into the reasoning why you think that way. Specific examples with context are the only way. 

 

Honestly, it isn't fair to subject people to fighting and things getting out of hand. We all signed up agreeing to the CoC. It really is that simple. If I went to a bar and there was always a fight breaking out during football on Thursday, Sunday, and Monday than I wouldn't go to the bar. I don't go to a bar to spend my time and expect to deal with fights. It isn't civil. 

 

At the end of the day you have expressed your opinion to what you think a fantasy forum should be. And I am sure you aren't alone in your thoughts. That is your opinion. Hopefully you find an outlet where you can have your type of fun with fantasy sports. Unfortunately, the CoC probably doesn't align with your opinions as well as other platforms might. 

Hey @Dreams And Dwightmares, thanks for posting in this thread. Personally, I am so new to being a moderator that I am still trying to find my footing and style of moderating. I am always down for constructive feedback and criticism. In general, if anyone takes the time to thoughtfully express themselves and respectfully critique someone that is something that will make people better in the long run. Not sure about all moderators, but I am always down for feedback. I may not be able to change, but I will hear you out.

This is an example of something that I think everyone needs to be more sensitive to when a forum is as large as this one it. If you are upset or emotional about something than it might be best suited for the Vent Threads. Just being honest, not many people take pleasure in reading about someone's personal fantasy hardships when they are trying to gather information about a player. The vent thread is where the stuff you need to scream on the internet to get it off your chest stuff belongs. The other stuff has to be taken in context. Personally, in NBA for example, if you post about a player and then include a trade that just happened and list the players and the league format I find that valuable, but you have to post it in a way where it is valuable for everyone to draw insights off of and apply it to their specific league settings. 

 

I can go into more detail if needed with an example from NBA last season. But, not all sports forums are created equal. NFL, NBA, and MLB are each unique. 

 

I don't expect perfection. I expect a tolerable experience, which is not happening for me and many others in this thread. This site needs lighter moderation. Moderate spam, porn, doxxing, etc. The stuff 95% if not 100% agree on. No ones day got ruined because I found out what gohawks traded Bell for.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oban14 said:

I never called you or any mod Nazis. It was a metaphor, allegorical if you will, about how just because a society requires cops, they don't have to be Nazis.

 

To be honest Tony, you are the problem. The users know it. The other mods probably know it and don't have the heart to tell you. The example quoted above does a fine job of showcasing why you arent cut out to be a mod. 

 

lol, Censored in a thread talking about censorship.

 

Pretty ironic.

 

I always enjoyed your posts Oban

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oban14 said:

Much like an offensive lineman, if you're a mod and people notice you, you're doing a bad job.

I might say a moderator is like a referee. Offensive lineman that are beasts are pretty noticeable. Either way, I understand the point you are trying to make. I just ask you to remember that we are volunteers as moderators. We don't get paid. If we could lurk in the shadows that would be cool, but we were/are all users that frequented the forums and posted about fantasy sports before we decided to dedicate some of our time to moderating. 

 

2 hours ago, oban14 said:

I think the best solution is for mods to only consider moderating threads/posts that get reported, particularly by multiple users. That way even mods with questionable judgement can do a good job, and you will know that the users wishes are being respected.

Obviously, there is some emotion in this thread. I am going to filter through a bit of it in this post and your other recent posts and just say that I think that your suggestion about multiple users reporting a post is interesting. At the very least, we/I can take away this thought and consider it moving forward. 

 

 

Personally, I would like to keep emotions low and try to keep this thread/conversation as productive as possible and steering away from a vent type of thread. I don't know how that plays out, but let's just keep it civil and as lighthearted as possible. There is so much I didn't know happened with moderators before I became one. Just try to give us the benefit of the doubt that we aren't power hungry people, draconian, etc and we are actually just people that like fantasy sports and this community. I am not even sure it is possible to be a volunteer and power hungry....power hungry volunteer seems like an oxymoron. Anyway. Now with that said, I think the Jordan Howard thread isn't on fire so I would like to spend some time doing what I do best around here....posting the NBA forum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, thezing1 said:

I might say a moderator is like a referee. Offensive lineman that are beasts are pretty noticeable. Either way, I understand the point you are trying to make. I just ask you to remember that we are volunteers as moderators. We don't get paid. If we could lurk in the shadows that would be cool, but we were/are all users that frequented the forums and posted about fantasy sports before we decided to dedicate some of our time to moderating. 

