Shark Poolers...Help Us, Help You (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

Hey Everyone.

It's hard to believe how long this board has been around, for some of you this is your second or third incarnation of the FBG forum to boot. We've always been extremely proud of the community here, for a lot of reasons. For many of us [subscribers, staff and others], the Shark Pool started as ground zero for our experiences in fantasy football discussion and analysis. While some have no doubt come and gone, our forums have largely grown exponentially while maintaining a lot of the magic that came in the early days when it was more intimate.

In any case, just like everything else we do at Footballguys, we never want to rest on our laurels. We are always trying to improve where we can, do right by you guys/gals, and ultimately be the best at every aspect of the business.

As many of you know, this forum is among the largest and most active Invision board in the world. And to achieve that takes considerable resources, time, energy. And ultimately community. Without consistent, well intended discussions and ideas, the board would be worthless.

So next let me say THANK YOU to everyone for what you bring to the table.

Now, let's get to the meat of the matter. If you look up, you'll see a pinned thread entitled PLEASE READ, written by Joe. Joe wrote that back in 2005 believe it or not, and what's great is that everything he said then remains relevant now. But as time passes and things evolve, it's fair to say that we're always open to both reinforcing what's made this place great from the start while also adding in whatever else we can think of to improve the place.

So here's what I'm hoping you'll do.

Drop me an email: wood@footballguys.com with the header: Shark Pool Discussion

And let me know what YOU would like to see from US regarding the Shark Pool.

How can we improve? What would you like to see done differently? Do you want more staff access? Do you want more topics started by staff? Do you want more/less moderation? Any technical issues you feel need addressing? Anything goes here. All I ask is that you treat this seriously. We want to hear what you think about the Shark Pool, and see if there's anything we're not doing that maybe we should consider.

Thanks in advance,

Jason

 

[TheFanatic]

The shark pool is not the place for dooshbaggery. That's what the FFA is for.

I think the whip should be cracked faster and harder when the discussion veers from the topic into personal attacks. I don't want to have to weed through a myriad of name calling to find a well thought out opinion by someone with some great statistical support. That great post is lost to people that don't scroll down through that crap...

I don't mind a little policing of a board such as when discussing what a player will do in the following year some guy chimes in with, "I just traded X and Y for that player," and someone responds with "good to hear. Can you keep us posted on all of your teams this year." But when someone says X player is going to run for Y amount of yards and Z TD's because in the second half he really started to come into his own with X carries per game, Y YPC, and Z TD's per game, yada yada yada and someone responds with "your an idiot if you think that teams won't game plan against this guy now." No logical argument, just opinion backed with more opinion and some name calling...

Maybe single guys out. Leave the post in there, but add at the bottome "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post." Or, "Username X has been given a 1 week time out for his third post that has violated Shark Pool rules." Gives people an idea of what gets a guy a time out and that repeatedly breaking the rules will result in increasingly longer timeouts.....

 

[3nOut]

The shark pool is not the place for dooshbaggery. That's what the FFA is for. I think the whip should be cracked faster and harder when the discussion veers from the topic into personal attacks. I don't want to have to weed through a myriad of name calling to find a well thought out opinion by someone with some great statistical support. That great post is lost to people that don't scroll down through that crap...I don't mind a little policing of a board such as when discussing what a player will do in the following year some guy chimes in with, "I just traded X and Y for that player," and someone responds with "good to hear. Can you keep us posted on all of your teams this year." But when someone says X player is going to run for Y amount of yards and Z TD's because in the second half he really started to come into his own with X carries per game, Y YPC, and Z TD's per game, yada yada yada and someone responds with "your an idiot if you think that teams won't game plan against this guy now." No logical argument, just opinion backed with more opinion and some name calling...Maybe single guys out. Leave the post in there, but add at the bottome "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post." Or, "Username X has been given a 1 week time out for his third post that has violated Shark Pool rules." Gives people an idea of what gets a guy a time out and that repeatedly breaking the rules will result in increasingly longer timeouts.....

I agree for the most part. Maybe its my age showing, but there is a growing population that shows no respect for others. I like the idea of displaying a "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post" type of message in red and maybe even saying which "rule" he broke with a link to the PLEASE READ thread.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

 

[valhallan]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

:(

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

Even worse is that half the people are talking PPR, and half aren't, and it's often not specified.Especially in all those player voting polls we've had recently. Most aren't useful because it wasn't clarified whether it was PPR or not from the get-go and half the people voted as if it was and half as if it wasn't.

