What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Making The Shark Pool More Useful - How To Post & Discuss Breaking News (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Hey Guys,

Spinnoff from this thread.

One of the best ways the Shark Pool can be useful is with breaking news.

We'll never ever come close to beating twitter and other social media as there are simply so many people listening compared to the audience here. So we'll likely never get it first here. And that's fine. What we CAN do much better here though is discuss it intelligently. The average poster here is way smarter than the average guy on Twitter when it comes to football. Let's use what we have.

For instance, if you saw Adam Schefter tweet on Hunter Henry's injury last week, a lot of the twitter discussion was the entirely predictable stuff with zero usefulness. It was "LOL at Chargers - should have drafted a TE" type stuff. That's useful to nobody.

We can do TONS better. But it'll take effort on your part. I think we should do something that is uniform like this:

1. It should NOT go in the master thread which might be years old and not have the right title.  It should be a new thread.

2. We likely should establish a standard way of making a new post. Something like: BREAKING (DATE) and (TIME including Time Zone) Full Player Name then Issue

So something like:   BREAKING - 5/22/18 10:00 PM ET - Hunter Henry Torn ACL

Then the the post needs to be whatever happened and most importantly of all A LINK to the story. If you don't have a link, say how you heard it. It's ok if you heard on radio or you heard it at the bar or whatever. As long as you're clear.

Something like 

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/999102898561744896

Stunner from LA: Chargers’ TE Hunter Henry suffered a season-ending torn ACL today, per league source. Did it during a drill, running downfield, untouched. Second opinion coming Wednesday.





 
3. Then we can discuss with the focus being on HOW THIS IMPACTS OTHERS. In other words, Hunter Henry news the other day should mostly be about who is going to see work now. I don't want to be cold towards Henry and I'm sorry he's hurt, but for most of us, the USEFUL discussion will be on what happens now. 

That make sense?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Faust

MVP
Joe,

This is a very solid set of guidelines; however, I do need to politely disagree with this idea:

It should NOT go in the master thread which might be years old and not have the right title.  It should be a new thread.

I think it should be acceptable to post the information in the master thread, otherwise why are we bothering to have master threads on players?

 

jvdesigns2002

Footballguy
Dumb question--but can moderators/staff change the titles of existing threads (even ones that they did not start) in order to keep the title relevant to the player being discussed in a thread?  Many of the official threads were started by users who no longer patron the site or who don't really care to re-title the threads over time.  Keeping the official threads intact with current or news breaking  titles  might be a better way to go.  

 

abbottjamesr

Footballguy
Dumb question--but can moderators/staff change the titles of existing threads (even ones that they did not start) in order to keep the title relevant to the player being discussed in a thread?  Many of the official threads were started by users who no longer patron the site or who don't really care to re-title the threads over time.  Keeping the official threads intact with current or news breaking  titles  might be a better way to go.  
Or have a standard format for player thread titles so that we know that is the player thread that will live on forever.

 

Arodin

Footballguy
If the breaking thread is eventually folded into the master thread after a few days, so the discussion is again properly aggregated, that might be the best of both worlds.

It would require commitment from the mods to go through the forum every few days and merge the older breaking news threads, but this has been done before with duplicate threads, and would let us keep our signature characteristic of having long threads showing the full range of discussion about a player over his career.

 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Joe,

This is a very solid set of guidelines; however, I do need to politely disagree with this idea:

It should NOT go in the master thread which might be years old and not have the right title.  It should be a new thread.

I think it should be acceptable to post the information in the master thread, otherwise why are we bothering to have master threads on players?
Breaking thread

Merge into master thread in 48 hours (or so)

If the breaking thread is eventually folded into the master thread after a few days, so the discussion is again properly aggregated, that might be the best of both worlds.

It would require commitment from the mods to go through the forum every few days and merge the older breaking news threads, but this has been done before with duplicate threads, and would let us keep our signature characteristic of having long threads showing the full range of discussion about a player over his career.
:yes:

 

Borden

Footballguy
What is the obsession with wanting so many threads?