 

Obviously, there is some emotion in this thread. I am going to filter through a bit of it in this post and your other recent posts and just say that I think that your suggestion about multiple users reporting a post is interesting. At the very least, we/I can take away this thought and consider it moving forward. 

 

 

Personally, I would like to keep emotions low and try to keep this thread/conversation as productive as possible and steering away from a vent type of thread. I don't know how that plays out, but let's just keep it civil and as lighthearted as possible. There is so much I didn't know happened with moderators before I became one. Just try to give us the benefit of the doubt that we aren't power hungry people, draconian, etc and we are actually just people that like fantasy sports and this community. I am not even sure it is possible to be a volunteer and power hungry....power hungry volunteer seems like an oxymoron. Anyway. Now with that said, I think the Jordan Howard thread isn't on fire so I would like to spend some time doing what I do best around here....posting the NBA forum. 

Sounds like some scary stuff goes on in the moderator locker room...

 

I have always kept my emotions low on this site and will continue to do so. You're right about moderators being like refs. Did you know there is holding on every single play? Do you know how a game would feel if they called it every time?  Like this forum.  So please, as you are all kind public servants, monks doing gods work for us all, just stop moderating 90% of what you moderate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, oban14 said:

I never called you or any mod Nazis. It was a metaphor, allegorical if you will,

 

So you're just invoking Reductio Ad Hitlerum?  We're not Nazis, we're just like Nazis?

 

Or, since you seem to personalize this for some reason -- *I'm* like a Nazi?

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

4 hours ago, oban14 said:

To be honest Tony, you are the problem. The users know it. The other mods probably know it and don't have the heart to tell you. The example quoted above does a fine job of showcasing why you arent cut out to be a mod. 

 

I guess will look forward to hearing all about this on my next performance review.

 

Look, my intent in re-opening this thread was to offer a chance for people participating in good faith to have their voice heard and ask any questions on why we do things the way we're doing them.  I think I've walked the walk here, going into great detail about our thought process, and trying my best to explain why these guidelines exist.

 

You, on the other hand, just seem like you're here to cause trouble, repeating the same argument about how you want the forums to be something they're not, and something that they have never been. Do you walk into a Starbucks and demand they serve you Irish car bombs and let you puke on their floor?  As @thezing1 pointed out above, there is no debate possible on whether the Rotoworld.com forums will turn into a "dive bar."  They will not.  The site owners do not want that, nobody on the staff wants that, and many other members in this very thread have said they don't want that.

 

In short: I'm not in the minority here -- you are.

 

There is room for interpretation with the fixed parameters of the Code of Conduct, and that's where we're willing to listen to counter-arguments and debate whether there are ways we can meet the "fewer rules" crowd halfway while not alienating the folks who prefer a more streamlined experience.  But calling us/me "Nazi-like" because we set aside one forum for a certain kind of discussion focused on player outlooks and another forum for questions about your team, or because we reserve some threads for a more focused discussion when there are plenty of other threads where a more free-ranging discussion can be had...  Frankly, these comparisons are offensive and pathetic.


To anyone who wants to discuss the finer points of moderation, why we delete certain things, where the bright lines are vs. where we have to make judgement calls.... I'm happy to have that conversation for as long as this thread remains productive and manageable.  But being willing to be transparent and forthcoming about the process is not the same as signing up to be a punching bag for a single member who wants to make it personal.  @oban14, if you have anything else to say about me personally, my PM inbox is open, or by all means take your complaints about my judgement to the rest of the team if you'd like.  This thread is for a substantive debate on site policy, and we will do what we need to do to make sure it stays on that topic and doesn't devolve any further.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't personal,  and again, it was a metaphor. Meaning just because some policing is necessary, doesn't mean the most extreme policing is good. I don't think you're a Nazi, never called you one nor compared you to one.