 

[guderian]

The shark pool is not the place for dooshbaggery. That's what the FFA is for. I think the whip should be cracked faster and harder when the discussion veers from the topic into personal attacks. I don't want to have to weed through a myriad of name calling to find a well thought out opinion by someone with some great statistical support. That great post is lost to people that don't scroll down through that crap...I don't mind a little policing of a board such as when discussing what a player will do in the following year some guy chimes in with, "I just traded X and Y for that player," and someone responds with "good to hear. Can you keep us posted on all of your teams this year." But when someone says X player is going to run for Y amount of yards and Z TD's because in the second half he really started to come into his own with X carries per game, Y YPC, and Z TD's per game, yada yada yada and someone responds with "your an idiot if you think that teams won't game plan against this guy now." No logical argument, just opinion backed with more opinion and some name calling...Maybe single guys out. Leave the post in there, but add at the bottome "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post." Or, "Username X has been given a 1 week time out for his third post that has violated Shark Pool rules." Gives people an idea of what gets a guy a time out and that repeatedly breaking the rules will result in increasingly longer timeouts.....

I agree for the most part. Maybe its my age showing, but there is a growing population that shows no respect for others. I like the idea of displaying a "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post" type of message in red and maybe even saying which "rule" he broke with a link to the PLEASE READ thread.

Moderation seems capricious because no reasons are ever given for bannings/lockings.

 

[trader jake]

Don't get suckered into the "subscriber only forum"...keep it free for everybody. Gotta agree with the suggestion that personal attacks be met with suspensions and posted for all to see.

 

[identikit]

Hey Everyone.

It's hard to believe how long this board has been around, for some of you this is your second or third incarnation of the FBG forum to boot. We've always been extremely proud of the community here, for a lot of reasons. For many of us [subscribers, staff and others], the Shark Pool started as ground zero for our experiences in fantasy football discussion and analysis. While some have no doubt come and gone, our forums have largely grown exponentially while maintaining a lot of the magic that came in the early days when it was more intimate.

In any case, just like everything else we do at Footballguys, we never want to rest on our laurels. We are always trying to improve where we can, do right by you guys/gals, and ultimately be the best at every aspect of the business.

As many of you know, this forum is among the largest and most active Invision board in the world. And to achieve that takes considerable resources, time, energy. And ultimately community. Without consistent, well intended discussions and ideas, the board would be worthless.

So next let me say THANK YOU to everyone for what you bring to the table.

Now, let's get to the meat of the matter. If you look up, you'll see a pinned thread entitled PLEASE READ, written by Joe. Joe wrote that back in 2005 believe it or not, and what's great is that everything he said then remains relevant now. But as time passes and things evolve, it's fair to say that we're always open to both reinforcing what's made this place great from the start while also adding in whatever else we can think of to improve the place.

So here's what I'm hoping you'll do.

Drop me an email: wood@footballguys.com with the header: Shark Pool Discussion

And let me know what YOU would like to see from US regarding the Shark Pool.

How can we improve? What would you like to see done differently? Do you want more staff access? Do you want more topics started by staff? Do you want more/less moderation? Any technical issues you feel need addressing? Anything goes here. All I ask is that you treat this seriously. We want to hear what you think about the Shark Pool, and see if there's anything we're not doing that maybe we should consider.

Thanks in advance,

Jason

As opposed to posting in this thread?Will do...

 

[Jason Wood]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

I love this forum but since you asked, I wish there was a way to click on a thread and go directly to the first post in that thread that I have not already seen. I have seen this feature in other forums, and it is a great feature IMO.

 

[PatrickT]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

I love this forum but since you asked, I wish there was a way to click on a thread and go directly to the first post in that thread that I have not already seen. I have seen this feature in other forums, and it is a great feature IMO.

The little red square next to the thread title does exactly that.No need for an email from me, I agree that I'd like to see the boards policed a _little_ more aggressively, too many threads turn into pissing matches, and usually, just a warning message takes care of it before it escalates to a banning.

 

[TheFanatic]

Hey Everyone.

It's hard to believe how long this board has been around, for some of you this is your second or third incarnation of the FBG forum to boot. We've always been extremely proud of the community here, for a lot of reasons. For many of us [subscribers, staff and others], the Shark Pool started as ground zero for our experiences in fantasy football discussion and analysis. While some have no doubt come and gone, our forums have largely grown exponentially while maintaining a lot of the magic that came in the early days when it was more intimate.

In any case, just like everything else we do at Footballguys, we never want to rest on our laurels. We are always trying to improve where we can, do right by you guys/gals, and ultimately be the best at every aspect of the business.

As many of you know, this forum is among the largest and most active Invision board in the world. And to achieve that takes considerable resources, time, energy. And ultimately community. Without consistent, well intended discussions and ideas, the board would be worthless.

