BuckeyePlanet Discussion - All views welcome

[Bucklion]

Sorry to chime in late...I've been travelling. Seems to me the most important thing for people to know is what the priorities are. Obviously, we are a self-policing community, and the quality of the people here is most important, as Clarity has outlined. But beyond that, it becomes a question of what interests we need to focus on. For example, are we mostly interested in how we all perceive things, or how the outside world does?(note: this is above and beyond the recruiting forum, where the answer is obvious). Where that comes into play is in things like the "homo" jokes and some of the other obviously-playful-to-insiders but possibly-offensive-to-families-of-future-Buckeyes type of thing.

To this end, if the forums need to be divided up as such, they probably should. Another thing I want to say without offending anybody is that a lot of threads recently seem to end up quickly turning from meaningful discussion to insider stuff, and then never seem to go back, even when people try. I know the "specialty forums" and the like were met with mixed emotions, but maybe an "insider" board of some kind where people can take these kinds of discussions would be good. Then people can keep most of the other threads on topic and it would open up more discussions to more members.

To the rep angle, I would strongly caution against changing it for everyone's ability to + or - is the same: newbies could come in without understanding "the way it works" and start dinging people left and right because someone says we ought to run more spread option. If it gets kept, it should still be the way it is for that reason, IMO.

I think most of the extra stuff with race and homosexuality is basically locker room talk, and as pointed out tibor seems to be the only example where it was used as an invective. Still, if the concern for the view by the outside world is high on the priority list, then there should be some board-by-board guidelines that EVERYONE is expected to follow...period. So, if you can drop the f-bomb on the political forum but not even a "shit" on the football board...everyone needs to know that. I am not a PC person per se, and I don't care what kind of jokes people tell, but if these boards need to be restricted so that only people who understand they are jokes can se them...so be it.

As for newbies, maybe there should be a strict guidline as to who they contact with a problem, and what happens then. They are going to get ribbed sometimes, and who the hell wants to see another Smith/Zwick thread either, so some are going to get smacked around for trying to start trouble as soon as they get here. Beyond that, they should be given every opportunity to see what goes on here in a fair way...keeping in mind that if they really are just here to cause trouble, usually on a personal/bashing level, we don't want them here either. It cuts both ways...if we have a responsibility to treat them fairly, they need to spend some time understanding how things work around here, and have a thicker skin that the average Thanksgiving turkey.

 

[Steve19]

For me, the most important thing is the sense of community BP imparts to its members. We are here, first and foremost, because we are Buckeye fans.

I dislike comments that potentially make other Buckeye fans feel bad about themselves and their visit here.

I understand that it says in the Torah "What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. That is the entire law, everything else is detail." The golden rule is woven in every major religion. In a recent post, someone reminded us all that life is about treating others as you would wish to be treated yourself.

Having said that, I would hate for BP to become a place where political correctness substitutes for genuine conversation.

Abdu'l Baha said, "moderation in all things". I guess that's what I want to say. We need to observe moderation in our behavior on BP. We all need to know that this is a commons, a place all Buckeyes can come, and a place all Buckeyes should feel welcome.

Oh yeah, and I have no problem with people saying, "(obscenity of your choice) Michigan".

 

[nickofthewoods]

A quick note from a lurker. I like to read and I like to talk, but here
I mostly do the first. I sometimes feel like a believer who doesn't
understand fully the subject of his belief. I miss details on the field
that many of you understand. As an outsider, I don't get sometimes
why Ohio State can't sustain a strong offensive line, something that
to veterans seems simple. I don't know why hips are important for
a cornerback. So it's useful for me to read to learn more. My first
dinging came when I suggested that Oregon might deserve a place
in the BCS. The hammer came down hard, too hard, I thought. Later
I posted a link from the =New York Times= which was hooted down
in a matter of moments. It was a piece on Texas Tech football and
the reinvention of its offense. Weird stuff. Instead of the substance
of that article being engaged, folks simply responded that the =Times=
itself was not worth reading and that we beat Texas Tech. So that
was, yes, discouraging. When matters of faith collide with matters
of reason, it's tough to avoid problems. We love Ohio State football,
and I at least am grateful for a sustained belief in anything at this age.
But what I want, what I really want, is intellectual discussion of that
belief, without the suggestion that questioning details is heresy. I don't
want a culture of conformity. Any homophobia and racism I tend to
ignore, but on some level it probably does push me away by making me
think that folks here aren't as tolerant as their often gracefully written,
cogently argued epistles suggest. That said, the discussion here is so
much smarter than anywhere else. And the willingness to be self-conscous
about the ongoing health of the discussion is impressive.