 

Mods and politicians are one and the same.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, oban14 said:

It wasn't personal,  and again, it was a metaphor. Meaning just because some policing is necessary, doesn't mean the most extreme policing is good. I don't think you're a Nazi, never called you one nor compared you to one.

 

Like I said above, it's time to move on from this.  Litigating why you invoked a Nazi metaphor is not a productive use of this space.  If you're invoking Nazi metaphors for things that in no way resemble the actions of actual Nazis, then you've lost the argument.

 

You've had your voice heard here -- it's time for us to prioritize our responses to those raising other issues on which there is some possibility of a return on investment.

 

On 10/9/2018 at 8:22 AM, afl5013 said:

I just think the mods group too many posts into CSB or AC talk. Ranking a list of RB for the upcoming week and asking where player X fits in there should not be moved to AC. If you specify a scoring setting in there (which is relevant information), it'll be deleted within the hour. That kind of post will help more posters than just the one asking it. 

 

Another example. Sometimes when a poster asks if they should drop a player for one on the wire, that discussion can help other posters gauge those players as well. The more discussion, the better, as long as it is helping the posters with their fantasy questions. If it's super specified (1 for 1 question, in depth keepers, things like that), sure, move that to AC, but some general AC questions can help those owners viewing their players' threads. 

 

21 hours ago, kmoore1521 said:

 

This is my biggest thing ^

 

i enjoy seeing a list of players or seeing guys talk about one guy over others, obv as long as its not super tailored to the posters team, i enjoy seeing what kind of guys other managers are playing over a guy im considering starting, very helpful to see the general confidence in said player that given week compared to possible replacements

 

It sounds like you guys agree with some of the sentiment expressed by others that it's not so much the existence of guidelines around how the main forums for each sport are moderated, but how we interpret / enforce them.  This is certainly an area where I think we can have a productive discussion.

 

If we're starting from the position that some posts are too team/league/format-specific, but some other posts that may be team/league/format-specific may also help enough people to make it worth allowing them, then the question becomes where do we as mods draw the line.  When does a post go from being too AC-focused to be of use?

 

Let me first say that we do let plenty of "rank these RB" type posts go in Football Talk.  A small fraction of them that are judged to be too dependent on league context to be generally useful are removed.  I could go find ten threads right now where these discussions are routinely happening.

 

But we do have a limit on now much of this kind of AC-ish "rank these three guys" posting we allow.  Obviously there are cases where more than one reader could be helped by a post where a group of four players are ranked.  But how useful is that list when everyone plays in different formats?

 

This wasn't necessarily the case several years back, but the customization options provided by the major platforms (and the amount of resources dedicated to providing analysis for different types of leagues) have increased significantly.  With these changes, there is no longer really such a thing as a "standard" league.  There are platform defaults for public leagues, but the kind of person who's going to spend a lot of time talking fantasy football on these forums is far more likely to be in leagues with some amount of deviation from the norm.

 

I can't tell you how many times I've seen a half a page of arguing about a ranked list only to find out that the nature of the disagreement was related to team/league context.  Half / full PPR is very popular, as are leagues with different roster configurations (3 WR, 2 QB, superflex, etc.)  10 teams, 14 teams...  5 , 6, 7 or more bench slots...  Dynasty, keeper, redraft...  And the dynamic is probably even stronger on the baseball side.

 

I haven't done a scientific poll or anything, but I've been around long enough that I'm comfortable saying that there is no single league configuration that represents a majority of leagues in the baseball or football forums.  Go look at the posts in Football League Finder right now if you don't believe me.

 

Now, you might be saying that some of these differences are relatively minor, and I'd agree.  But the whole premise of asking for player comps is to compare players whose value is in the same ballpark already.  If you're asking the question, the answer is probably close enough that these differences matter enough to change the answer.

