All Things in Moderation (split from Meyer thread)

[MightbeaBuck]

When someone posts in a game thread, or even a player's thread - saying, for example, that he wishes the quarterback would go through all his reads before taking off downfield...or wishing that a lineman should be better at knowing the snap count - it is okay. Hoping that the player will start doing what we Monday morning quarterbacks recommend from high atop our lofty Buckeye Planet perch. This doesn't mean we think the player is bad. In many cases the player's season may be great, but had a bad individual game. Or maybe it's just our perception that is not seeing the whole scheme of things. Either way, not really bashing a Buckeye.

This happens with the coaches too. I've read many things on this site over the years saying that Tressel needs to improve this or that. Things like "wish he would open the playbook more. We would have won." And fellow Buckeye Planeteers said nothing, after all, it's not really bashing.
It was a little worse, and more negative, with Luke.
Then there's Bollman. Blatant bashing. Many things have been said about him that should have, under BP's rules, caused a two-week vacation - yet didn't. Again, fellow Buckeye Planeteers said nothing.

Urban Meyer is a very good coach. There is no reason he shouldn't do an excellent job at Ohio State. I have said that repeatedly. But a dozen people have taken exception to my wish that during Meyer's tenure he would be more Tresselesque in his consistency than he has in the past. Guess this must finally be bashing, because many are defending Meyer.

I fail to see how Muschamp taking over a team with 4 straight top 20 recruiting classes (including multiple top 5 recruiting classes) and failing to produce a winning season with that talent is somehow Urban's fault?

It also points out that that is one of the pluses of Meyer. Hence the...

I think it's a compliment to Meyer to be able to do what he did (against us :() with lesser recruits.

Meyer wins with Zook's players = Meyer sucks

I guess you can read only the parts that fit into your conceptions as well as anyone. Then to be able to read something negative into that is even better. Please continue to ignore this:

I think it's a compliment to Meyer to be able to do what he did (against us :() with lesser recruits.

Everyone, let the piling on continue.

 

[localyokel]

Blatant bashing. Many things have been said about him that should have, under BP's rules, caused a two-week vacation - yet didn't. Again, fellow Buckeye Planeteers said nothing.

I've frankly been confused by this lately, too. My compass has zero true north about where the boundary lines are, especially since I've noticed some very long time members who are on "vacation" this week (Maybe I missed the post that sent them to cyber Bermuda.)

 

[BB73]

When someone posts in a game thread, or even a player's thread - saying, for example, that he wishes the quarterback would go through all his reads before taking off downfield...or wishing that a lineman should be better at knowing the snap count - it is okay. Hoping that the player will start doing what we Monday morning quarterbacks recommend from high atop our lofty Buckeye Planet perch. This doesn't mean we think the player is bad. In many cases the player's season may be great, but had a bad individual game. Or maybe it's just our perception that is not seeing the whole scheme of things. Either way, not really bashing a Buckeye.

This happens with the coaches too. I've read many things on this site over the years saying that Tressel needs to improve this or that. Things like "wish he would open the playbook more. We would have won." And fellow Buckeye Planeteers said nothing, after all, it's not really bashing.
It was a little worse, and more negative, with Luke.
Then there's Bollman. Blatant bashing. Many things have been said about him that should have, under BP's rules, caused a two-week vacation - yet didn't. Again, fellow Buckeye Planeteers said nothing.

Are you able to tell which posts have received infractions? There have been numerous posters that have received infractions and temporary bans because of the way they've commented on Bollman. His thread has been closed multiple times just to try to minimize the number of posts that require moderator action, because we'd rather not have to ban a lot of posters.

So, can you identify which posts have been moderated?

Do you know how many PMs moderators and admins have sent to various posters because of comments they made about Bollman?

Do you know how many posts criticizing Bollman have been edited or deleted?

Or did you just feel like making a blanket statement crtitical of the way that BP is moderated?

 

[Bucknut24]

 

[DiaBuckeye]

Are you able to tell which posts have received infractions? There have been numerous posters that have received infractions and temporary bans because of the way they've commented on Bollman. His thread has been closed multiple times just to try to minimize the number of posts that require moderator action, because we'd rather not have to ban a lot of posters.

So, can you identify which posts have been moderated?

Do you know how many PMs moderators and admins have sent to various posters because of comments they made about Bollman?

Do you know how many posts criticizing Bollman have been edited or deleted?

Or did you just feel like making a blanket statement crtitical of the way that BP is moderated?

Unfortunately, I can back this statement up. My vacation was as real as Jim Bollman's walrus tusks.

I regret nothing.:tongue2:

 

[Muck]

Are you able to tell which posts have received infractions? There have been numerous posters that have received infractions and temporary bans because of the way they've commented on Bollman. His thread has been closed multiple times just to try to minimize the number of posts that require moderator action, because we'd rather not have to ban a lot of posters.