There’s zero doubt that board can keep up with Twitter, sports apps, etc. That’s not the point of the board. If someone wants up to the minute breaking news they have options. If they want daily updates then they can sign up for the FBG news letters.

The purpose (and also entire value) is that the members can discuss the player/topic. Adding a unique thread for Hunter Henry’s Torn ACL adds no value outside of a trickle of injury updates. And even those can carry on in the Hunter Henry thread. Any discussion of the impact on other players will, rightfully, happen those players threads. People bump those threads quickly with “How does Henry’s change this other players outlook?” Pretty quickly. 

I appreciate the attention that you’re giving the board and like that you’re trying to improve it. I don’t think that more threads is an improvement though. If you want more community involved from/for the paysite, especially for new members then have more staff involvement in threads. I remember when you guys used to put up threads asking for questions to be read on the podcast. As new board member I thought it was awesome the when I heard my question get read on the podcast. Or have polls in the thread that you plan to include in articles. Things like that. Just my  :2cents: though. 

 

Slapdash

Footballguy
If the breaking thread is eventually folded into the master thread after a few days, so the discussion is again properly aggregated, that might be the best of both worlds.

It would require commitment from the mods to go through the forum every few days and merge the older breaking news threads, but this has been done before with duplicate threads, and would let us keep our signature characteristic of having long threads showing the full range of discussion about a player over his career.
This is a fantastic idea. 

Some suggested the idea of volunteer mods to @Joe Bryant regarding the PSF in another thread, but I think having @Faust curate this stuff could be a home run.  From the other thread, it is clear that he really understands the principal behind organizing info:  I view the message boards here essentially as a functional database, and each player thread is it’s own record. An essential principle of good database management is eliminating ‘data redundancy.

That way people can start breaking news threads which get easily get folded in by people who are dedicated to keeping long running information accessible

 

Borden

Footballguy
This is a fantastic idea. 

Some suggested the idea of volunteer mods to @Joe Bryant regarding the PSF in another thread, but I think having @Faust curate this stuff could be a home run.  From the other thread, it is clear that he really understands the principal behind organizing info:  I view the message boards here essentially as a functional database, and each player thread is it’s own record. An essential principle of good database management is eliminating ‘data redundancy.

That way people can start breaking news threads which get easily get folded in by people who are dedicated to keeping long running information accessible
You’re not wrong but that’s a lot of work to put on Faust. He’s already the most valuable poster.

 

Slapdash

Footballguy
You’re not wrong but that’s a lot of work to put on Faust. He’s already the most valuable poster.
Yes, I'm sure there are others wanting a similar process.  And its a volunteer one.  He just springs to mind because of his value

Was connecting the ideas based on what Arodin says, because either way involves more moderation hours...which is a problem

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Joe,

This is a very solid set of guidelines; however, I do need to politely disagree with this idea:

It should NOT go in the master thread which might be years old and not have the right title.  It should be a new thread.

I think it should be acceptable to post the information in the master thread, otherwise why are we bothering to have master threads on players?
Thanks @Faust  what do you think of the folding a breaking news thread in later to the master thread idea?

Or better question, what do you think is the best way to discuss a breaking news story on the Shark Pool? 

The big thing is the title.  When Hunter Henry tears his acl, that must be in the title.  Of that I’m certain.  What do you think?

 

ShamrockPride

Footballguy
I am 100% on board with merging the breaking news into the master after a few days, something standard, say...3 days?

But as others said, get someone besides Faust. Dude is already your MVP in the SP. Give that man a lifetime achievement award.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Cool.  The key is the title I think. Having a dedicated breaking news thread to discuss the specifics around the issue is key. And it’s often not really even about the player. For instance most of the discussion in a Hunter Henry ACL breaking news thread would be about Virgil Green or Antonio Gates. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I’m starting to get excited about the possibilities here. We do this now in our staff communication. A staffer will post a breaking news story in our Basecamp software and other guys will rapid fire start posting what they think the repurcussions will be. It’s super helpful.

With the knowledge we have here in the shark pool we could do something similar and it has the potential to be awesome if you guys make it so. We’ll have to be strict about no bs.  This should be people discussing what the news means and how players will be affected. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member

Biabreakable

Footballguy
I am not sure what is driving the obsession with the thread titles currency?