 

So, having made the case that there's really not a "standard" league configuration, player comps now require people to supply their league context.  Just with non-PPR, half-PPR, and full-PPR, that means there will potentially be three overlapping and different discussions going on about how to value any arbitrary collection of players submitted as player comps in each outlook thread.

 

Then when we go beyond player comps, other league settings come into play.  "Dropping X for Y" is a lot different of a question to someone assuming a 10-team league vs. a 12-team, 14-team, or larger league.  It's also a lot different for leagues with more bench slots.  "Starting X over Y" is dependent on all of the above factors, but a lot less useful to people who don't own the players involved.  A ranked list of RBs can at least send some information to someone who only owns one or even zero guys the list -- they might be targeting the others in a trade, for example.  But start/sit decisions mean *nothing* to someone who doesn't own *both* players.  And in any given week, there are thousands upon thousands of possible start/sit questions that could be asked.  The likelihood that any individual start/sit question or answer helps more than a handful of people is very low -- this is just how the math involved works.

 

Ultimately, the dynamic I see in here between the roughly equal numbers of people expressing support for a status quo-ish enforcement of AC/CSB vs. those asking us to let more things go is that some people see the value in outlook threads as a more streamlined experience with items that will be applicable to anyone who owns the player, while others see it as just another resource to help them with their daily/weekly decisions, but with a larger and perhaps more informed audience.  Any move toward allowing more items that only help a small subset of owners decide on who to add/drop/trade/start/sit is going to upset the former group, while any restriction on what can be posted in outlook threads is going to upset the latter group.  I see very few opportunities for win-win scenarios here that won't disappoint one group or another -- but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, thezing1 said:

 

This is an example of something that I think everyone needs to be more sensitive to when a forum is as large as this one it. If you are upset or emotional about something than it might be best suited for the Vent Threads. Just being honest, not many people take pleasure in reading about someone's personal fantasy hardships when they are trying to gather information about a player. The vent thread is where the stuff you need to scream on the internet to get it off your chest stuff belongs. The other stuff has to be taken in context. Personally, in NBA for example, if you post about a player and then include a trade that just happened and list the players and the league format I find that valuable, but you have to post it in a way where it is valuable for everyone to draw insights off of and apply it to their specific league settings. 

 

I can go into more detail if needed with an example from NBA last season. But, not all sports forums are created equal. NFL, NBA, and MLB are each unique. 

 

this response shows exactly why this site is less appealing to me and many others. it's not what ya said it's why you said it. it's cherry-picked. you focused on a singular aspect of my post and ignored the rest. you also presume to know best what other users want to read and discuss. this is much like the rules and regulations that is demanded and enforced upon the userbase. this ain't allowed here, that ain't allowed there and the broader view often is not taken into account. it doesn't have to be emotional. some posters may or may not get excited/upset/emotional about an offield incident that may affect a certain player's outlook for the coming year. can't talk about it though. the mods know what's best. can't talk about a trade or a run of bad luck in the relevant player thread where others besides rush and a handful of randoms might actually care to hear, help, laugh at, ignore, or console. the main point of my original post was that often "you can't express thoughts as they come and often in response to other things going on" which leads to "nowadays it's hard to simply have a flowing conversation." you can keep saying you know what is best and what we want to read and see. this thread existing proves otherwise 

Edited by Packdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is Tony's Favorite word is dichotomy. Must use it every time i see a post of his. This forum is great, I understand the mod thing but for an unpaid position, they take it to the extreme (mainly Tony but i just think he is on here more than any other mod. I have never encountered anyone else I do not believe).  If i ever got removed from this site, I would not be heart broken. Id still get my info from here, just without signing in/posting.

 

Either way, you have to have mods on forums. There are a lot of nuts in this world who take things wrong and too serious and there has to be some level of censorship. Most of my info comes from the blogs and not the opinions of fellow roto users. With that said, I like to post my opinions and read other opinions regardless of how I/you use them. I bet a good chunk of arguments here are someone reading a post out of context or interpreting it the wrong way. Its extremely tough to gauge a persons demeanor by reading posts. Mods just try to limit the chance of getting off topic due to a miscommunication.

