I still remember the no-hitter he threw on "Boy Meets World."

Please delete this worthless article. It's just rehashing a painful past that no one wants to remember.

4. tmutchell Posted: March 24, 2009 at 02:05 PM (#3113038)

Yes, I linked to my own blog. So what? There's no rule against it. A link from BBTF (or Rob Neyer, or Dayn Perry, or whomever) gets me several hundred extra readers, and this is one over which I can have some influence. Several hundred extra readers vs. half a dozen smug, self-righteous comments about "bad form"? I can deal with that.

are there some comments missing here?

No, Danny just doesn't like me. I can deal with that, too.

3. Danny Posted: March 24, 2009 at 02:00 PM (#3113045)
4. tmutchell Posted: March 24, 2009 at 02:05 PM (#3113038)

Yes, I linked to my own blog. So what? There's no rule against it. A link from BBTF (or Rob Neyer, or Dayn Perry, or whomever) gets me several hundred extra readers, and this is one over which I can have some influence. Several hundred extra readers vs. half a dozen smug, self-righteous comments about "bad form"? I can deal with that.

Here's at least a few thousand more, my industrious friend. Happy blogging.

Well, it's obvious there needs to be a way to ban crap bloggers like tmutchell and 4seamer from posting their spam here as they don't seem to care the least bit about community standards.

Who cares a whit about community standards when there's black gold in them thar blogs!

No, Danny just doesn't like me. I can deal with that, too.

I don't know anything about you other than the fact that you spam Primer with links to your crappy blog. Oh, and that you're quite proud of it.

I don't know anything about you other than the fact that you spam Primer with links to your crappy blog. Oh, and that you're quite proud of it.

Let those among us who don't have a 19-18 comments-blog entries ratio cast the first stone.

Buzz Bissinger thinks this thread is ########.

Let those among us who don't have a 19-18 comments-blog entries ratio cast the first stone.

Does 8827:0 qualify me to throw some rocks?

Does 8827:0 qualify me to throw some rocks?

I'm at 2,562:1, and I can't imagine what the 1 was.

Obviously, I'm on your side here Danny.

I don't mean to sound insensitive, because I don't think that a blog's number of readers necessarily correlates with a blog's quality, but this particular blog's Sitemeter tracker says that it averages 42 readers per day. I can understand the desire to broaden one's readership, sort of (when I had a blog, I didn't particularly care about page hits, although the network probably did), but I'd suspect the way to do it is to build up enough goodwill so that others are doing your linking on Primer for you.

Well, that or set up a few sock accounts of "dedicated readers."

I don't know if I ever said this before, but I agree with Danny.

I'm at 4,818:18 (tied for 118th among submitters!), and I'm also on your side Danny. If the only time someone comments is in a thread to defend their posting of yet another link to their blog, then they're not really adding much to the site.

People who incessantly self-link are the last great problem that BTF faces now that kevin is gone forever - and it's a problem that's only growing as BTF slowly gains a higher profile. It's obviously not in my hands, but I think people like tmutchell should be perma-banned (he's had enough warnings at this point, and has explicitly admitted he's merely trying to drive up his own traffic) pour encourager les autres. But then I'm a real hard-ass about things like this. I'm sure I'm in the minority here.

EDIT: I never bothered to check before, but it turns out my ratio is 2,918:28...hey, SOMEBODY's got to submit those Nationals and Mariners articles, right?

How does one check to see where they rank among "submitters?" This arcane knowledge is beyond my grasp.

Just run a sort by Total Entries, and do a little bit of counting. You're currently tied for 95th.

How does submitting an article work? Someone has to approve it, right? If so, who has those rights?

All you gotta do is ask Repoz nicely. He'll link you if you throw in a reference to a politician or clergyman.

can someone explain to a low-level web user what is going on here?

okay, i've submitted a couple of articles. i get that. and i suppose i get that it's bad form to submit to BTF something that you are responsible for. in fact, i thought it was against the rules. is that what this is about? so what does the comment inside the comment stuff (#3 and #6) signify?