So next let me say THANK YOU to everyone for what you bring to the table.

Now, let's get to the meat of the matter. If you look up, you'll see a pinned thread entitled PLEASE READ, written by Joe. Joe wrote that back in 2005 believe it or not, and what's great is that everything he said then remains relevant now. But as time passes and things evolve, it's fair to say that we're always open to both reinforcing what's made this place great from the start while also adding in whatever else we can think of to improve the place.

So here's what I'm hoping you'll do.

Drop me an email: wood@footballguys.com with the header: Shark Pool Discussion

And let me know what YOU would like to see from US regarding the Shark Pool.

How can we improve? What would you like to see done differently? Do you want more staff access? Do you want more topics started by staff? Do you want more/less moderation? Any technical issues you feel need addressing? Anything goes here. All I ask is that you treat this seriously. We want to hear what you think about the Shark Pool, and see if there's anything we're not doing that maybe we should consider.

Thanks in advance,

Jason

As opposed to posting in this thread?Will do...

I would also like to add that not following rules outside of Joe's pinned post should not result in timeouts

 

[ChuckLiddell]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

I love this forum but since you asked, I wish there was a way to click on a thread and go directly to the first post in that thread that I have not already seen. I have seen this feature in other forums, and it is a great feature IMO.

The little red square next to the thread title does exactly that.No need for an email from me, I agree that I'd like to see the boards policed a _little_ more aggressively, too many threads turn into pissing matches, and usually, just a warning message takes care of it before it escalates to a banning.

How about that? Awesome. Glad I brought it up!

 

[Jason Wood]

Keep it up everyone, this is exactly what we're looking for.

 

[Bri]

I don't like much of the pinned stuff. It should be bare essentials.

Poor thread titles and or a presumed lack of interest shouldn't be a reason for pinning a thread. (this may not make sense until you notice something in the future)

This topic now seems to be in JB's pinned thread and here. Do we need two?

I don't like "guides" as pinned threads. All NFL dates/calendar, all FA threads, all....I think we would all be much better served by improved search capability. With that, one could easily find "all FA threads" and a mutual goal would be reached.

One thing that older boards had was the ability for threads to be branched out like a family tree. I want that, I sorely want that. The back N forth that is complained about above, would be grouped together as a series of rebuttals. Those guys can expand that and chatter. The rest of us can leave it minimized and enjoy the rest of the thread. It's hard to explain maybe someone else can link to a tree or explain it better. I think it would be very well received here.

Posting Charts/tables here is rough sometimes. I really think FBGs should either spend some time searching the web for such an add-on to the board or pay some freelancer to create one. Its a long time coming and I can't imagine it'd be much money at all. What I'm referring to is someone goes to PFR, clicks reply, and then maybe "add table" and pastes in stats from PFR that furthers the discussion. We've been trying code /code and all sorts of things for years to get them to appear better. Could you at least ask around see if such an add-on exists please?

Hope this is helpful

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

I would definitely start here with any changes...

 

[Jason Wood]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

I would definitely start here with any changes...

I understand what you guys are talking about here, but just to flesh it out more. How would you propose we monitor that? It would be redundant to have to duplicate every thread and discuss the merits from both dynasty and redraft. Would having people clearly state whether they were speaking dynasty or redraft help?

 

[BeTheMatch]

The search function continues to be approximately 99.2 percent useless. Something needs to be fixed there.

 

[GregR_2]

Moderating

I think the biggest reason for the success of the boards here is the increased level of moderation here that is lacking at many other sites. If people with meaningful content to contribute get drowned out by flame wars and such, they are going to get tired of it and go find somewhere that they won't have to deal with it.

I tend to support more moderation over less. But that doesn't mean the moderation has to be draconian either. I think mod posts guiding things back on topic are often all it takes. But when someone proves to be a repeat offender, then I definitely do favor the mods turning to a heavier hand to either curb the behavior or get rid of them for good.

So I guess I'd say, I think where we're at is pretty good, but I wouldn't have a problem with heavier moderation. Especially if it isn't overdone, giving immediate timeouts for even minor infractions, etc.

Shark Pool Team Projection threads instead of Individual Player Projections

I used to bring this up yearly and it seemed like staff would generally react favorably and say they'd think about doing it next year, but then never would. I finally stopped bringing it up. Rather than doing individual player projection threads, I think that FBGs should be doing NFL team projection threads. I don't know of many who would advocate doing projections player by player rather than looking at the entire team. I think you'd get a lot more meaningful content out of it this way as everyone is guided to considering the changes to the entire team, will have to actually think about whether their receiver projections account for more yards than their QB projection is throwing, etc.