 

There will never be a consensus of how much modding is enough or not enough. Lets live with it. Its mostly a free site, nobody makes you post here. You could always have a deeper in depth conversation with certain members by PMs. Nothing stops you there....I don't believe. 

 

Either way, good luck to all you fantasy football guys. I hope you lose every week and see you in the rant thread so I can have amusement while working! Later!:lol:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw someone's post get moved from a player outlook thread to the 'completed trades' thread. If I have a player and want to gauge their value, why would I want to sort through that entire thread hoping to have a chance at finding my player instead of just being able to find it in that player's 2018 outlook thread? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zekepeak86 said:

Lets live with it.

 

I'm going to go with the above. The mods get overzealous sometimes with editing/deleting posts(IMO), but I think some posters here also take this site too seriously and give them too hard of a time. We need mods but it really seems like a thankless job, not one I'd want. I was going to post an example of a recent post I had deleted(I think unfairly), and the interaction with the mod(wasn't Tony) to illustrate I kind of agree with this thread but after typing a sentence or two I thought who cares. I don't take this stuff too seriously and nobody else should, although I totally understand how it can be annoying when you post something you think other members will like and contains useful information and then it disappears. 

 

I've been posting here about 10 years, and early on used to visit other sites too but they really sucked. Too much garbage posted and not enough useful substance. I suppose they are still out there for people who want the unmodded experience, but I like what we've got here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we’re on the topic of over moderation, Maybe a mod can go unlock the Adrian Peterson outlook thread that somebody locked because I had the audacity to post a comment about the act that he took a nasty hit with his foot planted in which his knee buckled awkwardly during the game on Monday night. I (apparently foolishly) thought this info was beneficial to all that owned him and were not watching the game at the time, but apparently a mod thought it was good cause to lock the thread for approximately two days and counting. AP now has a shoulder injury to pair with his ankle and knee issues and I sure would like to be able to see updates on his status from anyone that would have them. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, afl5013 said:

I just saw someone's post get moved from a player outlook thread to the 'completed trades' thread. If I have a player and want to gauge their value, why would I want to sort through that entire thread hoping to have a chance at finding my player instead of just being able to find it in that player's 2018 outlook thread? 

 

There is a search function in all threads.  Search for your players name to find completed trades about said player.  Player threads aren't here to gauge value by talking about your league, and trades that happened in your league.  Player threads are for sharing useful information about a player.  All leagues are different...and nobody cares about your league or what happens in your league.  Information about your specific league helps nobody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bill_Buckner said:

Since we’re on the topic of over moderation, Maybe a mod can go unlock the Adrian Peterson outlook thread that somebody locked because I had the audacity to post a comment about the act that he took a nasty hit with his foot planted in which his knee buckled awkwardly during the game on Monday night. I (apparently foolishly) thought this info was beneficial to all that owned him and were not watching the game at the time, but apparently a mod thought it was good cause to lock the thread for approximately two days and counting. AP now has a shoulder injury to pair with his ankle and knee issues and I sure would like to be able to see updates on his status from anyone that would have them. 

 

Report the thread as being locked and we will unlock it....Player threads get locked during games as we want the discussion to remain in the game day threads.  If you read the Posting Guidelines you would know this is why it happens/happened.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, phatrat said:

 

There is a search function in all threads.  Search for your players name to find completed trades about said player.  Player threads aren't here to gauge value by talking about your league, and trades that happened in your league.  Player threads are for sharing useful information about a player.  All leagues are different...and nobody cares about your league or what happens in your league.  Information about your specific league helps nobody.

 

That's honestly 100% false and the problem we are having. The value of a player in my league helps other owners of that player gauge value for them as well. If I'm looking to go trade Doug Baldwin, it's much easier for me to go to his outlook and see what people are saying about him and what people are getting/asking for him (all things that fall under his "2018 outlook") than it is to hope that someone brought him up in a thread consisting of every player in the pool.