Thank you to those who make this board possible. It amounts to charity
work, and there is precious little of that in this world.

 

[Folanator]

Oh hey, I'm not saying he's wrong at all. But the very nature of a fan forum like this is that much of it is an updated regurgitation of conversations from seasons gone by. Certainly recruiting areas and the diversity of OD offer something different, no doubt so too does the poliboard, but that has its own issues. I'm just curious about slobber's position, where it comes from, and how he thinks we could improve. Zero hostility or defensiveness.

Clarity, the one place where IMO this redundancy and reguritation hurts is in the recruiting forum. The comments that start with "It is my gut feeling" or "I have no inside information but" need to be limited or you end up with threads like BN's.

I value that forum becasue if I see a new post it usually contains new information about a recruit. That carries HUGE value to me as someone who is tight on time. I really could not care less whether Joe Blow thinks he will be a Buckeye.

my 2c

BTW I have been venturing into the open forums more and more and found the tenor there fantastic. The political forum is mature and very inteligent. It has helped me shape some arguments I had not thought about before.

 

[osugrad21]

Clarity, the one place where IMO this redundancy and reguritation hurts is in the recruiting forum. The comments that start with "It is my gut feeling" or "I have no inside information but" need to be limited or you end up with threads like BN's.

Agreed 100%. There have been too many of those posts lately, but they always appear this time of year.

 

[Dryden]

A quick note from a lurker. I like to read and I like to talk, but here
I mostly do the first. I sometimes feel like a believer who doesn't
understand fully the subject of his belief. I miss details on the field
that many of you understand. As an outsider, I don't get sometimes
why Ohio State can't sustain a strong offensive line, something that
to veterans seems simple. I don't know why hips are important for
a cornerback. So it's useful for me to read to learn more. My first
dinging came when I suggested that Oregon might deserve a place
in the BCS. The hammer came down hard, too hard, I thought. Later
I posted a link from the =New York Times= which was hooted down
in a matter of moments. It was a piece on Texas Tech football and
the reinvention of its offense. Weird stuff. Instead of the substance
of that article being engaged, folks simply responded that the =Times=
itself was not worth reading and that we beat Texas Tech. So that
was, yes, discouraging. When matters of faith collide with matters
of reason, it's tough to avoid problems. We love Ohio State football,
and I at least am grateful for a sustained belief in anything at this age.
But what I want, what I really want, is intellectual discussion of that
belief, without the suggestion that questioning details is heresy. I don't
want a culture of conformity. Any homophobia and racism I tend to
ignore, but on some level it probably does push me away by making me
think that folks here aren't as tolerant as their often gracefully written,
cogently argued epistles suggest. That said, the discussion here is so
much smarter than anywhere else. And the willingness to be self-conscous
about the ongoing health of the discussion is impressive.

Thank you to those who make this board possible. It amounts to charity
work, and there is precious little of that in this world.

Excellent post, and I've repped you accordingly for it, at least the first half of your post anyhow. I'm glad you've decided to stick around and participate in the BP community rather than turn tail and run when you were dinged for the Oregon/BCS thread. On that issue though, I disagree with your wording that your "first dinging came when [you] suggested that Oregon might deserve a place in the BCS." I think that statement misrepresents what really happened in the Oregon/BCS thread. You were not dinged for suggesting Oregon deserved a BCS bid -- at least that's not why I dinged you anyhow -- but, rather I think the chicklets came for suggesting that Oregon was the more deserving team, even over OSU, based only on record; that a one loss team should go to the BCS over a two loss team every single time and without fail.