So, can you identify which posts have been moderated?

Do you know how many PMs moderators and admins have sent to various posters because of comments they made about Bollman?

Do you know how many posts criticizing Bollman have been edited or deleted?

Or did you just feel like making a blanket statement crtitical of the way that BP is moderated?

You are in effect berating him for the board's lack of transparency.

Seriously if you want posters to know what positive effects moderation has then you need to make that information available. Otherwise TPTB must accept responsibility for misperceptions that are caused by their own policies.

/nitpick

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Are you able to tell which posts have received infractions? There have been numerous posters that have received infractions and temporary bans because of the way they've commented on Bollman. His thread has been closed multiple times just to try to minimize the number of posts that require moderator action, because we'd rather not have to ban a lot of posters.

So, can you identify which posts have been moderated?

Do you know how many PMs moderators and admins have sent to various posters because of comments they made about Bollman?

Do you know how many posts criticizing Bollman have been edited or deleted?

Or did you just feel like making a blanket statement crtitical of the way that BP is moderated?

Elitist pr*ck

You are in effect berating him for the board's lack of transparency.

Seriously if you want posters to know what positive effects moderation has then you need to make that information available. Otherwise TPTB must accept responsibility for misperceptions that are caused by their own policies.

/nitpick

TPTB can be expecting my FOIA request any day now.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought it'd do any good.

 

[jwinslow]

You are in effect berating him for the board's lack of transparency.

no, he is berating him for choosing to berate the board and mods without any of the facts

There is a report post function. People report bashing, spam, trolling, etc. He can and should use the system when the situation calls for it.

Don't stew on it for weeks without doing anything, then lash out about how an assumption falls short of a secret opinion.

Seriously if you want posters to know what positive effects moderation has then you need to make that information available. Otherwise TPTB must accept responsibility for misperceptions that are caused by their own policies.

/nitpick

yeah, making moderation a public event would be nothing but helpful. People won't start whining about why they got an infraction but so and so didn't.

Then there is the matter of publicizing stern interventions. seeing as we must forbid rep discussion altogether given the volume of griping over trivial, private feedback, I'm sure there will be no issues with not only giving much harsher feedback, with actual consequences at times, but doing so publicly.

Terrific complaint, muck.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Stick it to the man!

ATTICA! ATTICA! ATTICA!

 

[Muck]

no, he is berating him for choosing to berate the board and mods without any of the facts

Do you understand what lack of transparency means?

You're essentially saying the same thing I am without the full context.

Yes he does not have all of the facts and that is because board policy does keeps those facts behind a privacy wall.

yeah, making moderation a public event would be nothing but helpful. People won't start whining about why they got an infraction but so and so didn't.

There are costs & benefits to either course of action. There are also methods to help determine which course would offer the best ratio to the board that don't include rank speculation.

Terrific complaint, muck.

It''s not a complaint. It's a statement of fact. I made no value judgement either way.

 

[jwinslow]

Do you understand what lack of transparency means?

Yes I do. I disagree with the seriousness & obligation you're applying to this.

You're essentially saying the same thing I am without the full context.

Not really. I'm saying there's a very good reason for it, with consequences that would be much worse than BP mods having to live with the guilt & responsibility of choosing privacy.

There are costs & benefits to either course of action. There are also methods to help determine which course would offer the best ratio to the board that don't include rank speculation.

We're all ears for those methods.

After posting those, explain if you're disputing that publicly aired moderation & infractions would be a mess.

I'll take infrequent curiosity & speculation any day over opening that problematic box.

It''s not a complaint.

/nitpick

It's a statement of fact.

No it's not. Do you understand what opinion means?

I made no value judgement either way.

If you say so.

 

[Muck]

No it's not. Do you understand what opinion means?

Well only one of us appears to that's for sure.

Would you care to explain what in my first post was an opinion rather than a fact?

If you say so.

 

[jwinslow]

Beyond all of the babysitting over why Johnny didn't get the infraction that Suzie did, or why hers was this infraction instead of that one...

Beyond the much harsher & embarrassing nature of public scolding instead of a private confrontation...

Beyond the now public spats that ensue from some infractions (formerly handled via PM)...

Beyond the seemingly permanent memories of BP, making it much harder for past transgressions to truly "expire"...

It's a statement of fact.

This is exactly why we handle things privately.

Bashing is a judgment call. When a post gets reported, a dozen or more mods are alerted (& emailed) to respond. Often times there is a discussion about how to handle it, as opinions differ on how to classify it as well as handle it. This doesn't mean people should start racing to report everything. It means there's a system in place with reasonable discussions about how to properly handle it.

Most of all, we're unpaid fans of OSU. While we try to help protect the quality of BP's community, we are here to have fun like everyone else.

 

[TooTall]

:popcorn: