I asked in a mainland thread if it was poor form or bad site etiquette to comment in un-published threads in order to get them active in Hot Topics. There was no official response but people seemed to think it was OK.
Perfectly okay, I think. I’d say just posting “bump” is bad form but otherwise, if you have something to say do it.
I asked in a mainland thread if it was poor form or bad site etiquette to comment in un-published threads in order to get them active in Hot Topics. There was no official response but people seemed to think it was OK.
Perfectly okay, I think. I’d say just posting “bump” is bad form but otherwise, if you have something to say do it.
The question arose when threads had been submitted but not yet published. An editor or administrator has to go into the queue and move a submitted thread out of pending status for it to be published. As NN found and others learned, there was a loophole that displayed “pending” threads in the site archives, so a member could access the thread in there, comment in it, and then BOOM it’s in the hot topics sidebar, effectively published despite still being in pending status.
With that context I should have said it’s bad site etiquette. I don’t believe I said it was bad, because I didn’t understand the context above. I thought the context was that a published thread had no comments, or had quickly fallen off hot topics, and whether it’s poor form to comment in it simply to get it back on hot topics. I know I’ve made comments in published threads to get them into hot topics, and I think it’s fine to do it once; otherwise, take the hint.
Having said all that…
1. I believe the loophole has been closed. Pending threads should no longer appear in site archives.
2. One opportunity for site improvement is if we get submitted threads published faster. I know others have raised this issue. The site archive / comment bump loophole was circumventing the problem of a thread being submitted but stuck in limbo for far too long. If we get enough people to volunteer time to approve threads, or if we somehow streamline the process on generating threads, then the whole issue is moot.
3. From what I’ve seen we haven’t had an issue with spam-like threads being published on the main site. I believe the submission / approval process is a significant reason why. We occasionally get spam threads in the forums where there is no approval process, which is a data point in favor of my view. There’s a chance that site quality would diminish if we removed approval layers without increasing vigilance on monitoring and maintenance, but the volunteers to do the latter is probably a solution to the approval burden.
I don’t code websites and have no idea how easy or difficult it is, but if we could set up a news feed from a MLB-related site (such as MLB.com, he said unimaginatively, or like BB-Ref has for mlbtraderumors.com on their front page) AND next to each link in the feed we put a button that, when clicked, will automatically establish a thread (or direct you to a thread if one has already been auto-established) then that would handle a decent amount of submissions. So for example, if we show a MLB.com feed that has an article on “Mookie Betts wins 2018 AL MVP” people can click through to the article, and on this site they can click the “Discuss” button that instantly publishes a thread linked to that article. No more waiting for a thread to be posted, at least for the basic stuff that would be in the feed. We’d still need (streamlined) approval for anything not in the feed.
I don’t think we’d want the feed to be every possible baseball-related news source, but IMO it wouldn’t need to be restricted to just MLB.com. Could include other trusted sites - maybe Fangraphs, maybe Tango’s blog, etc. Y’know, the usual suspects.
Harold can be a fun sponge - 26 November 2018 07:02 PM
Master of the Horse - 20 November 2018 03:36 PM
village: I wrote on the other thread but if people are serious then someone or someones need to define who is wanted as a user and anyone is not a good or viable answer. What are the characteristics or traits that this community wants to add to the current user base. And from that a requirements document that fits that user profile. But jumping to configuration based on feedback from current users is not going to help build the new user base. I am trying to help because this is some of what I do but if folks want to politely tell me to #### off I get it, no problem. Good luck.
I agree with this sentiment, but would actually generalize it further: we need to understand what the goals of the site and community are first, and then figure out what changes will get us towards those goals. I question whether attracting new users is actually the most important goal.
And I agree with that too. Let me take a shot at it:
The primary goal of the site is to provide a place where a community of baseball fans engages in intelligent discourse about the game. Specifically, it distinguishes itself from other sports fan sites because it’s a go-to place for information and ideas, rather than just being a fan bloviation site.
The tools the site provides to create that community involve some original content, and a newsblog which allows users to chime in about current events in the game. Game chatters too. The community aspect is realized where people become friends and interact IRL and get to know one another—the site provides spaces for that to happen.
Finally, a healthy community is one where people feel safe about being present and contributing, and can engage in a discussion without someone veering it off the rails. Content that threatens that state is managed via moderation. This has been an issue on the internet for decades, and it isn’t going away, but sites manage this by segregating off personal and off-topic discussions, and by correcting bad behavior.