Now, if that was not your position or suggestion, I'm sorry that the horde showed up to whack you with the negative rep stick. Where I found problem with your posts in that thread was that your argument was, I thought, extremely myopic in its view that wins and losses should all be weighed the same. Simply, that's not a view I can support, and I think you'll find that that is a hard sell to a lot of college football fans, regardless of their leanings. I also think that you may not have been dinged so badly if you'd left the statement alone after one post, rather than digging the hole deeper by following up with several more posts on the issue.

As to the second issue you bring up, the Texas Tech/NY Times thread, I cannot comment on it, I didn't see it. I happen to enjoy watching Mike Leach and his PlayStation offense when it's hitting on all cylinders. I think he's a vastly underrated coach.

Regardless of where we may agree or disagree, good post, and I'm glad you've decided to stay and continue sharing your view.

 

[Folanator]

Excellent post, and I've repped you accordingly for it, at least the first half of your post anyhow. I'm glad you've decided to stick around and participate in the BP community rather than turn tail and run when you were dinged for the Oregon/BCS thread. On that issue though, I disagree with your wording that your "first dinging came when [you] suggested that Oregon might deserve a place in the BCS." I think that statement misrepresents what really happened in the Oregon/BCS thread. You were not dinged for suggesting Oregon deserved a BCS bid -- at least that's not why I dinged you anyhow -- but, rather I think the chicklets came for suggesting that Oregon was the more deserving team, even over OSU, based only on record; that a one loss team should go to the BCS over a two loss team every single time and without fail.

Now, if that was not your position or suggestion, I'm sorry that the horde showed up to whack you with the negative rep stick. Where I found problem with your posts in that thread was that your argument was, I thought, extremely myopic in its view that wins and losses should all be weighed the same. Simply, that's not a view I can support, and I think you'll find that that is a hard sell to a lot of college football fans, regardless of their leanings. I also think that you may not have been dinged so badly if you'd left the statement alone after one post, rather than digging the hole deeper by following up with several more posts on the issue.

As to the second issue you bring up, the Texas Tech/NY Times thread, I cannot comment on it, I didn't see it. I happen to enjoy watching Mike Leach and his PlayStation offense when it's hitting on all cylinders. I think he's a vastly underrated coach.

Regardless of where we may agree or disagree, good post, and I'm glad you've decided to stay and continue sharing your view.

Dryden it does bring up an issue. When heavy hitters like yourself give a negative rep for a somewhat marginal (my interpretation) point of view, it might be a bit overboard to the nubes. It would almost be prudent to only negative rep if the poster is FAR OOB's. It would be great to be able to give more rubies for a more aggrieves offence.

I personally get frustrated by rubies with no sigs and for dumb/trivial reasons. However, I would not change or dump the rep system, I like it.

 

[GoBucks89]

Later
I posted a link from the =New York Times= which was hooted down
in a matter of moments. It was a piece on Texas Tech football and
the reinvention of its offense. Weird stuff. Instead of the substance
of that article being engaged, folks simply responded that the =Times=
itself was not worth reading and that we beat Texas Tech.

Keep in mind that back in 2003 the Times printed an anti-OSU hatchet job by Mike Freeman that started the whole Maurice Clarett ball rolling. None of his allegations were backed up by facts, but they ran with it anyway. Some people might still have hard feelings about that.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

heres one other thing. if you go some place to get food every day and have one bad meal, is the place terrible? should two experiences in the months youve been here discourage you. you fail more than you are successful. the other reality is this is a place to state your ideas, have them challenged and challenge others. learn and be taught. to me this is a place of learning. whether its football, basketball snowblowers, mortgages, cars, home ownership, politics-people have different ideas. this place takes a lot of people who know a lot of stuff and concentrates them in one central location. not everyone knows as much as the let on, yet others knowledge is vastly greater than they let on. some challenge for the sake of argument while others do it see another perspective. sometimes things get heated, in all forums, but this happens when people are passionate even more so when they are knowledgable. things get out of hand, ive had some converstaions with jwins, crazybuck40 etc which have reached the threshold of those guys and myself lashing out, it was solved by a pm that says "hey i dont necessarily agree with you on this but i love to debate and see others' perespectives"

herein lies the problem-do people want this to be an open place to challenge, grow and learn or a safe place which we all just accept each others comments and discussion is limited?

 

[Clarity]

Quick notes as I'm doing some housekeeping.