 

Not to mention if I complete a trade for Doug Baldwin, it's much more logical to me to go talk about it in that player's outlook thread than to post it in a thread where 90% of the posters viewing it couldn't care less about Doug Baldwin. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, afl5013 said:

 

That's honestly 100% false and the problem we are having. The value of a player in my league helps other owners of that player gauge value for them as well. If I'm looking to go trade Doug Baldwin, it's much easier for me to go to his outlook and see what people are saying about him and what people are getting/asking for him (all things that fall under his "2018 outlook") than it is to hope that someone brought him up in a thread consisting of every player in the pool.

 

Not to mention if I complete a trade for Doug Baldwin, it's much more logical to me to go talk about it in that player's outlook thread than to post it in a thread where 90% of the posters viewing it couldn't care less about Doug Baldwin. 

 

Well you can think all of this as the way you would like it to be...but that's not how things work around here and it's been this way for since the forums started. 

Read the posting guidelines, we have these for a reason. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, afl5013 said:

If I'm looking to go trade Doug Baldwin, it's much easier for me to go to his outlook and see what people are saying about him and what people are getting/asking for him (all things that fall under his "2018 outlook") than it is to hope that someone brought him up in a thread consisting of every player in the pool.

 

There are a lot of variables beyond a single player's raw value that go into completing a trade.  Let's suppose you see "just traded Baldwin for Dalvin Cook" in Baldwin's outlook thread.  Here are the things you need to know in order to be able to get any insight at all into Baldwin's value:


* how that owner values Cook

* how the owner he traded Baldwin to values Baldwin

* How the owner he traded Baldwin to values Cook

* the positional needs of that owner

* the positional needs of the owner he's trading to

* league depth

* league format (PPR, half PPR, etc.)

* league roster configuration

 

Then there are even fuzzier qualitative measures that affect whether deals get done. How desperate is each owner in the deal to make a move?  How good are the two teams involved in the trade in the first place?  And this is before you get into trades that involve more than two players.

 

If any of these variables is not specified, or is different than those same variables for you and your league context, then knowing that this one trade occurred in this one league is meaningless.  That's just how math works -- if your equation has 10 variables and you only know variables 1 through 8, then you can't solve for variable 10 without knowing variable 9.

 

Even if we assume for the sake of argument that some tiny sliver of information is carried by each post announcing someone's completed trade in an outlook thread, and that somehow readers wading through all of these (and the many responses) could gain some amount of insight about how to apply all of those data points to their own league, we have to weigh the cost of conveying that information.  Real estate in these threads is valuable -- people who own Baldwin but aren't interested in trading him may nonetheless want to read up on other aspects of his outlook, and now they're reading through page after page of trade offers in which he was one part of many.  Some members just don't have the time or inclination to read through that many posts, and we have to serve their needs as well.

 

Then there are the responses.   "ZOMG why would any Cook owner trade him for Baldwin?"  "You really did great there."  "Your league sucks."  And on and on.  These convey zero useful information about Baldwin, and even if we said you can post trades but not respond to the trades of others, it takes several times more effort on our part to remove the responses than it does to keep them out of outlook threads in the first place, because people simply can't help themselves but to respond.

 

How much work the staff has to do may not be something you care about, but if you recognize the need for any amount of moderation whatsoever (and I think you did acknowledge that if things were too AC-focused then they should be moved) then you accept that we have to make choices in how we ration the time we can spend tending to the forums.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

How much work the staff has to do may not be something you care about, but if you recognize the need for any amount of moderation whatsoever (and I think you did acknowledge that if things were too AC-focused then they should be moved) then you accept that we have to make choices in how we ration the time we can spend tending to the forums.