Is this so that people can get the information from the thread title without needing to read the thread?

When a thread that hasn't been bumped to the first page in some time is on the first page, I automatically know something new has happened, even if that isn't explicitly clear from the thread title.

The type of discussion that occurs the the player thread after an injury or some other news that is fresh is exactly what Joe is talking about. People speculate what the information means as far as opening up new opportunities for other players or how the team is going to adjust to the changes.

I appreciate Joe looking for ways to improve things on the message board and rolling a new thread focused solely on the news into the already established thread seems like a fine idea, I am just not sure if it is actually a improvement.

People are going to discuss what they want to discuss about things, where and how they do that is their prerogative. Having a new thread for the breaking news just seems like a way for people to avoid reading the already established threads.

Is that the intent here Joe?

 

jvdesigns2002

Footballguy
I’m starting to get excited about the possibilities here. We do this now in our staff communication. A staffer will post a breaking news story in our Basecamp software and other guys will rapid fire start posting what they think the repurcussions will be. It’s super helpful.

With the knowledge we have here in the shark pool we could do something similar and it has the potential to be awesome if you guys make it so. We’ll have to be strict about no bs.  This should be people discussing what the news means and how players will be affected. 
Just to build upon this thought Joe. If this process is what you do with your staff communication--why not have your staff use the Shark Pool to communicate with each other? I think it's established that FBG staff being more involved in the boards is nothing but a positive thing. It promotes dialogue and good behavior by the members. Having the staff more involved in the boards also will naturally keep the entire content on the boards more relevant. 

However--the biggest byproduct could effectively be the Shark Pool turning into an interactive breaking news fantasy football think tank.   Just as you and your staff posts breaking news to one another and you rapid fire ideas back and forth to each other--why not utilize these boards to increase the number of football minds you have participating in these discussions?  I'm not trying to brown nose--but many of the posters here have very insightful and analytical thoughts to fantasy football topics. Many of them have teams that they follow closely and can comment better about this type of breaking news.   I really do think that utilizing the Shark Pool as an interactive think tank is truly something that can separate you guys from the other fantasy sites out there.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Just to build upon this thought Joe. If this process is what you do with your staff communication--why not have your staff use the Shark Pool to communicate with each other? I think it's established that FBG staff being more involved in the boards is nothing but a positive thing. It promotes dialogue and good behavior by the members. Having the staff more involved in the boards also will naturally keep the entire content on the boards more relevant. 

However--the biggest byproduct could effectively be the Shark Pool turning into an interactive breaking news fantasy football think tank.   Just as you and your staff posts breaking news to one another and you rapid fire ideas back and forth to each other--why not utilize these boards to increase the number of football minds you have participating in these discussions?  I'm not trying to brown nose--but many of the posters here have very insightful and analytical thoughts to fantasy football topics. Many of them have teams that they follow closely and can comment better about this type of breaking news.   I really do think that utilizing the Shark Pool as an interactive think tank is truly something that can separate you guys from the other fantasy sites out there.  




3
For sure i hear you on getting more staff involved. We'll see how that goes there. This could be in addition to what we do privately with the staff. That part will stay the same and we won't be changing that.

What I'd love to see is this get some momentum and you guys, plus new posters we can attract here for these threads. I know for sure there is tons of great info and knowledge from the posters here. Lots of good potential.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I am not sure what is driving the obsession with the thread titles currency?

Is this so that people can get the information from the thread title without needing to read the thread?

When a thread that hasn't been bumped to the first page in some time is on the first page, I automatically know something new has happened, even if that isn't explicitly clear from the thread title.

The type of discussion that occurs the the player thread after an injury or some other news that is fresh is exactly what Joe is talking about. People speculate what the information means as far as opening up new opportunities for other players or how the team is going to adjust to the changes.

I appreciate Joe looking for ways to improve things on the message board and rolling a new thread focused solely on the news into the already established thread seems like a fine idea, I am just not sure if it is actually a improvement.