It would require putting some thought into the format, asking that all of a certain group of players be projected and discussed. Previous years stats for players and for the teams as a whole should be provided (like how many running vs passing plays, etc). Changes to the team would be given. All the information that people would use to project for that team should be given in the initial post. And then anything missing from that post would hopefully be caught by posters and added by staff to the original post. Then the FBG staff doing their projections would have a more complete listing to work from as well. FBGs could still garner comments on individual players for the content pages.

 

[GregR_2]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

I would definitely start here with any changes...

I understand what you guys are talking about here, but just to flesh it out more. How would you propose we monitor that? It would be redundant to have to duplicate every thread and discuss the merits from both dynasty and redraft. Would having people clearly state whether they were speaking dynasty or redraft help?

I think in general, that mods stepping in to help make things clearer/better is a good thing. I know this is done already though I probably don't know to what extent.Things like... if the title of a thread doesn't tell you what the thread is about without opening, then mods should be renaming it. If a poll gets created that is obviously flawed, then have a mod get involved and ask the OP if they can recreate it so it is more useful for everyone, then delete/close the original when it is.

I also think an addition to Joe's post giving some more general things like that might help. Please try to name threads so they are descriptive, please try to specify scoring systems, redraft, dynasty, etc when appropriate.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

 

[hostile]

The shark pool is not the place for dooshbaggery. That's what the FFA is for. I think the whip should be cracked faster and harder when the discussion veers from the topic into personal attacks. I don't want to have to weed through a myriad of name calling to find a well thought out opinion by someone with some great statistical support. That great post is lost to people that don't scroll down through that crap...I don't mind a little policing of a board such as when discussing what a player will do in the following year some guy chimes in with, "I just traded X and Y for that player," and someone responds with "good to hear. Can you keep us posted on all of your teams this year." But when someone says X player is going to run for Y amount of yards and Z TD's because in the second half he really started to come into his own with X carries per game, Y YPC, and Z TD's per game, yada yada yada and someone responds with "your an idiot if you think that teams won't game plan against this guy now." No logical argument, just opinion backed with more opinion and some name calling...Maybe single guys out. Leave the post in there, but add at the bottome "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post." Or, "Username X has been given a 1 week time out for his third post that has violated Shark Pool rules." Gives people an idea of what gets a guy a time out and that repeatedly breaking the rules will result in increasingly longer timeouts.....

I agree for the most part. Maybe its my age showing, but there is a growing population that shows no respect for others. I like the idea of displaying a "Username X has been given a time out for 24 hours for this post" type of message in red and maybe even saying which "rule" he broke with a link to the PLEASE READ thread.

Moderation seems capricious because no reasons are ever given for bannings/lockings.

I agree with all three quotes here. Keyboard tough guys are becoming far too rampant these days, not just here, but everywhere. Just b/c we're talking football, does not mean the conversation has to immediately turn guttural when someone disagrees with another's point of view. I like to read posts based on logic, historical precedence, insight, and statistics, not ignorant opinion. I think the only way to reach that higher level of debate/discussion is to filter the idiocy, even if it comes at a price of heavier policing. In fact, I'm actually thinking of siggin' Fanatic's first sentence - classic.

 

[ScottNorwood]

I would say an improvement would be less editing by mods of user created polls

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

 

[Jason Wood]

I would say an improvement would be less editing by mods of user created polls

Now here is a great example of just the kind of thing we're not looking for.ScottNorwood started a poll asking how many games the Bills will win with TO on board. He then proceeded to have 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 wins. Obviously he was doing this as a tongue in cheek statement of how great he thinks his Bills will be. But a poll like that, while funny to some, is just noise. Having a real conversation about how many games the Bills are going to win is NOT.

So I went in, added other options, and noted that I edited the poll and explained why.

Total upfront disclosure.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=460078

But Scotty comes in here with his feathers ruffled.

Unnecessary.

Consider this a warning Scotty. Do it again and it's a time out.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

 

[CalBear]

I think in general you guys do a good job of keeping the Shark Pool reasonable; it's hard to have an Internet sports talk forum that has any kind of adult-level discussion. The Shark Pool is about it. There are a couple of moderation things which could be done better (like squashing HK's annual reverse-jinx thread), but overall I think it's fine.