 

I'll admit that the amount of work the staff has to do isn't a major concern of mine, however I always try to make things easier for others, whether on a message board or in real life. I don't want to make your lives any harder than it needs to be, as I know I have a ton going on and can imagine you do too. However don't you think over-moderation is more work on your part than being a little more lenient on the rules (again, I'm not saying to get rid of them altogether)? The rules in place make sense and should absolutely be enforced, but if a post is in a grey area (ie a basic comparison of weekly/season-long value by way of ranking other players around that one or value in a trade), let the discussion continue as that's what we are here to do. 

 

I commish my own league who can be very demanding and require a lot of effort to keep things running smoothly, so trust me when I say I can appreciate you doing your best to keep things in order and especially responding to this matter in as much detail as you have. I just think the posters need a little more leeway to discuss the information we came here to discuss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, afl5013 said:

However don't you think over-moderation is more work on your part than being a little more lenient on the rules (again, I'm not saying to get rid of them altogether

 

We've found that this is definitely not the case.

Once you open a rule up to interpretation, it's a lot harder to enforce.  Those who try in good faith to adhere to the rules will nonetheless push the boundaries.  This happens for a variety of reasons.  Some, like you, just feel that any discussion of the player's value is useful.  Some just want to tell the world about their team.  Then there are some who simply don't care about the rules, and don't view moderation as useful to them.  This group will use the fact that judgement is required in order to defend their post, questioning the judgement of the moderator.   They will use the fact that other posters made a similar (in their view) post that wasn't removed.  This is a lot harder to defend when the rule is simply "don't post about your trades."

 

Ranking players is one area where we do have to open things to interpretation a bit.  ROS rankings of a handful of options are usually OK, but when you get into weekly rankings, either/or comparisons, or very specific format qualifiers, the number of people those rankings provide information to gets smaller, even as the informational value to that small number of people may get larger.  At that point, it's clear that the post belongs in AC.

 

3 hours ago, afl5013 said:

let the discussion continue as that's what we are here to do. 

 

There are plenty of valuable discussions of a player's fantasy outlook that don't involve citing trade value, or making A/B comparisons.  Fantasy value is about a lot more than who you'd trade a guy for or who you'd rank him above/below on a week-to-week basis.  We want real insight in these threads -- why the player is off to a slow start, what his upcoming schedule might do to his value, whether that nagging injury is a concern going forward, etc.  There are dozens of other things we can say about a fantasy player that aren't "just traded Baldwin for Cook" or "would you start Baldwin or Cook in 0.5 PPR?"

 

3 hours ago, afl5013 said:

I just think the posters need a little more leeway to discuss the information we came here to discuss. 

 

No, what you're saying is that posters need a little more leeway in the player outlook threads to discuss the information we came here to discuss.  I'll keep harping on this point until someone bothers to acknowledge it:  There are many other threads where you can have these discussions, but you (and many other posters) want to use the fact that the outlook threads are more focused and curated as a justification to talk about topics that make them much less focused, and much harder to curate.  We simply can't open up the discussion in the ways you want to without reducing the informational density of these posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2018 at 4:58 PM, tonycpsu said:

 

I would be interested to hear more on what kinds of things you guys feel we've gotten more "oppressive" and "draconian" about recently.  We added some mods a little over a year ago (including myself), and part of the rationale was to clean up some things that were getting out of hand.  I can see how one might feel this is oppressive/draconian if they're used to getting away with things that were against site policy but not enforced because of insufficient staff resources, but I think this misunderstands the dynamic, which is that the "natural" state of things wasn't working, at least as far as the mod team was concerned when they brought more of us on board.

 

 

I wouldn't call this draconian or overy oppressive at all but a good micro-cosm of this would be the dis-allowment of the 2019 outlook threads for Baseball.

 

It was never a problem in years past to start ones after the actual fantasy baseball season ended. Its a fantasy forum. Fantasy Baseball ended when the month turns October. The cross pollination between the handful of 2018 threads from playoff players didn't do any harm to forum. Cause any chaos or mass confusion.

 

Sure it makes your index script useless until the actual MLB season ends. So what? Its an excellent resource for sure, but you don't have a ton of users or high volume that people really need to use the index to find player threads.