People are going to discuss what they want to discuss about things, where and how they do that is their prerogative. Having a new thread for the breaking news just seems like a way for people to avoid reading the already established threads.

Is that the intent here Joe?





3
Hi @Biabreakable

The title is so people can instantly scan and see what's up. Hunter Henry is a great example.

This is extreme but there would be two ways to work things with Henry.

In a "everything has to be in only one master thread" way, Hunter Henry's ACL news would be page 3 of his master thread. A viewer might look at the Shark Pool, see Henry's master thread and skim on. If he's got tons of time, he might click on it, scan down to the end and see why it was bumped. It might be for a good reason. It might not be. 

In a board where Henry has a "Breaking - Hunter Henry Tears ACL" thread, the reader instantly gets the story and doesn't have to wonder what has brought the Henry thread to the front page. It's tons more valuable to the reader. Especially to the reader who doesn't have time to click on every thread.

Bottom line, I don't want to make the reader work to see what people are talking about inside the thread. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hankmoody

Footballguy
What is the obsession with wanting so many threads?

There’s zero doubt that board can keep up with Twitter, sports apps, etc. That’s not the point of the board. If someone wants up to the minute breaking news they have options. If they want daily updates then they can sign up for the FBG news letters.

The purpose (and also entire value) is that the members can discuss the player/topic. Adding a unique thread for Hunter Henry’s Torn ACL adds no value outside of a trickle of injury updates. And even those can carry on in the Hunter Henry thread. Any discussion of the impact on other players will, rightfully, happen those players threads. People bump those threads quickly with “How does Henry’s change this other players outlook?” Pretty quickly. 

I appreciate the attention that you’re giving the board and like that you’re trying to improve it. I don’t think that more threads is an improvement though. If you want more community involved from/for the paysite, especially for new members then have more staff involvement in threads. I remember when you guys used to put up threads asking for questions to be read on the podcast. As new board member I thought it was awesome the when I heard my question get read on the podcast. Or have polls in the thread that you plan to include in articles. Things like that. Just my  :2cents: though. 
I disagree entirely.  As one of the biggest sticklers of all sticklerish sticklers around here for not wasting board space, I have come to fully appreciate the way it's currently done - when something new and exciting breaks, they allow the new thread, let it run its course for the next couple of days, and once it's no longer "fresh and new" merge it in with the Official thread.  Just because Hunter Henry's thread is bumped doesn't mean I'm going to read it.  I only open about 1/2 the active threads, there are a ton I'm just not interested in.  Hunter Henry is actually a good example.  I don't own him anywhere and his price has been prohibitive so I don't generally go into the thread when the last 15 pages have all been his owners pimping how much he's going to break out this year.  But an ACL is big stuff.  Now all of a sudden I'm interested.  I want to know what the prognosis is, what his owners are now saying, and who the next guy up on LAC might be.  I'd get none of that if we stifle breaking news into the existing threads.

As long as the breaking news threads get merged in within a couple of days that works.

A 2nd alternative would be to have the titles edited of the Official Threads to include "Breaking news" but even that's subject to error.  Is there a way to give the Player Index profile or some other small subset of posters limited permissions to edit topics but not post contents?   You probably don't want a dozen new forum mods all of a sudden but just for us to police up the thread titles might help.

@Joe Bryant The only thing I think gets missed is that threads don't get merged nearly soon enough.  Duplicate/non-breaking news ones hang around for a few days, usually with bumps from people complaining about it or from the OP defending himself or just bumping his own redundant question.  You get 3-4 people jumping in complaining about the people complaining about the OP staring this own personal thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Phantom Knight

Footballguy
Dumb question--but can moderators/staff change the titles of existing threads (even ones that they did not start) in order to keep the title relevant to the player being discussed in a thread?  Many of the official threads were started by users who no longer patron the site or who don't really care to re-title the threads over time.  Keeping the official threads intact with current or news breaking  titles  might be a better way to go.  