Really I think this site has actually done a decent job of achieving this, but it wasn’t organized to be what it is. The site was designed for a vision from twelve years ago and it hasn’t been adjusted since. This is very limiting. I’m not worried about the site being bigger, or more of a money maker (I’m not against it). I would just like it to be better.
Jim: it’s up to you. You have members volunteering their time, expertise, and money. I’m going to pony up a little myself ($) after I finish typing this. I totally understand where you are with regard to the site and your personal time and priorities. I think everyone here gets this. I think the solution is clear: take advantage of these offers. We’ve had these discussion before and it’s time for a succession plan. I am thankful for what you set up here and always will be.
Thanks to both for the follow up. I focused on new user generation based on series of posts talking about lack of new posters and how if you are not growing you are dying at least for most websites. And not to be mean but by many posters different statements this place is dominated by middle aged white guys and that population is not expanding. But totally on board with changing the scope as long as people are thinking and then codifying what they want this place to be before they go off and make changes. Though a whole new web design is a must because this is not remotely current especially since anyone under the age of 40 is trying to interact via a mobile platform. And kudos to the Jim guy for his candid post. Really impressive. There is a lot to like in this thread. Something else I will mention just for consideration is that like Twitter found out nuking tweets or users is the only real option after behaviors have become entrenched. If there is a new layout there can also be a relaunch on what are and are not ok behaviors by users.
Some sort of “Pin this thread/Ban this thread on my Hot Topics sidebar” functionality.
The “pin this thread” function exists, although it could probably be a bit more user-friendly:
1. In the Forums, if you are logged in you can click “Subscribe to this thread” at the top of any thread. After that, you can click “Your Account” from the top of any page on the site, then “View Subscriptions”.
2. In the Newsblog, if you are logged in, every thread has a “Bookmark” link at the bottom of the intro (you have to be in the thread itself, you can’t see the “Bookmark” links from the Newsblog main page). If you click it, that thread shows up at the top of your Hot Topics bar going forward until you click “Delete Bookmark”.
[
Thanks to both for the follow up. I focused on new user generation based on series of posts talking about lack of new posters and how if you are not growing you are dying at least for most websites. And not to be mean but by many posters different statements this place is dominated by middle aged white guys and that population is not expanding. But totally on board with changing the scope as long as people are thinking and then codifying what they want this place to be before they go off and make changes. Though a whole new web design is a must because this is not remotely current especially since anyone under the age of 40 is trying to interact via a mobile platform. And kudos to the Jim guy for his candid post. Really impressive. There is a lot to like in this thread. Something else I will mention just for consideration is that like Twitter found out nuking tweets or users is the only real option after behaviors have become entrenched. If there is a new layout there can also be a relaunch on what are and are not ok behaviors by users.
The site also eschews image files pretty much completely—that is another major limitation for younger folk.
Mobile platforms and blogs are not a great mix, but Tapatalk is a nice tool… another reason to consider a forum structure.
Whether or not not growing = dying, if the site is succeeding it should be able to maintain critical mass. I agree with Harold that the specifics of how the site should change must be focused on the goals of the site and the community.
The question arose when threads had been submitted but not yet published. An editor or administrator has to go into the queue and move a submitted thread out of pending status for it to be published. As NN found and others learned, there was a loophole that displayed “pending” threads in the site archives, so a member could access the thread in there, comment in it, and then BOOM it’s in the hot topics sidebar, effectively published despite still being in pending status.
With that context I should have said it’s bad site etiquette. I don’t believe I said it was bad, because I didn’t understand the context above. I thought the context was that a published thread had no comments, or had quickly fallen off hot topics, and whether it’s poor form to comment in it simply to get it back on hot topics. I know I’ve made comments in published threads to get them into hot topics, and I think it’s fine to do it once; otherwise, take the hint.
Ah, that’s different—I totally agree about the pending comments thing. However, I think there is nothing wrong with making a comment, assuming you have something to say. Posting a thread and posting “bump”—not cool. Anyway, thanks for making me think now on that someone is being shady every time they make the first comment in a thread they’ve posted.
3. From what I’ve seen we haven’t had an issue with spam-like threads being published on the main site. I believe the submission / approval process is a significant reason why. We occasionally get spam threads in the forums where there is no approval process, which is a data point in favor of my view. There’s a chance that site quality would diminish if we removed approval layers without increasing vigilance on monitoring and maintenance, but the volunteers to do the latter is probably a solution to the approval burden.
I think the spam threads in the forums are pretty rare, really. I don’t think that should be a significant knock against the forum format. Certainly, spam management is something to consider no matter what the format is.