There are definitely times when it would be useful to be able to post an image. I know, images can clutter up threads and people post all kinds of obnoxious stuff, but there are legit reasons to want to post images. Beyond just posting football images, there have been times when I've done some statistical analysis and wanted to post a graph or plot, and had to post a link which most people never followed. Maybe if you could limit it to 600 pixels or something it would keep it from getting too big and cumbersome.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

Understood. I don't think most people really want the staff wasting their time on stuff like this when they can be posting about football. If the cops who are on homicide have to spend a bunch of time handing out parking tickets, then they're not spending as much time solving homicides.

 

[GregR_2]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

You know I've never really had a problem with the humorous one-liners. Part of my enjoyment of the board are the personalities and witty comments that often make me laugh or at least smile. I think the board would be lessened without some of that being here.I also don't have a big problem with the occasional, "Shoot, I just traded him away" post. Isolated posts like that don't really disrupt the meaningful conversation. And I think that's what the test should be for when a mod should step in.

If it becomes so much noise it drowns anything useful out, then yes, act. And in those cases I think FBGs has been good about making threads to limit it (the bragging and whining threads for example). I hope mods won't timeout every person who makes such a post, especially if it isn't part of disrupting the conversation.

What I do think should be cracked down on are the snide comebacks, the ones meant to be insulting rather than humorous. Attacking a person because of their opinion rather than discussing the opinion. That's when people retort and meaningful discussion ends.

 

[TheFanatic]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

That's the thing, I think most people would be just fine with harsher/quicker time outs for those mouthing off in the SP. We have the FFA for that. If someone wants to DB it up, head over to the FFA, pick a side on religion or politics and get down and dirty. It's a great place to get that sort of debate and argument out of one's system. I think of it as free therapy. Less of that debate and argument in my non iLife as I get it out of my system in the FFA. But in the Shark pool, let's put the hammer down when people can't come back with a reasonable argument and revert to being junior high punks. People that can't remove themselves from the discussion and take it personal need to know quickly that it will not be tolerated and why. It's just an anonymous forum about Fantasy Football not an anonymous forum discussing the proper way to grill a steak or anything!?!?!

Also, I think some direct feedback in the post to not only the offender but to the rest of the board as well to explain what is allowed and what isn't will help everyone. I hear about bannings all the time and when someone explains why someone was banned it's usually colored down a bit. Leaves the reason for the banning up the imagination too much. Put it out there for the world to see. Draw the lines in the sand and make sure the rest of the forum knows where that lines are.

One thing I worry about though is tougher moderation in the SP spilling over to the FFA. I think there should be more leeway in the FFA as the name sort of implies...

 

[~Haze~]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

I love this forum but since you asked, I wish there was a way to click on a thread and go directly to the first post in that thread that I have not already seen. I have seen this feature in other forums, and it is a great feature IMO.

The little red square next to the thread title does exactly that.No need for an email from me, I agree that I'd like to see the boards policed a _little_ more aggressively, too many threads turn into pissing matches, and usually, just a warning message takes care of it before it escalates to a banning.

How about that? Awesome. Glad I brought it up!

Life will be easier if you learn to use the features. Some of these features should be explained better in the FAQ thread. Everything I know, I know from trial and error or seeing someone else mention it. The features that I hear about and pick up on, all make my MBExperience easier. For example: (as mentioned) go to last unread - feature and reply instead of quote-feature.

There should be a user guide or a how to guide. There are a lot of control panel and personal preference features should be explained somewhere so that we are aware of all the features and how to use them.

 

[guderian]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

I'm not completely sure that most people know where the line between acceptable and unacceptable lies. The 50-100 regulars who read most of the threads may have a good idea about the rules and when there's a banning they may know why. However, there are a lot of us that only monitor a handful of threads and post a couple of times a day and we aren't as up-to-date with board moderation. I'd add the in-flux of "in-season" members to the ones that are also clueless about what is acceptable here. I think that the reasons for bannings should be better publicized. I don't think this should be personal, but I think out-of-line behavior and punishments should be better publicized to the broader FBG community. When things get way out of line, perhaps you should start a thread highlighting that a number of people have been given time-outs for certain behavior. As it is, one only discovers that certain behavior begets a banning if you happen to be in that thread.

I just think that there is a broader FBGs community that may not be as clued into the rules as the handful of "regulars". Therefore, when the season hits you have a lot of people that need to be educated about the moderation policy.

 

[ScottNorwood]

I would say an improvement would be less editing by mods of user created polls

Now here is a great example of just the kind of thing we're not looking for.ScottNorwood started a poll asking how many games the Bills will win with TO on board. He then proceeded to have 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 wins. Obviously he was doing this as a tongue in cheek statement of how great he thinks his Bills will be. But a poll like that, while funny to some, is just noise. Having a real conversation about how many games the Bills are going to win is NOT.