Or have a standard format for player thread titles so that we know that is the player thread that will live on forever.
If FBG created a thread for *every* player (Player: Name etc), this resolve both these points.  The question of what to do with any devy/pre-NFL players would have to be addressed though.  Would anyone be able to start those and once drafted, the title could be changed to the standard player thread format or would the thread be merged into a new thread to be sure that FBG had access to change the title if needed?  

While I like the idea of simply changing the existing player thread title (for 48 hours), I don't believe it works in practice because many who would would be posting breaking news will not be FBG staff and so could not change the thread title.  So separate thread merged into existing thread is clearly the way to go.

 

Phantom Knight

Footballguy
Why?

I don't get this at all Joe. To me it seems to encourage lazy behavior which is not going to make board participation "better".
Hey now!  I don't consider myself at all lazy.  ;)

I am however often sleep deprived from overworking while navigating the forums on a cellphone with a slow connection and my fat fingers.  I support "Breaking news" threads.

 

Biabreakable

Footballguy
Hey now!  I don't consider myself at all lazy.  ;)

I am however often sleep deprived from overworking while navigating the forums on a cellphone with a slow connection and my fat fingers.  I support "Breaking news" threads.
So it is the technologies limitations that cause you to not be able to read the most recent posts of a thread?

:bs:

Joe has already conceded that the SP cannot keep up with twitter, news aggregators and so on. Once upon a time news may have broken from a post here in the SP but not anymore. The information is so ubiquitous I just don't really see the point. Why try to copy those things and dumb down the SP?

No one wants to draft a player who has been injured. With all of information available through so many mediums there really is no excuse for someone to draft an injured player when a quick google search or whatever you prefer should inform you of the injury. The only way you might get caught drafting an injured player is if you had predrafted the guy and they were injured after you put in your pre draft list. Otherwise you just haven't done your due diligence.

The breaking news is not going to help you if you already drafted the guy a few days ago, a few weeks ago, months ago ect. It is only actionable if you are drafting that player around the same time as the news breaking.

I think we have all heard the phrase don't judge a book by its cover, but this seems to be exactly what Joe wants to do. To be able to read the thread title and get the information from that alone without having to read the actual content of the thread. May as well not have the forums at all if it is such a chore to actually read the content.

 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
So it is the technologies limitations that cause you to not be able to read the most recent posts of a thread?

:bs:

Joe has already conceded that the SP cannot keep up with twitter, news aggregators and so on. Once upon a time news may have broken from a post here in the SP but not anymore. The information is so ubiquitous I just don't really see the point. Why try to copy those things and dumb down the SP?

No one wants to draft a player who has been injured. With all of information available through so many mediums there really is no excuse for someone to draft an injured player when a quick google search or whatever you prefer should inform you of the injury. The only way you might get caught drafting an injured player is if you had predrafted the guy and they were injured after you put in your pre draft list. Otherwise you just haven't done your due diligence.

The breaking news is not going to help you if you already drafted the guy a few days ago, a few weeks ago, months ago ect. It is only actionable if you are drafting that player around the same time as the news breaking.

I think we have all heard the phrase don't judge a book by its cover, but this seems to be exactly what Joe wants to do. To be able to read the thread title and get the information from that alone without having to read the actual content of the thread. May as well not have the forums at all if it is such a chore to actually read the content.
You're assuming everyone else functions like you.  We don't.  For some of us the SP *is* our news aggregator.  I don't use Twitter.  I don't want to Google search a to of guys I am interested in following and I don't want to count on ESPN for timely updates on breaking news.  Breaking news is actionable 365 days a year for dynasty players, no need to limit it to whether or not we've drafted him.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I disagree entirely.  As one of the biggest sticklers of all sticklerish sticklers around here for not wasting board space, I have come to fully appreciate the way it's currently done - when something new and exciting breaks, they allow the new thread, let it run its course for the next couple of days, and once it's no longer "fresh and new" merge it in with the Official thread.  Just because Hunter Henry's thread is bumped doesn't mean I'm going to read it.  I only open about 1/2 the active threads, there are a ton I'm just not interested in.  Hunter Henry is actually a good example.  I don't own him anywhere and his price has been prohibitive so I don't generally go into the thread when the last 15 pages have all been his owners pimping how much he's going to break out this year.  But an ACL is big stuff.  Now all of a sudden I'm interested.  I want to know what the prognosis is, what his owners are now saying, and who the next guy up on LAC might be.  I'd get none of that if we stifle breaking news into the existing threads.