 

 You choose organization, following the letter of a law, over showing you have any pulse on what your user base actually wants to talk about.  Fantasy baseball is over. The handful who are still on that forum are your dedicated junkies who are looking on 2019. Why? because fantasy baseball ended.  The hottest 2018 player thread in the past 24 hours is of a position player who just had TJ. Nothing in that thread has anything to do with his 2018 outlook. Its his 2019 outlook and chances of playing at all next year. Yet we have to remain in the 2018 thread for the moderation's own sense of personal organization.

 

I totally get not allowing the 2019 threads for players who still in the playoffs. That would add useless information towards their 2019 outlook of "Boomstick just hit a walk-off HR to win the series" or "god, this guy has been awful in the post-season".  It really just comes down to you don't want any cross pollination of of 2018 an 2019 threads. Even though its pretty clear what your remaining FBB users want to talk about.  Tidy organization over your own user base.

 

In the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. Its a low volume forum base right now. You got bigger fish to fry in the football forum. Wasn't even going to comment in the thread that was made about it. I simply remember you asking me this^^^^^

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Slatykamora said:

Sure it makes your index script useless until the actual MLB season ends. So what? Its an excellent resource for sure, but you don't have a ton of users or high volume that people really need to use the index to find player threads.

 

There isn't a ton of users or high volume, but what there is in the offseason is a very high rate of new threads being created.  One of the main purposes of the index threads is to avoid duplicates.  Not just that people can check it before they post a 2019 thread, but also because it locks duplicates and flags them for my attention so I can merge them / hide them depending on whether the new one has any useful content or not.

 

By allowing overlapping of 2018 and 2019 outlooks, the script can't do its thing properly, and there will be many more duplicates (with many more comments in them, since I won't have the script alerting me to them) that we have to manage manually.  There are some enhancements I could make to the script to deal with this better, but I lack the time for such a thing right now, so I decided in this instance to prioritize keeping the workload down for us over some people being upset that they have to have player conversations in the "old" thread instead of the "new" one.

 

I am not going to apologize for doing what I need to do in order to make sure that the limited time I have to put in around here gets used in the most productive way possible.

 

4 hours ago, Slatykamora said:

the cross pollination between the handful of 2018 threads from playoff players didn't do any harm to forum. Cause any chaos or mass confusion.

 

Here, you're saying that it doesn't matter whether the postseason discussion for some players occurs in last year's thread or this year's thread.

 

4 hours ago, Slatykamora said:

The hottest 2018 player thread in the past 24 hours is of a position player who just had TJ. Nothing in that thread has anything to do with his 2018 outlook. Its his 2019 outlook and chances of playing at all next year. Yet we have to remain in the 2018 thread for the moderation's own sense of personal organization.

 

But here, you're saying that it does matter that the discussion of Didi is happening in his 2018 thread.

 

Please help me resolve this contradiction.

 

Obviously, Didi's 2019 thread is going to begin with a discussion of his TJS.  That is true whether his thread went up yesterday or a few weeks from now.  The only difference is a handful of comments that occur between now and then happen at the tail end of the 2018 thread.  Why is this a problem?
 

4 hours ago, Slatykamora said:

You choose organization, following the letter of a law, over showing you have any pulse on what your user base actually wants to talk about. 

 

This is an extremely unfair statement.  Nobody is placing limits on what people can talk about.  Anyone who wants to talk about any player is free to do so.  I think I've shown that I'm willing to take constructive criticism, but I think you're painting me in a very unfair light here over, as far as I can tell, a handful of comments about a handful of players that aren't exactly where you want them to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2018 at 7:47 AM, phatrat said:

 

Report the thread as being locked and we will unlock it....Player threads get locked during games as we want the discussion to remain in the game day threads.  If you read the Posting Guidelines you would know this is why it happens/happened.  Thanks.

My frustration was not that the thread was locked during a game, but rather that it remained locked for days after. Anyway, thanks for for the tip. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this