Wadc45 is a new Sr. Mod.

The following are new mods (a few more to come);
AKAKBuck, Buckeyegrad, Bucklion, Coastalbuck, Daddybigbucks, Deety, Dryden, GoBucks89, Kinch, LightningRod, NewYorkBuck, NJ-Buckeye, OSUsushichic, PrincessPeach, Seed702, Steve19.

I have something/areas in mind for each, but haven't been able to send out emails yet, so for the time being, they're going to be wandering around here looking confused. Throw things at them before they know how to abuse their new powers!

Also, don't want anyone feeling left out. If there's an area of the site you want to work on, something new you want to bring to the table -- let me know. Looking for a couple more people to be part of a 'welcoming committee' of sorts, a new forum is going to open up where people awaiting email confirmation (not fully registered) can post before they become full members. Basically it's going to be a place where they can get some noob questions out of the way, in a open/friendly setting. Before the trial by fire. :) We'll probably post a link to the FAQ (in progress), and have a sticky with a roadmap of sorts in there. Will definitely put something in place telling people what to do if they didn't get, deleted or can't find their email confirmation. Won't be something registered users will see (not to hide it from them, just to keep it out of the way). Hopefully this will allow some new folks a healthier transition. Get their feet wet in the wading pool before heading into the deep end.

I'm also going to be talking with the admins more about creating a few ombudsman positions. These are going to be folks who are known for their patience and fairness, who can be mediators and even investigators when there's a problem between a user and a mod or admin. This speaks to a question Thump asked yesterday, and conversations that stemmed from that have sort of grown into this. I don't know who, or how many yet, maybe a few of the new mods above, not sure yet.

May seem like there's too much going on, tasking people and such, but as we all know, BP is community driven. All we're doing now is preparing for future growth.

The Open Discussion tree of forums is indeed going to be closed off from guests, at least on a trial basis. We'll see how the lurkers feel about it, as I know there are quite a few who like to read in there, but not post. Lurkers, feel free to email me, my address is my user name at the site name dot com, let me know what your take on this is.

 

[3yardsandacloud]

Well, sorry to get this topic rolling and then not revisit it until today. Work and a flood of PMs (as you could imagine) seemed to keep me from returning to do more than just read. I am happy with the amount of feedback and insight, thank you all very much. I would also encourage those members of the board that lurk and/or post infrequently to give us your perspective as well. I'll try and clarify a few points and respond to much of what I'm seeing here.

I was in the midst of formulating my original post when several events seemed to all collide in quick succession. So I decided to go ahead and make the post (since it happened to cover several topics in question) rather than take the time for further revisions. That has lead to a small bit of confusion, but for the most part folks have seen my concerns for what they are. I posed everything in question form to get honest feedback. I hoped by doing so I wouldn't 'lead' anyone to an answer they thought I was looking for. That never completely works, but for the most part I think folks have said what they feel.


1) Closed Community ... yes or no? I mainly asked this because we are getting feedback from folks that get the impression we don't really mind if new members are added, but we don't really want or need their voice on the forums. I would admit that we can come across that way. There are a lot of strong personalities and it can be intimidating to someone who wants to join the discussion. I would hope that through our actions people will see that it's OK to brave the waters. It isn't enough to read it here on this thread, they must see it in operation everyday on the forums. Of course there are expectations that we place on new members. But please remember, by their definition (new) they know little of how we like to operate. While there is a burden on both ends to make a connection, I believe the greater burden falls on us to foster that initial contact.

There have been some great suggestions. In particular I like the idea of someone that gets assigned to a new member, kind of a mentor relationship. I'm not totally sure that's needed or even feasible, but it's a great idea. Most time all it takes if for someone to acknowledge the new guy/gal. Say hi, drop them a PM, give them a quick overview of what most people will expect. A simple "If you're not sure, or have a question, send me a PM and we'll discuss it." works wonders. Give folks that first connection to BuckeyePlanet, then they can be responsible for where it leads.