1
Hi @Hankmoody   I must not be doing a good job explaining. I'm saying do exactly what you're saying for the reason you're in the bold. We agree, not disagree. After Henry's ACL, people want to read the prognosis, what his owners are saying and who the next guy is. Not wade through 3 pages of old posts with people hyping him up. 

Where we may disagree is I'm not personally overly concerned with merging everything into a master thread, although I'm ok with it when it's relevant to the master thread player. But in many cases, it won't be. For instance, in Hunter Henry ACL thread, I'd expect much of the discussion to be not about Henry. It would be about Antonion Gates or Virgil Green. That doesn't belong in Henry's thread. So we'll have to be thoughtful there.

The other thing is merging threads is a bit of work for the mods or @Faust if we can get him to help there. First thing is we need to get folks reporting and not bumping threads. Reporting is way faster and reaches the people who can do something way more quickly. Bumping just clogs up the board. The biggest problem is making sure they know the exact link of the new thread to merge into when they report it.  If the thread is reported and says, "Merge with the official thread" and there isn't an official thread, a mod spends 3 minutes trying to find what thread the person is talking about. But that's not hard to fix either. We'll just ask the person reporting and asking for the thread to be moved to give the exact url link he thinks it should be moved to. If the report doesn't have the master thread url, it doesn't get merged. 

Bottom line is I think we can make these super popular with good discussion that is useful to owners. And that's the primary goal. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hankmoody

Footballguy
Hi @Hankmoody   I must not be doing a good job explaining. I'm saying do exactly what you're saying for the reason you're in the bold. We agree entirely. Not disagree entirely.  After Henry's ACL, people want to read the prognosis, what his owners are saying and who the next guy is. Not wade through 3 pages of old posts with people hyping him up. 

Where we may disagree is I'm not personally overly concerned with merging everything into a master thread, although I'm ok with it when it's relevant to the master thread player. But in many cases, it won't be. For instance, in Hunter Henry ACL thread, I'd expect much of the discussion to be not about Henry. It would be about Antonion Gates or Virgil Green. That doesn't belong in Henry's thread. So we'll have to be thoughtful there.

The other thing is it is a bit of work for the mods or @Faust if we can get him to help there. First thing is we need to get folks reporting and not bumping threads. Reporting is way faster and reaches the people who can do something way more quickly. Bumping just clogs up the board. The biggest problem is making sure they know the exact link of the new thread to merge into when they report it.  If the thread is reported and says, "Merge with the official thread" and there isn't an official thread, a mod spends 3 minutes trying to find what thread the person is talking about. But that's not hard to fix either. We'll just ask the person reporting and asking for the thread to be moved to give the exact url link he thinks it should be moved to. If the report doesn't have the master thread url, it doesn't get merged. 

Bottom line is I think we can make these super popular with good discussion that is useful to owners. And that's the primary goal. 
I disagreed entirely with Borden's comment that I bolded about there being no value to Henry's ACL thread ;)

The only thing I think needs tightened up is the timeframe that duplicate threads need to be merged, a lot of them are allowed to rot and fester way longer than they should.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I disagreed entirely with Borden's comment that I bolded about there being no value to Henry's ACL thread ;)

The only thing I think needs tightened up is the timeframe that duplicate threads need to be merged, a lot of them are allowed to rot and fester way longer than they should.
Thanks Buddy. I thought I was losing the ability to read there. 

:hifive:

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I think we have all heard the phrase don't judge a book by its cover, but this seems to be exactly what Joe wants to do. To be able to read the thread title and get the information from that alone without having to read the actual content of the thread. May as well not have the forums at all if it is such a chore to actually read the content.