Even if you had 50,000 posts, shouldn't it just be the case in general that you shouldn't submit your own work? I mean, articles by BTF regulars like Megdal, Treder, Brattain, etc. are often discussed here... but as far as I know, they are not submitted by the authors. It happens because someone with no self-interest in the matter feels that the articles are good and deserve discussion. (And presumably doesn't happen when they aren't and don't ;)

How does submitting an article work?

On the front page, in the upper left corner, there's this Submit News Item link. Basically, you file things through there, and then wait until someone notices it and judges it to be worthy. Bonus points are given for maximum flammability.

hey, SOMEBODY's got to submit those Nationals and Mariners articles, right?

Considering that the number of Nats fans here could probably be counted on one hand (or at least a Chris Needham hand, since he's Alfonsecan), you're doing a heckuva job and please keep up the good work!

can someone explain to a low-level web user what is going on here?

tmutchell is the author of the blog linked. Most of his activity at BTF has involved linking to his blog, with a handful of comments responding to comments within those particular threads (in many cases, I suspect, defending himself for linking to his blog). If you click on his username and look at the column for Total Entries and Total Comments, you'll see they're virtually identical, 19 comments to 18 entries. If you click on your own, for example, you'll see something like 3,146 comments to 5 blog entries. The difference is you come here to discuss baseball with other likeminded folks, not to pimp your own blog.

phredbird -

You're a long-time veteran here, so I'm assuming you're familiar with the article submission system? If not, here's the short version: anyone can submit an article to be posted on the Newsstand, using the yellow-boxed link in the upper-left corner of the main page. But only a very few people have the right to 'approve' such submissions and put them up (Repoz, presumably Furtado and Szymborski, and maybe a few others). Among other things, this prevents multiple postings of the same story. I've submitted a few stories myself, almost exclusively stuff covering the Nats and the Mariners that might otherwise get ignored (neither team has much of a following here, really).

But there are some people -- tmutchell, 4seamer, that recent guy shilling for the fantasy baseball paysite, etc. -- who only (or mostly) submit articles linking to their own webpages. You can usually tell these guys apart easily because they rarely comment, and then only on their own articles. They're submitting not because they wish to add to the general knowledge of the community, or even because they really feel they have some awesome insight they want to share with others, but strictly because they want to promote their own sites, raise traffic levels, etc. If the articles they submitted were excellent and valuable additions then it wouldn't really matter, of course, but invariably it's rehashed BS like the current example, or lame secondhand fantasy baseball analysis, etc.

The difference is you come here to discuss baseball with other likeminded folks, not to pimp your own blog.

You can probably take "likeminded" out of there. If we were likeminded, there'd be a hell of a lot fewer sniping contests around here.

can someone explain to a low-level web user what is going on here?

The guy linked to his own blog, which is considered to be bad form, and I think is against the rules. Anyone can use the "submit news" link to link to/post an article, although it's subject to approval from the site honchos. This guy apparently has 19 comments and 18 links, which may mean he uses Primer mostly to promote his own blog. Danny OTOH has 8827 comments and has never posted an article.

Also, Daly forgot to add "unknown punk bands" and "NY-area serial killers from Repoz's neighborhood" to his Repoz comment.

thanks guys. i'm a bear of little brain, but it's all starting to make sense.

Phredbird -

The "comment inside a comment," while framed rather confusingly, is a cut-and-paste of an earlier comment tmutchell left in an earlier entry. Cut and paste part of it into the search box and it'll take you to that one.

ah. the last part of the puzzle. just talk to me like a 4-yr old, and i'll get it.

IT PUTS THE BLOG POST IN THE BASKET

IT PUTS THE BLOG POST IN THE BASKET

That's precious.

(cue bunyon)

The "comment inside a comment," while framed rather confusingly, is a cut-and-paste of an earlier comment tmutchell left in an earlier entry. Cut and paste part of it into the search box and it'll take you to that one.

Yeah, poorly constructed, though the link in my fake comment takes you to that previous thread.

I don't know if I ever said this before, but I agree with Danny.

I didn't know you ever agreed with anyone. Usually, I just see you making a bland self-deprecating remark and stating that everyone else has made good points.