My biggest concern with this issue goes to the heart of what makes BuckeyePlanet (and being a Buckeye) a great experience for me. People, friendship, community. I have met many wonderful people here, folks I call friend. On many levels this is a powerful experience, an experience I owe to some folks who welcomed me at one time. Folks who choose to make the first connection. I sincerely hope that we choose to return that favor to other Buckeye (and sometimes rival) fans. I hope we share it and not hoard it for ourselves. I think everyone should have a chance to experience the friendship many of us share. And at some point YOU might just make another great friend.

Outside of the first several months, BuckeyePlanet has NEVER tried to bolster it's membership. It was only a concern at the time to get enough members to carry a conversation without having to wait a day for a response. I hope everyone knows that membership numbers will never be a goal or concern for BuckeyePlanet. This issue isn't about (and never will be) making BP friendly so that new folks will join. Clarity could care less if we have 50 members or 50,000 members. It's about making BuckeyePlanet a great place for whoever IS here.


2) Bash the Newbies ... why? I think this point is somewhat related to #1. I see some comments that state we need to put some folks in their place at times. I don't disagree with this notion, but I would hope we place some parameters on our actions BEFORE the beatdown begins. As with the previous point, I believe the onus falls on us to reach out to the new member. If a new members is making posts that are inappropriate or counter to our philosophy at BP, we need to talk to them first. Explain (via post, PM, email) what they are doing wrong and why. Explain it several times if need be. If that doesn't work, notify one of the mods or admins and let them have a chance to make a difference. If that doesn't work ... look out noob! I would imagine that negative reputation, warnings and even a banning is in your near future. But please make an effort to correct the problem BEFORE pulling out the whipping stick. When I see new members unintentionally making inappropriate posts and doing things that annoy the membership I get the feeling that we as a community failed to make (or even attempt) a connection as pointed out in #1. Of course, some folks join the board with gun a blazin. We can't do much there in a preemptive manner, but I hope we would still make an effort to make communication our first response.


3) Racial and Homophobic Attitudes ... why? This is a point that I grant has a pretty narrow focus on the racial side. I have noticed folks saying they don't really see or notice a problem. That may well be the case for them. Others (particularly folks that are lurking) seem to notice a problem. The problem is not so much with the volume of racially insensitive posts, but that those posts are going unchecked. In short, very few (if any in some cases) people are stepping up to say there is a problem with a race motivated post. We as admins/mods aren't doing the proper thing by removing or editing those posts and issuing warnings. This gives the impression that we, as a community, tacitly endorse those views. To me personally that is unacceptable. This goes beyond the scope of bigotry we showed Tibor. That was handled poorly by all parties and we need to learn from it. In that case, a long standing feud (between multiple people) was left to fester and grow. Over a period of time, the small escalations went unnoticed or unchecked and soon folks were desensitized to this behavior. Just because some actions are ingrained through time doesn't make them right.

Folks, this is less about the past and more about our current actions. The word "n!gger" is found in 45 posts at BuckeyePlanet. The word "n!gga" in 23. "N!ggaz in 4. I didn't even bother the check all the other terminology used to demean race. To be sure, some of this usage was done with honorable intentions, to rectify a problem, as I am attempting to do. But 45 times!?!? I couldn't believe it. I figured 5 to 10 times tops and that would include all the times it was misused and used again to correct a problem. I fully understand that 45 times in the thousands of posts at BP is a small percentage of usage ... but it's 45 times too damned many for me. I'm not considering the times this term (and the post) have been deleted from BP. I'm not even considering the other instances where colorful euphemisms are used in place of the N bomb. Not even considering cases when different races are demeaned. Not even considering the times someone artfully wordsmiths their way around the subject without overtly using bigoted terms. This is a small and narrowly focused problem for sure, but a problem we need to address the moment we see it. BuckeyePlanet is open to all people of all races and creeds. Stupid people are stupid regardless of skin color. If use of these terms is OK for you on a personal level, then keep them that ... personal and OFF BuckeyePlanet.