 
Thanks @Biabreakable  We will just have to disagree here.  On a message board forum, we absolutely want to judge a book by it's cover. Meaning I want thread titles to be hyper accurate reflecting what the the thread is about. We'd never allow thread titles of "you won't believe what just happened to this QB". Because it wastes people's time. Same way with article titles on the site. We want the readers to be able to know what he's getting when he clicks on the link. Exactly the same for the message board thread titles. So actually I guess we do agree - I definitely want the thread titles to be a "judge the book by it's cover".  The other end of the spectrum where thread titles didn't match the content of the thread would be chaos.

It's also good to remember  - tons of people don't have the time to read every single thread. It's not a "chore" to read the content. But people are busy. They are constantly being forced to decide what is worthy of their time. The sites that help them do this get participation. 

This is all about making it more useful. And thread titles that reflect the content of the thread are a big part of that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Phantom Knight

Footballguy
Where did I say THAT was the reason? The first thing I mentioned was "sleep deprived"... I also mentioned "slow internet" connection (I live on the Haiti border).  Both pertain to *my* needs to pass thru the forums (when I am able to visit), in as effecient a manner as possible. Certainly it is clear *your* needs and desires are different. No problem with me. No need to lower a conversation into something personal with a snarky comment.

I am entitled to an opinion equal to you and my life situation is not the same as yours. If most folks agree with me, great. If not, as is often the case, no problem. 

 

Phantom Knight

Footballguy
 merging threads is a bit of work for the mods

[snip]

 But that's not hard to fix either. We'll just ask the person reporting and asking for the thread to be moved to give the exact url link he thinks it should be moved to. If the report doesn't have the master thread url, it doesn't get merged.
Back on my one-man band wagon!

Having FBG (automatically) create all player threads would solve this issue. It would not take much to automate the merge. However even without it being automated, if all player thread titles had a unique format - for example, [player name] - a quick search would immediately find the correct thread.

 

Chaka

Footballguy
I am not certain refining the handling of Breaking News is really that big of an issue for the boards.  Maybe I am in the minority but I don't come here for breaking news, I come here for player/coach/team discussions.  I use the boards to inform my opinions about players not to find out if Hunter Henry tore his ACL.

Breaking News is well covered by a hundred other sources and they probably do it much better than FBGs could (or should) hope to. Personally I use Sleeperbot and, to a lesser extent Florio for my breaking news. That's where they make their hay, but as soon as I find out the news I come here to find out about the impact of said news.  The comments sections in Sleeperbot and PFT are worthless cesspools of human misery and entirely useless for figuring out what to do with the information they provided.  FBGs dominates the landscape in that department and I think that is where the focus should remain.

 

Borden

Footballguy
If the moderators are going to have to have to merge threads anyways, why not just have them change the titles?

Hunter Henter !!TORN ACL!! May 23, 2018

If you can even add the page number that the discussion starts or the news link is posted. Editing a title only takes a couple seconds and seems to solve all the problems. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
That's where they make their hay, but as soon as I find out the news I come here to find out about the impact of said news.  The comments sections in Sleeperbot and PFT are worthless cesspools of human misery and entirely useless for figuring out what to do with the information they provided. 
Thanks @Chaka

That's exactly what I'm talking about. When Henry tears his acl, I want to have lots of knowledgeable discussion about what it means and more importantly about what this means for other players. Having a title that matches the content of the thread is the best way to do that I believe. 

 

Chaka

Footballguy
Thanks @Chaka

That's exactly what I'm talking about. When Henry tears his acl, I want to have lots of knowledgeable discussion about what it means and more importantly about what this means for other players. Having a title that matches the content of the thread is the best way to do that I believe. 
Maybe, but when I hear about Hunter Henry's torn ACL the first place I think to go is the Hunter Henry thread. Personally I think more threads (even with well considered new titles) is just going to add noise, confusion and will more likely result in diluting the discussion rather than distilling it.  Some people will be talking in the official threads and some people will be talking in the new breaking news threads and, in both threads, people will be calling for the threads to be merged so we can focus the discussion.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
If the moderators are going to have to have to merge threads anyways, why not just have them change the titles?