So I went in, added other options, and noted that I edited the poll and explained why.

Total upfront disclosure.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=460078

But Scotty comes in here with his feathers ruffled.

Unnecessary.

Consider this a warning Scotty. Do it again and it's a time out.

Well we can still have a serious discussion about how many games the Bills will win in that thread. Sure the poll was set up just for fun and goofing around, but that kind of poll data is generally worthless anyway.

 

[guderian]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

That's the thing, I think most people would be just fine with harsher/quicker time outs for those mouthing off in the SP. We have the FFA for that. If someone wants to DB it up, head over to the FFA, pick a side on religion or politics and get down and dirty. It's a great place to get that sort of debate and argument out of one's system. I think of it as free therapy. Less of that debate and argument in my non iLife as I get it out of my system in the FFA. But in the Shark pool, let's put the hammer down when people can't come back with a reasonable argument and revert to being junior high punks. People that can't remove themselves from the discussion and take it personal need to know quickly that it will not be tolerated and why. It's just an anonymous forum about Fantasy Football not an anonymous forum discussing the proper way to grill a steak or anything!?!?!

Also, I think some direct feedback in the post to not only the offender but to the rest of the board as well to explain what is allowed and what isn't will help everyone. I hear about bannings all the time and when someone explains why someone was banned it's usually colored down a bit. Leaves the reason for the banning up the imagination too much. Put it out there for the world to see. Draw the lines in the sand and make sure the rest of the forum knows where that lines are.

One thing I worry about though is tougher moderation in the SP spilling over to the FFA. I think there should be more leeway in the FFA as the name sort of implies...

I think it will be hard to maintain two different set of rules for the SP and the FFA. I think the rules should be applied to both forums equally.

 

[TheFanatic]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

Understood. I don't think most people really want the staff wasting their time on stuff like this when they can be posting about football. If the cops who are on homicide have to spend a bunch of time handing out parking tickets, then they're not spending as much time solving homicides.

That analogy sucks and you're an idiot.An example of what should constitute the following message in the post along with a time out:

Due to this post it has been deemed that TheFanatic has failed to follow the rules of the Shark Pool and will be unable to post for a period of 48 hours

Everyone will know exactly why I crossed the line and it will reinforce in them why they should not make similar posts

Oh, and sorry CB. Just using your post as an example to prove a point. I don't think you're an idiot....

 

[Jason Wood]

As to FFA vs. Shark Pool.

I don't want to speak for Joe or David but from my perspective, they are different beasts. I think we allow a LOT in the FFA and have always been more strict in the Shark Pool for good reason. If anything, I think we're trying to re-establish just how different the two forums are and that means a likely heavier/shorter hand in here, but not discernible change to what flies/doesn't fly in the FFA.

 

[~Haze~]

Good post Jason and good replies. Of course, with this many people, you'll always have requests that are varied and sometimes even opposites, but still we want to hear what you guys are seeing out there.

For certain, there is going to be a much stronger moderating factor. The tool factor has crept up and become way too high. The Shark Pool needs to stay almost soley focused on football discussion and strategy. And less "noise" and BS. It's a fine line as sports talk by it's nature involves giving the other guy a rough time sometimes. But it needs to stay way more on Football talk. And less on the comedy attempt comebacks.

J

I am so screwed.....Edit to add: I think more moderation is fine. I like warnings, either in the thread or PM for stuff that deserves a warning. I do think that sometimes people have opinions just based on their gut and watching the games or players. I understand that sometimes stats or facts will "overrule" those "gut feels", but I worry about moderation of those type of opinions. Having said that, anything to stop the silly attacks on an opinion different than yours.

That brings up a good point - it would be awesome if we could do warnings and really stay close to people. The reality is that we don't have the manpower. Most warnings turn into a multiple PM back and forth exchange that we honestly don't have the manpower for.Most people know the rules. When they cant' follow the rules, they'll be suspended. I'm sorry that's harsh. But that's the reality of what we are dealing with.

J

That's the thing, I think most people would be just fine with harsher/quicker time outs for those mouthing off in the SP. We have the FFA for that. If someone wants to DB it up, head over to the FFA, pick a side on religion or politics and get down and dirty. It's a great place to get that sort of debate and argument out of one's system. I think of it as free therapy. Less of that debate and argument in my non iLife as I get it out of my system in the FFA. But in the Shark pool, let's put the hammer down when people can't come back with a reasonable argument and revert to being junior high punks. People that can't remove themselves from the discussion and take it personal need to know quickly that it will not be tolerated and why. It's just an anonymous forum about Fantasy Football not an anonymous forum discussing the proper way to grill a steak or anything!?!?!

