It's ironic that I was going to post this in the pinned moderation thread, but before I could do so the thread got locked again.
Anyway, if you'll indulge me for a minute, I want to tell you all a quick story. Last spring, I got suspended from the this site for the rest of 2019 over a joke I made in the PSF. I didn't mind not being able to post about political stuff, but the fact that I wouldn't have access to the Shark Pool for the entire season was a killer. Having a message board where I can bounce ideas off of people about fantasy strategy, and soak up the collective wisdom of others, is invaluable to me, so I set about finding another forum. I looked at a few, most of which were terrible, before finally settling on one that was the best of a mediocre lot. I didn't even look at any of the political discussions there, just focused on football.
The fantasy discussions there were ... fine, but definitely nowhere close to the level of the Shark Pool. But what stood out to me more than anything was how degraded the level of discourse was. There just seemed to be so much anger permeating every discussion; instead of a weekly waiver-wire thread, there was a weekly "FU" thread where they would complain about the guys that screwed them over (for, by example, getting concussed in the first quarter). The final straw for me came when I posted a link to a tweet by the Cowboys' beat reporter with a list of the top fantasy players' chosen charities, and the suggestion that if a player helped you win a title, you could donate to his charity. I honestly can't imagine a more unobjectionable sentiment. And yet, the posts that joked "If a player stunk, will he donate to my charity?" were actually the nicest responses I got. Others were whining about how the players really owe us for "paying their salaries", saying they wouldn't support any players' charity because of Kaepernick, even accusing the reporter of "grandstanding" by suggesting people make donations. I was genuinely gobsmacked, and started getting in increasingly vitriolic flame wars with the posters there before finally taking a step back and saying, "What the hell am I doing?" I'm sure lots of the guys posting there were perfectly nice IRL, but, at least in how they were presenting themselves in that forum, they came across as really horrible people, and why did I need to waste any time arguing with people like that?
I bring all this up to say that coming back here once my suspension was lifted was like a breath of fresh air. I'm not saying the discussion here is perfect, and I'm definitely not minimizing the hassles that Joe and Maurile have to put up with. What I will say is this: There are plenty of people here who I disagree with. There are some who exasperate me. And yes, there are a small number whose, um, intellectual capacity I may have disparaged once or twice. But I can't recall a single time when I read a post here and thought, "This is a bad person," as opposed to just being someone who sees the world differently from me. (I've also had multiple times where I've found myself annoyed at someone's political posts, and then realized that same person had put up a smart, informative football take in the Shark Pool, which is a good reminder that we all contain multitudes.)
I think the problems here are less about bad people and more about a Tragedy of the Commons type of situation. For one thing, the volume is so damn high that any discussions that might be a little annoying inevitably become very annoying when they go on for multiple pages. And even good people can get sucked into pointless digressions (and act in not-so-nice ways that drag down the discourse). I suspect that a few small structural nudges, such as (I'm spitballing here) forcing people to wait a certain amount of time between posts to cut down on volume, could make a big difference.
I said in another thread that I don't really care if this forum goes away; I probably waste too much time here, and the only section that I really can't live without is the Shark Pool. But whatever the moderators end up deciding, I have little doubt that the good people here are capable of working these problems out.
[Note to mods: I posted this because I felt strongly that it needed to be said. But the last thing I want to do is create headaches for you by reconstituting the moderation thread under a different header. So I'd be fine if you want to just lock it right off the bat. And to everyone else: If responses are allowed, let's try to keep the positivity theme going and save the complaints and accusations forelsewhere nowhere.]
Anyway, if you'll indulge me for a minute, I want to tell you all a quick story. Last spring, I got suspended from the this site for the rest of 2019 over a joke I made in the PSF. I didn't mind not being able to post about political stuff, but the fact that I wouldn't have access to the Shark Pool for the entire season was a killer. Having a message board where I can bounce ideas off of people about fantasy strategy, and soak up the collective wisdom of others, is invaluable to me, so I set about finding another forum. I looked at a few, most of which were terrible, before finally settling on one that was the best of a mediocre lot. I didn't even look at any of the political discussions there, just focused on football.
The fantasy discussions there were ... fine, but definitely nowhere close to the level of the Shark Pool. But what stood out to me more than anything was how degraded the level of discourse was. There just seemed to be so much anger permeating every discussion; instead of a weekly waiver-wire thread, there was a weekly "FU" thread where they would complain about the guys that screwed them over (for, by example, getting concussed in the first quarter). The final straw for me came when I posted a link to a tweet by the Cowboys' beat reporter with a list of the top fantasy players' chosen charities, and the suggestion that if a player helped you win a title, you could donate to his charity. I honestly can't imagine a more unobjectionable sentiment. And yet, the posts that joked "If a player stunk, will he donate to my charity?" were actually the nicest responses I got. Others were whining about how the players really owe us for "paying their salaries", saying they wouldn't support any players' charity because of Kaepernick, even accusing the reporter of "grandstanding" by suggesting people make donations. I was genuinely gobsmacked, and started getting in increasingly vitriolic flame wars with the posters there before finally taking a step back and saying, "What the hell am I doing?" I'm sure lots of the guys posting there were perfectly nice IRL, but, at least in how they were presenting themselves in that forum, they came across as really horrible people, and why did I need to waste any time arguing with people like that?
I bring all this up to say that coming back here once my suspension was lifted was like a breath of fresh air. I'm not saying the discussion here is perfect, and I'm definitely not minimizing the hassles that Joe and Maurile have to put up with. What I will say is this: There are plenty of people here who I disagree with. There are some who exasperate me. And yes, there are a small number whose, um, intellectual capacity I may have disparaged once or twice. But I can't recall a single time when I read a post here and thought, "This is a bad person," as opposed to just being someone who sees the world differently from me. (I've also had multiple times where I've found myself annoyed at someone's political posts, and then realized that same person had put up a smart, informative football take in the Shark Pool, which is a good reminder that we all contain multitudes.)
I think the problems here are less about bad people and more about a Tragedy of the Commons type of situation. For one thing, the volume is so damn high that any discussions that might be a little annoying inevitably become very annoying when they go on for multiple pages. And even good people can get sucked into pointless digressions (and act in not-so-nice ways that drag down the discourse). I suspect that a few small structural nudges, such as (I'm spitballing here) forcing people to wait a certain amount of time between posts to cut down on volume, could make a big difference.
I said in another thread that I don't really care if this forum goes away; I probably waste too much time here, and the only section that I really can't live without is the Shark Pool. But whatever the moderators end up deciding, I have little doubt that the good people here are capable of working these problems out.
[Note to mods: I posted this because I felt strongly that it needed to be said. But the last thing I want to do is create headaches for you by reconstituting the moderation thread under a different header. So I'd be fine if you want to just lock it right off the bat. And to everyone else: If responses are allowed, let's try to keep the positivity theme going and save the complaints and accusations for