Hunter Henter !!TORN ACL!! May 23, 2018

If you can even add the page number that the discussion starts or the news link is posted. Editing a title only takes a couple seconds and seems to solve all the problems. 
Thanks. It's because moderators wont always be able to instantly change a title. With the crowd here I'd expect a thread to be posted within minutes of the story breaking. And we want to have the title right from the start. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Maybe, but when I hear about Hunter Henry's torn ACL the first place I think to go is the Hunter Henry thread. Personally I think more threads (even with well considered new titles) is just going to add noise, confusion and will more likely result in diluting the discussion rather than distilling it.  Some people will be talking in the official threads and some people will be talking in the new breaking news threads and, in both threads, people will be calling for the threads to be merged so we can focus the discussion.
Thanks. But there will be people who hear about the news here. We'll see how it goes but for sure we'll have titles that reflect the content of the thread. That's a must. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Chaka

Footballguy
Thanks. It's because moderators wont always be able to instantly change a title. With the crowd here I'd expect a thread to be posted within minutes of the story breaking. And we want to have the title right from the start. 
I agree with Borden and I am not sure I understand what you are saying here.  Are the moderators the ones you expect to start these breaking news threads or is the expectation that we will be starting the threads? If it's the former then it seems that it would be simpler to have them edit thread titles, if it's the latter then you might as well start a cat herding farm because that will be more successful than trying to get us to follow whichever parameters we finally land on in this thread.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I agree with Borden and I am not sure I understand what you are saying here.  Are the moderators the ones you expect to start these breaking news threads or is the expectation that we will be starting the threads? If it's the former then it seems that it would be simpler to have them edit thread titles, if it's the latter then you might as well start a cat herding farm because that will be more successful than trying to get us to follow whichever parameters we finally land on in this thread.
For sure it'll be you guys starting the threads. 

I think you guys are plenty capable of doing this well. I have tons of faith in you guys. 

 

Chaka

Footballguy
For sure it'll be you guys starting the threads. 

I think you guys are plenty capable of doing this well. I have tons of faith in you guys. 
As do I for informed commentary, hilarious zingers and frustrating back-and-forths that more often than not, in my experience, lead to two people coming to a better understanding.

But getting us to follow a specific thread title nomenclature? I don't see it, particularly because I doubt many of us are going to see this thread on the Sunday of Memorial Day Weekend.

Frankly doesn't this whole process happen already just without the standardized title nomenclature? Doesn't it always develop the same way?

1) Hunter Henry tears his ACL

2) Maybe a couple dozen of us rush to the boards and either

   A) Start 1-5 new threads on the subject

   B) Go to the official thread and post the link to the story about a dozen times

3) Discussion commences in multiple places

4) Eventually we start to clamor for the threads to be merged because the discussion is being diluted and the front page is being polluted because of too many threads on the subject.

If the moderators aren't going to take the lead by modifying the thread title nomenclature, and pruning the redundant threads that will inevitably pop up (again lots will miss this thread due to the holiday), then I don't think anything significant will change by Labor Day.

 

jvdesigns2002

Footballguy
As do I for informed commentary, hilarious zingers and frustrating back-and-forths that more often than not, in my experience, lead to two people coming to a better understanding.

But getting us to follow a specific thread title nomenclature? I don't see it, particularly because I doubt many of us are going to see this thread on the Sunday of Memorial Day Weekend.

Frankly doesn't this whole process happen already just without the standardized title nomenclature? Doesn't it always develop the same way?

1) Hunter Henry tears his ACL

2) Maybe a couple dozen of us rush to the boards and either

   A) Start 1-5 new threads on the subject

   B) Go to the official thread and post the link to the story about a dozen times

3) Discussion commences in multiple places

4) Eventually we start to clamor for the threads to be merged because the discussion is being diluted and the front page is being polluted because of too many threads on the subject.

If the moderators aren't going to take the lead by modifying the thread title nomenclature, and pruning the redundant threads that will inevitably pop up (again lots will miss this thread due to the holiday), then I don't think anything significant will change by Labor Day.
"Nomenclature"?  This is the shark pool--not dictionary.com.  For real--what does that mean?  I was an English major and I'm not familiar with that term. Help a brotha out. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top