IT PUTS THE BLOG POST IN THE BASKET OR IT GETS A BONDS/STEROIDS THREAD AGAIN.

I welcome self-pimping from regulars like Megdal, Treder, Brattain, etc. "Regulars" is anyone I recognize by name.

Ye Gods, I have made 21 blog entries on BTF, and I don't remember a single one of them. I swear none of them are to my own blog. I know this mostly because I do not have a blog.

If there's a rule against this, someone point it out, and I'll knock it off.

I've been blogging for several years, and people know me, but it's tough to build a following when you only post once every week or two. If BBTF has some rule against self-promotion, then I'll abide. But for now, I fail to see the harm in this.

As has been mentioned, someone has to approve it, and I have made a few submissions that did not make the cut, so Repoz or someone must think enough of the ones that do to let them through the filter. This means, by definition, that they're not spam.

And why is it OK to "add to the general knowledge of the community" by commenting but not by linking? The only way to contribute to the general welfare is by making thousands of two-line, off the cuff comments but not with several paragraphs of research, analysis and commentary? How does that make sense?

You're right, I don't comment much, not because I don't want to contribute but because when I choose to contribute, I do so in this way. I have a real job and a long commute and a wife and a son and responsibilities, and therefore barely enough time to read and write about baseball, much less to make almost 9,000 comments on internet discussion boards. If you don't like what I post, don't read it.

I self pimp everything I do, but you idiots don't know it because I use my alias -- Repozz -- thereby flying under the radar.

Suckers!

If there's a rule against this, someone point it out, and I'll knock it off.

The ToS includes:

Comments whose primary purpose is to advertise, self-promote may also be removed.

How strongly that's been enforced may be debated.

Usually, I just see you making a bland self-deprecating remark and stating that everyone else has made good points.

Yikes. Hopefully Danny has not paid as much attention to my posts, I'd hate to see me and my 19,500 comments reducted to one line like that.

The only way to contribute to the general welfare is by making thousands of two-line, off the cuff comments

I'm partial to one-line myself

Yes, I see that in the Terms of Service.

Specifically, I see "comments", not "Links" and (more important) I see "may", not "will".

My conscience is clear.

I have a real job and a long commute and a wife and a son and responsibilities, and therefore barely enough time to read and write about baseball, much less to make almost 9,000 comments on internet discussion boards

Well yes, but most of us have imaginary jobs, a commute that consists of shuffling two yards in carpet slippers from bed to keyboard, and list a couple of favorite Strat-O-Matic cards as dependents on our 1040s. That's the audience you're cultivating.

And why is it OK to "add to the general knowledge of the community" by commenting but not by linking?

I don't see how you're in the community. Trying to sell something to the community is not being in the community. Insisting that you won't abide by the community standard unless explicitly forced to, is also not being in the community.

If someone else were to link your stuff, then it wouldn't be a question of you pursuing your own self-interest and it would be different. (Of course, I realize I'm asking for "pmutchell" to start submitting articles now...)

I don't particularly mind you posting your own article here but I think it would be much better form if you would mention that. A simple "This is from my blog over at boysofsummer.net" as an intro at least allows us to make the then informed decision that this is effectively an advertisement and not something that Repoz or Howard or others have read and thought "hey, this might be interesting to others."

I'm so confused. Why are these getting past Repoz or whoever? Please tell me this Mutt doesn't have the keys.

This discussion spurred me to login and check myself out. 154:7 (154 with this post). I'd have sworn it was more like 15-15. I am curious as to what it takes to be a member of the "community". As an occasional poster for approx. the last 10 months, and a lurker for a few years, would this make me a member of the community?

If so, I think it may be time for a name change to something snarky and baseball-y, since it seems like all the cool kids do that and I wanna be a cool kid!

I'm surprised you only have 154 posts, Krusty, as I certainly recognize your name. But perhaps that's only because it's so recognizable.

The truly cool kids are those who never change their handles. So you are cool right now, don't go to the dark side.

I change my handle but always keep my name in it one way or another (i.e. I've been Esoteric from day one and will be until the end of days) Does that count, or am I walking down a dark, dark path?

eso, i keep my original handle somewhere in my new ones too, though i've only changed my screen name twice.