Now the homophobic issue. I see the majority of responses saying that they view this issue as being one of locker room humor. Tasteless at times, but usually without malicious intent. I agree to a point. I mostly agree that it usually happens without malicious intent. That of course is an easy assumption for me and anyone else who isn't homosexual. I can't even pretend to know how it affects them and in turn affects their view of BuckeyePlanet, Buckeye fans, and in turn the Ohio State University. I would guess it's not good. There are two problems I see here. As before, no one (or almost no one) steps in to change this attitude or use of derogatory terms. And secondly, the use of such terms is enormous. I could accept this as some form of tasteless locker room humor if it cropped up on rare occasions. The use of terms such as "homo", "fag", "queer" and their variants appear in well over 1000 posts ... just this year. Once again, this gives the impression that there is some tacit approval of this attitude within BuckeyePlanet. I don't want to be associated with that. I don't want my University and friends to be associated with that. I would hazard a guess that many folks don't even realize the depth and abundance of this problem. Each individual usage of "homo" doesn't seem like much to be concerned about, but when you look at the totality of our abuse, it looks more and more like a problem.

I certainly don't want to change the good natured back-and-forth that happens at BuckeyePlanet. The razzing and ribbing are a part of what makes this place great. I would however suggest that we need take notice when we are abusing our freedoms at someone else's expense. I'm hoping that the closing of the Open Discussion to lurkers will give us enough room to enjoy our normal give and take without offending those that are not versed in our personal histories and inside jokes.


4) Self Policing ... does it work? I asked this question because it relates to the previous points. Are we actively working to correct problems (like the ones above) or are we ambivalent/indifferent to those problems? Is this an issue you feel the admins/mods should handle? For that to happen, more hard and fast rules would need to be in place. I doubt many folks want that to happen. I guess it's really a call to action. I personally don't think we've done a very go job with self policing lately. I place myself at the top of that list of folks who've failed to take an active stance.


5) Can we make BuckeyePlanet better? This is a question that is ALWAYS open to our members. We like to hear your opinions and thoughts. It isn't lip service to say that you ARE BuckeyePlanet and shape it's growth and direction. We may indeed have problems and issues that need addressed from time to time. Maybe even yearly as the case seems to be. I will say that I'm proud to be a part of a community that can openly discuss such difficult subjects. I'm especially proud that BuckeyePlanet isn't afraid to look at itself and (when appropriate) admit it's faults and shortcomings and grow from that understanding.

 

[stxbuck]

Cpouple of points

1-to be quite honest, except for immediately after games, the football related threads-NOT recruiting-are often better over at BN-I think sometimes we do jump too hard on football related topics that may have been brought up, but buried 25 posts down the page. Honestly, unless it is someone raving insanely over recruiting matters or being rude to other members, I think it is absolutely ridiculous to give someone negative rep over football related posts-disagreeing over Smith/Zwick, or the recruitment of Navorro Bowman makes you a bad poster!?!

2-The whole racial/gay thing happened because of the exact same reason-mods not wanting to step on the toes of 2 of the "original" BP members. Instead of banning Tibor's ass 18 months ago, the mods let him blab on, and, in return, Tibor played along w/ the racial invective hurled his way-w/out complaining-but the image was out there. Same thing w/ Thump's homo obsession-the mods let a running joke from a longtime poster continue, and now they act like maybe they should have done something-personally, I and 99% of the other active posters saw it for the lockerroom humor it was, and left it at that. For the mods to get out whuppin' stick now is a bit hypocritical,IMO.

3-Overall, this site is great. The only real suggestion I would make is to have a football discussion board that is a bit more free-flowing and welcoming to newbies-we all should recognize that OSU football is a bit of a narrow topic and the same ideas will occasionally (well, more than that), be brought up by more than one poster.

 

[3yardsandacloud]

For the mods to get out whuppin' stick now is a bit hypocritical,IMO.

Who got out the whuppin stick?

EDIT: From what I'm hearing the complains (racial) aren't really directed towards the long standing episode with Tibor.

 

[osugrad21]

For the mods to get out whuppin' stick now is a bit hypocritical,IMO.

I didn't realize anyone took out a whuppin' stick here...I thought this was a discussion on improving the site without calling out folks individually. As for threads at BN being better, well to each his own I suppose...but that discussion is another thread (and not a needed one) altogether.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

maybe you can clearify then, if a behavioral change is needed i think it is good to show the wrong behaviors. i know you dont want to call people out, but maybe i am naive and dont see exactly where what the issue is. so maybe you could help us with greater clarification.

and if im part of it or ever have been, you can use one of my posts as an example of what not to do.