I think the spam threads in the forums are pretty rare, really. I don’t think that should be a significant knock against the forum format. Certainly, spam management is something to consider no matter what the format is.
You’re right, but I think there’s more incentive to spam the main site instead of the forums. The links on the main site are accessible to non-members; the forums are not. There’s just no effective way to spam the main site, and no way to do it in the forums without a lot of effort that can get wiped out by Jim pretty easily. I just want to be eyes-open on the implications of any streamlining of thread publication on the main site. That doesn’t mean we don’t try damn hard to do it; it’s just one of the things for which we need a plan as part of a more complete solution.
I guess I should come out and say that I am in the pro-forum format camp. There are a lot of successful sites out there that use this format, and of course, a lot of bad ones. The difference between the good and bad seems to relate mostly to moderation, and I will admit that I feel like the better forum sites I visit err on the aggressive side closing threads. But I still favor it. In terms of organization, presentation and accessibility, I think the forum format works for pretty much all of the content that this site provides.
Thinking about younger users, if they are at all attracted to the longer-format/blog/non-Twitter type of discourse that this site offers, I think they are probably used to seeing it in a forum context. And with Tapatalk (or perhaps a different app, that’s just the one I know) it’s probably as mobile-friendly as can be.
I know a lot of people feel differently about this and I would guess I am expressing a minority view.
What, exactly, are they key differences in functionality that people like between the “Forum” format and the “Newsblog” format? Other than the Newsblog threads have an intro pinned to the top and the Forum threads don’t pin the first post?
Otherwise, to me they just seem like two different interfaces. Each one has some features that I like and some that I don’t. And I think that you could fairly easily have an interface that combines the best of both, if people actually agreed on what the “best” was.
Knowing that the guy who owns this place is pretty casual but trying to support his no politics effort how is one supposed to handle this type of post?
51. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 28, 2018 at 01:41 PM (#5791878)
Speaking of people cheating, y’all need to check out Fat Donnie’s twitter feed today, he is absolutely losing his ####. He retweeted a drawing of his “enemies” all behind bars for the crime of “treason” *including Rod Rosenstein*. Then he referenced some Canadian documents showing the money spent to resettle an immigrant family and pretended they were American documents.
Losing. His. ####.
Just asking. Because pretty clearly violates what I understood to be the new code of conduct or whatever you want to call it. And this poster was one of the hard core politics posters in that thread before it was nuked. If this makes me a rat whatever.
Knowing that the guy who owns this place is pretty casual but trying to support his no politics effort how is one supposed to handle this type of post?
51. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 28, 2018 at 01:41 PM (#5791878)
Speaking of people cheating, y’all need to check out Fat Donnie’s twitter feed today, he is absolutely losing his ####. He retweeted a drawing of his “enemies” all behind bars for the crime of “treason” *including Rod Rosenstein*. Then he referenced some Canadian documents showing the money spent to resettle an immigrant family and pretended they were American documents.
Losing. His. ####.
Just asking. Because pretty clearly violates what I understood to be the new code of conduct or whatever you want to call it. And this poster was one of the hard core politics posters in that thread before it was nuked. If this makes me a rat whatever.
I think if it’s not in an OT thread it should be deleted, with a polite invitation to keep that kind of discussion where it belongs. If it is in the politics OT thread, that’s what the politics OT thread is for. If it’s the hoops Or soccer OT thread then it’s up to the OP of that thread I suppose to deal with it.
Knowing that the guy who owns this place is pretty casual but trying to support his no politics effort how is one supposed to handle this type of post?
51. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 28, 2018 at 01:41 PM (#5791878)
Speaking of people cheating, y’all need to check out Fat Donnie’s twitter feed today, he is absolutely losing his ####. He retweeted a drawing of his “enemies” all behind bars for the crime of “treason” *including Rod Rosenstein*. Then he referenced some Canadian documents showing the money spent to resettle an immigrant family and pretended they were American documents.
Losing. His. ####.
Just asking. Because pretty clearly violates what I understood to be the new code of conduct or whatever you want to call it. And this poster was one of the hard core politics posters in that thread before it was nuked. If this makes me a rat whatever.
I think if it’s not in an OT thread it should be deleted, with a polite invitation to keep that kind of discussion where it belongs. If it is in the politics OT thread, that’s what the politics OT thread is for. If it’s the hoops Or soccer OT thread then it’s up to the OP of that thread I suppose to deal with it.
MLB gambling thread and totally unrelated to discussion which made it really jump out like ‘whoa, dude’