Also, I think some direct feedback in the post to not only the offender but to the rest of the board as well to explain what is allowed and what isn't will help everyone. I hear about bannings all the time and when someone explains why someone was banned it's usually colored down a bit. Leaves the reason for the banning up the imagination too much. Put it out there for the world to see. Draw the lines in the sand and make sure the rest of the forum knows where that lines are.

One thing I worry about though is tougher moderation in the SP spilling over to the FFA. I think there should be more leeway in the FFA as the name sort of implies...

Seriously? How can you have harsher, tougher moderation? Things are quick and harsh here. I think too much so. If people would be more tolerant of a little passionate discussion, things would be fine. The problem is, too many people are overly sensitive, whinny jerks.

So what, someone called you an ###. That happens amongst friends all the time. Stop acting like a 12 year old and deal with it.

If things get any harsher, then they are going to start suppressing opinions and when that happens, no one wins.

I think everyone should stop complaining about any comment that might be tossed around in the midst of a passionate discussion (and whine about it like a child). This place would seem more like a collection of adults and less like a 2nd grade classroom.

 

[lyon812]

The search function continues to be approximately 99.2 percent useless. Something needs to be fixed there.

Being able to search on three-letter keywords would help. Something which I thought might be useful is collating all of the "official 2009 [team]" threads in one place/forum. They're usually somewhat active, but not enough to keep them on the first 1-2 pages...which I think discourages conversation between fans. There are also too many self-appointed moderators that act like they're participating in the Stanford Prison Experiment, which creates some of the #####fests. Let the moderators be the police.

 

[Flea Flicker]

Does it bug anyone else when someone quotes like 15 long-winded posts from earlier in the thread only to add like a one- or two-sentence reply? Even in this thread, it's a bunch of scroll-scroll-scroll to get to each new nugget. I think the "reply button should be moved or made smaller so that people use it less and only when it really adds value to do so.

btw, the scrolling is especially annoying when surfing threads on a mobile device... and I suspect more and more of us are using Blackberries and the like, so anything to help reduce the scrolling would be appreciated.

Thanks for soliciting, btw.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

I feel that the amount of pinned threads are an annoyance.

 

[TheFanatic]

So what, someone called you an ###. That happens amongst friends all the time. Stop acting like a 12 year old and deal with it.

Sounds easy enough. Except of course we live in reality and when someone calls someone else out that person generally responds in kind and the thread is done. The rules of this site state that name calling is not allowed. Not following the rules and reverting to name calling is in fact acting like a 12 year old. I come into this forum for information to help me win my league not to deal with keyboard tough guys that get their feelings hurt when someone tells them Reggie Bush is not that great of a RB.

If things get any harsher, then they are going to start suppressing opinions and when that happens, no one wins.

Wow you have completely missed the point. If someone goes into a thread with a very valid point and then starts weeding through a ton of bickering/name calling to make sure no one else has made the point in order to avoid the inevitable Honda response and gets bored reading all the bickering that guy is just going to click back and not post his point as it will be a waste. Oh, and I hope run on sentences are not violations of the rules!?!?!The bickering and name calling suppresses opinions. Again with the 12 year old reference, how about making a valid point like an adult without name calling?

I think everyone should stop complaining about any comment that might be tossed around in the midst of a passionate discussion (and whine about it like a child). This place would seem more like a collection of adults and less like a 2nd grade classroom.

See, I was under the impression that adults did not stoop to petty name calling. Because basically you have said that an argument that gets passionate is justification to start throwing comments around that violate the rules. Yet you want someone who has been on the receiving end of those comments to just be a man and take them without complaining? That guy is just as justified in retaliating with equally inflammatory comments according to your logic here and what do we have? More crap in the Shark Pool. You argue for turning the other cheek at the same time as justifying throwing the first stone. No first stone then no need to turn the other cheek....

 

[valhallan]

Half the people are talking dynasty. The other half, re-draft. Hard to tell when; and muddles the picture/thread.

I would definitely start here with any changes...

I understand what you guys are talking about here, but just to flesh it out more. How would you propose we monitor that? It would be redundant to have to duplicate every thread and discuss the merits from both dynasty and redraft. Would having people clearly state whether they were speaking dynasty or redraft help?

As has been said for many years, a dynasty forum would be great. It's ironic that you state redundancy is a concern, because I remember hearing that it wouldn't work because one forum might have a piece of information that the other does not. So which is it? In my opinion, there are enough hardcore players of both redraft and dynasty here to support two completely separate forums with the latest news and analysis.

Does it bug anyone else when someone quotes like 15 long-winded posts from earlier in the thread only to add like a one- or two-sentence reply?

