Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Granillo: “Rise of the Robot Umpires”
(www.baseballprospectus.com)
It troubles me that the world is just one big rip-off of Ferro Lad.
Read More...We’ve all thought it. Heck, many of us have even said it. Watching the exploits of Eric Gregg, Phil Cuzzi, Jim Joyce, and so many others, it’s hard not to believe it at least once. “We want robot umpires!”
A new project by Dan Levy is working to explore just what might happen if baseball ever heeded that call. Rise of the Robot Umpires is a graphic-style novel set in the not-too-distant future where the commissioner finally ...
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Infinite Joost (Voxter)I could help with the White Sox, for the 3 or 4 remaining Sox fans on this site.
"Losing is a disease..."
Although I don't want to swamp anyone with too much detail, here's a little more info about some of my thoughts on the microBBTFs.
The more moderators per topic, the easier the management of the area will be. As long as people can work together and can agree on who will be the lead moderator, I'm fine. If people can’t agree on the lead moderator, I will be happy to make the choice. If anyone doesn’t think he can work together with the others involved, he will be free to create a competitive microBBTF (or BBTF/m). Of course (using the Braves as an example), the default Braves topic will be easier to find, so other Braves-related BBTF/m would have to work harder to get attention. Even in that case, though, as long as both topics agree to provide links to each other, Braves fans that frequent the site will be free to subscribe to both BBTF/m.
In any event, I have no problem with competitive areas as a competitive setup has two primary advantages: 1) if the moderators of a particular topic go off the rails, or simply don't manage their area well, other members can create another BBTF/m. This encourages moderators to pay attention to the wants and needs of their particular community; and 2) if a member of the site wishes to create a singly-managed BBTF/m, which he wants to be more like a blog, I can easily provide that option without having to manage/code a separate area.
As for off-topic stuff, I will be grouping the tags/topics to make it easier for people find the BBTF/m they are interested in. I haven't decided exactly what groups we will have yet. The groups I am leaning toward creating for flexibility and ease of use:
(The first field is required and must be entered. It selects which microBBTF has full moderation permissions.)
1) Primary (required field)
(The following fields are secondary classifications and should be entered when the poster feels the entry will interest subscribers of another microBBTF.)
2) Team group, microBBTFs related to particular teams (this includes the initial 30 team micros),
3) People group, consisting of players, writers, and singly-managed BBTF/m,
4) General group, general topics which warrant their own microBBTF (sabermetrics, books, scouting, etc.)
4) Sports_OT group, basketball, football, soccer, etc.
5) Politics_OT group, just what it says.
6) Random group, tags which don’t fit within the other groups and, although useful for categorization, don’t warrant a microBBTF. This is where the offbeat and random tags go. Some examples which have recently been submitted are: booze, continuousmetsinjuries, doom, hello kitty, and the 10 plagues. In other words, fun, goofy stuff.
7) Naval-gazing group, site-related stuff like help, moderation, memes, etc.
The classifications will be monitored and adjusted as necessary.
This list may lengthen or shorten as I implement the change. I want the option available when posting but I don’t want people to need a manual to submit an entry. So, if I can’t set it up in a simple interface, I am not going to bother.
Edited: 5/2/2012
-------------------------------------------------------
Addendum 6/7/2012: As I've tested this classification system, I find the grouping of the tags adds more complexity to the posting process than I'd like. As a result, I've moved some of the overall grouping to a simpler system of channels.
Is it possible that with this introduction, we can improve Game Chatters? I'm thinking making each team key holder responsible for, if the desire is there, posting game chatter threads (in whatever format is desirable). That would seem to save you guys the trouble of posting a dozen threads every day that largely go uncommented in. If Sox or Mets or Cubs fans want to keep chattering, then any of these threads is the place to do it.
At the same time, BTF proper can host a catch-all game chatter like we do for Opening Day, First Round of the Playoffs etc. I look at a situation like last night, where Weaver is throwing a no-hitter. I visited BTF a few times during that stretch and had no idea it was going on, only finding out later at another site. There were places around here that people posted it was going on (such as the Dugout), but no place that anyone would think to look for at-the-moment activity in MLB.
But if there were a daily catch-all chatter, I think many of us would start looking there at night and discovering these things, alerting us to stuff we're interested in and (from BTF's perspective) leading to far more conversation. Just a thought.
I'd also love to help out in the Cubs micro, but sounds like you've got plenty.
Faceprimer here we come!
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.