Me too.

Buzz Bissinger thinks this thread is ########.

######## thinks Buzz Bissinger is ########.

Well, if you are really interested in writing your thoughts and having the BTF community comment on them, submit the posts as Primate Studiesa la Dialed In.

I'm with the people who cry "foul" when they see somebody link to their own blog. I will admit that it's not easy to gain a readership with a blog, particularly a new one. I had a Diamond Mind Baseball blog for a while that was ignored far and wide. I know what it's like to spend a lot of time writing stuff that nobody ever reads. You want to think of tricks to get more readers there, hoping that they'll stay for more.

Having said that, it's really not cool to link to your own blog on this website. I'd much rather see you write your own articles on BBTF and have them posted on the main page (I'm talking Dialed In). At the very least, if you are going to link to yourself here, have the courtesy to participate in discussions that do not concern your own blog.

Tmutchell, if you are looking for more readers, you might think about improving the quality of your writing. The teaser doesn't even entice me to click over. Honestly, is there anything here that I can't already get everywhere else?

If BBTF has some rule against self-promotion, then I'll abide. But for now, I fail to see the harm in this.

The harm lies in escalation. If you do it, and it benefits your blog, then word will get out and there will be ever more using this site merely as free advertising to a captive audience. Then the site quality will go down to the detriment to all.

My "handle" is always "Dan Szymborski" though I've been known to answer to Daniel and Danny as well.

Submitted entries are sent to the "Pending" list where someone reviews the article and then opens it (usually Repoz).

So that wasn't you posting as Dann Szymbroski?

So that wasn't you posting as Dann Szymbroski?

Of course not! It was barely even the same IP address!

I self pimp everything I do, but you idiots don't know it because I use my alias -- Repozz -- thereby flying under the radar.

Suckers!

Isn't this why they call you Shyster? ;-)

By the way, I don't think there are any standards that define whether you are "in the community" or not. To be honest, I usually can't remember who said what where, except for the most frequent posters (Nieporent, whose name I'm sure I spelled wrong, Andy, Retardo on older threads, etc). Hell, I remember the days of Admiral Ackbar and the Mike Piazza jokes, and I don't have enough posts to consider myself in the "in crowd."

Who cares? I don't usually look to see if you have 1 post or 10,000. I'm just pissed off when you post links to your own blog on this site in order to generate more hits.

I change my handle but always keep my name in it one way or another (i.e. I've been Esoteric from day one and will be until the end of days) Does that count, or am I walking down a dark, dark path?

As long as you have your "real" handle as part of it, I'm cool with that. Preferably at the beginning.

"Hell, I remember the days of Admiral Ackbar and the Mike Piazza jokes, and I don't have enough posts to consider myself in the "in crowd.""


Are you not a fan of The Great Guy LeDouche?

I've been around since the beginning, and am probably still in the top fifty posters numerically. I'd say that I'd have to have been to a couple of meetups, at least, to actually be in "the community."

@49, 50

Thanks for the feedback! Though, I suppose this ends my dream of becoming Heinie Mantush (Krusty). This is probably for the best.

Geez, I have 9155 posts!! I waste a lot of time here :( And I barely even get involved in the (f)lamewar threads.
And 46 blog posts too.

Which also reminds me, how does one submit an article to Primate Studies? I have been working on one, and I will one day get it finished up, me thinks. And since I don't have an active internet random thought collector, I figured this might be a good place to send it to once it is done.

How does one check to see where they rank among "submitters?" This arcane knowledge is beyond my grasp.

Step one: Find out your raw number (I've made seven blog posts, which is more than I thought. I would have guessed about four)
Step two: Go to the Member List and choose "Member Entries" in the "Sort By" drop-down menu near the bottom. Also set Rows to 50. Click Submit.
Step three: Okay, now that you've got a sorted list, just click through the pages until you get to where your number is. Seven blog posts puts me on page 5, so I'm... tied for 212th in Entries. And I also appear to be 248th in Comments with 2458. Both of those are more than I thought.