Yes. There has to be a way to limit the number of quotes allowed in a reply. I've been on other forums where only the two or three most recent in the quote string show up in new posts. If the argument against this is that it would blur the context of the reply, then I don't buy that. The only people following a 15-quote "conversation" are the two involved and they already know the context. The rest of us have to keep scrolling past them and eventually they drive away any real discussion.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

I had actually intended to close the thread and leave this for email only [so that people could feel free to speak freely without repudiation]. Either way, I'll leave it open for now. Feel free to EITHER email me OR post here. But let me say that this is for suggestions. Please don't deride or assail others views in here. There are no right or wrong answers, we're looking for honest feedback.

I love this forum but since you asked, I wish there was a way to click on a thread and go directly to the first post in that thread that I have not already seen. I have seen this feature in other forums, and it is a great feature IMO.

The little red square next to the thread title does exactly that.No need for an email from me, I agree that I'd like to see the boards policed a _little_ more aggressively, too many threads turn into pissing matches, and usually, just a warning message takes care of it before it escalates to a banning.

How about that? Awesome. Glad I brought it up!

Life will be easier if you learn to use the features. Some of these features should be explained better in the FAQ thread. Everything I know, I know from trial and error or seeing someone else mention it. The features that I hear about and pick up on, all make my MBExperience easier. For example: (as mentioned) go to last unread - feature and reply instead of quote-feature.

There should be a user guide or a how to guide. There are a lot of control panel and personal preference features should be explained somewhere so that we are aware of all the features and how to use them.

I think if you put mouse-overs on some of the icons explaining what they are for, it would solve a lot of these issues where people (like myself) had no idea how to use a certain feature.ETA - I am an idiot (is it OK to call myself names?). That feature is already there. Feel free to place me on ignore.

 

[TheFanatic]

Yes. There has to be a way to limit the number of quotes allowed in a reply. I've been on other forums where only the two or three most recent in the quote string show up in new posts. If the argument against this is that it would blur the context of the reply, then I don't buy that. The only people following a 15-quote "conversation" are the two involved and they already know the context. The rest of us have to keep scrolling past them and eventually they drive away any real discussion.

As someone who has been logging in more recently from my mobile, this is a great idea. Also, a mobile version would be great. No avatars. No sigs.

 

[JohnnyU]

Yes. There has to be a way to limit the number of quotes allowed in a reply. I've been on other forums where only the two or three most recent in the quote string show up in new posts. If the argument against this is that it would blur the context of the reply, then I don't buy that. The only people following a 15-quote "conversation" are the two involved and they already know the context. The rest of us have to keep scrolling past them and eventually they drive away any real discussion.

As someone who has been logging in more recently from my mobile, this is a great idea. Also, a mobile version would be great. No avatars. No sigs.

I believe there is a limit to the amount of quoting you can do. I can't remember if that's something I noticed at FBGs, or another board. Even if there is a limit, it should limit it more than it currently does.

 

[valhallan]

Yes. There has to be a way to limit the number of quotes allowed in a reply. I've been on other forums where only the two or three most recent in the quote string show up in new posts. If the argument against this is that it would blur the context of the reply, then I don't buy that. The only people following a 15-quote "conversation" are the two involved and they already know the context. The rest of us have to keep scrolling past them and eventually they drive away any real discussion.

As someone who has been logging in more recently from my mobile, this is a great idea. Also, a mobile version would be great. No avatars. No sigs.

I use the Lo-Fi version on my phone. The only downside is that you don't get the subtitles on threads.

 

[~Haze~]

Yes. There has to be a way to limit the number of quotes allowed in a reply. I've been on other forums where only the two or three most recent in the quote string show up in new posts. If the argument against this is that it would blur the context of the reply, then I don't buy that. The only people following a 15-quote "conversation" are the two involved and they already know the context. The rest of us have to keep scrolling past them and eventually they drive away any real discussion.

As someone who has been logging in more recently from my mobile, this is a great idea. Also, a mobile version would be great. No avatars. No sigs.

Football Guys LoFi Version. Just for you, #######.

 

[piratemike]

I think if there were a way to honestly convey to the Shark Poolers that no one cares about their fantasy team, we could clear out a lot of the static and focus on hard data. That's ACF stuff, and should be treated as such.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Also, a mobile version would be great. No avatars. No sigs.

Until then, just create a "Low-Fi" account for your phone. I've had my "Lo-Fi Ahrn" account for 3-ish years now. You have the option to turn avs and sigs off in board settings, so do it and then only use that account on your mobile device. Works swimmingly.