The atmosphere in Cricket Chat - Suggestions & Discussion

[silentstriker]

In terms of specific suggestions, what do people think about Agent TBY's idea in a separate subforum, called something like 'Player Analysis & Comparison'. I personally really like it. We'd would make sure every thread doesn't turn into that type of thing, and move it if it does.

 

[Flem274*]

Get Mitchell McClenaghan in to sort us all out.

Or any of the players getting bagged. Chris Gayle should pay WW a visit.

 

[Burgey]

I think everyone just needs to agree to disagree more often.

This

The Tendulkar thing has gone out of hand, but it's just the latest. It's been getting bad for a while now.

and this

SJS should post more often - as he has universal respect he calms the ****s down when they get excited

Likewise LT - his unique style will often have the same effect, though for rather different reasons

and this too.

People are passionate about their cricket, we all get that - if we weren't ourselves we'd likely not be members here. Certainly I'm not absolved from blame here - I get the ****s with it and blow up from time to time.

I just don't get the need though, if you disagree with someone on a point, to keep going through the circumlocutions of it all time after time, stat after stat. The point must surely get reached where you just say that you disagree and move on. And tbf it does get reached, just about 15 pages later than it ought to.

The sub-forum for "vs" threads not a bad idea maybe. Spend enough time there and it's straight to heaven - your time in purgatory has passed.

Oh, and mints ftw too

 

[silentstriker]

Well, we'd definitely create a mint, and all mint-related shenanigans forum. That's a given.

 

[sledger]

In terms of specific suggestions, what do people think about Agent TBY's idea in a separate subforum, called something like 'Player Analysis & Comparison'. I personally really like it. We'd would make sure every thread doesn't turn into that type of thing, and move it if it does.

Don't really have any objections. Would surely limit the amount of threads/activity in the other half of the forum to more or less tour thread etc.. though?

 

[silentstriker]

My thing is I certainly don't want to stop people from having stat wars. Look, I was a big part of that myself for a while. And cricket and baseball are unique in terms of the volume and importance people place on stats. But I do think a lot of people find it tedious and circular. So if people want to do it, this is a cricket forum, and if they can do it in a civil fashion, I think there should be a place for it. A sub-forum might be ideal.

 

[Flem274*]

Just make a subforum called "In depth discussions on players etc" (translation: never ending arguments forum) and shift stuff in there as needed e.g. anything that gets out of hand in the normal CC.

 

[sledger]

My thing is I certainly don't want to stop people from having stat wars. Look, I was a big part of that myself for a while. And cricket and baseball are unique in terms of the volume and importance people place on stats. But I do think a lot of people find it tedious and circular. So if people want to do it, this is a cricket forum, and if they can do it in a civil fashion, I think there should be a place for it. A sub-forum might be ideal.

Again I don't disagree. But the nature of a game like cricket means that talk of stats etc... is bound to crop up at some point, esspecially when comparing players, which is bound to be inevitable. I'm not sure how you could enforce any sort of "non-stats" part of the forum.

 

[silentstriker]

Don't really have any objections. Would surely limit the amount of threads/activity in the other half of the forum to more or less tour thread etc.. though?

Well, the activity might go down, definitely - but what remains might be better organized? For example, looking at the first page of Cricket Chat without the 'vs.' threads would be: Auction Draft, Doctoring the pitch, Otis Gibson quits England, English batsmen and 5000 ODI runs, Rank first class competitions, etc.

Not totally bad, even if everyone isn't interested in everything. As for some of the other threads, I take responsibility for not intervening sooner and handing out warnings. Normally, most moderators take a slightly back seat if senior members are involved because I think we trust them to keep it within the boundaries, but perhaps we need to be more draconian, as BoyBrumby says in our enforcement of rules and clamp down at the first sign of insult/trouble/attacks.

Speaking for myself, and I think for most moderators, constructive criticism is always welcomed. We wouldn't be here if we all didn't love cricket. For some of us living in non cricket playing countries and without many cricket playing friends, this is the only place that we can share our passion. I really have no one else to talk about cricket with, and I can safely say I've made a lot of friends here. So we all (I think) want to make it the best we can be, and all suggestions to do so are always welcomed.

 

[jeevan]

The sub-forum might work if the problem was contained to x vs y. (I don't think it is, while those might get out hand the most). Stricter moderating gets my vote.

 

[sledger]

Well, the activity might go down, definitely - but what remains might be better organized? For example, looking at the first page of Cricket Chat without the 'vs.' threads would be: Auction Draft, Doctoring the pitch, Otis Gibson quits England, English batsmen and 5000 ODI runs, Rank first class competitions, etc.

Not totally bad, even if everyone isn't interested in everything. As for some of the other threads, I take responsibility for not intervening sooner and handing out warnings. Normally, most moderators take a slightly back seat if senior members are involved because I think we trust them to keep it within the boundaries, but perhaps we need to be more draconian, as BoyBrumby says in our enforcement of rules and clamp down at the first sign of insult/trouble/attacks.

Speaking for myself, and I think for most moderators, constructive criticism is always welcomed. We wouldn't be here if we all didn't love cricket. For some of us living in non cricket playing countries and without many cricket playing friends, this is the only place that we can share our passion. I really have no one else to talk about cricket with, and I can safely say I've made a lot of friends here. So we all (I think) want to make it the best we can be, and all suggestions to do so are always welcomed.

Never knew I meant that much to you SS.

 

[silentstriker]

Again I don't disagree. But the nature of a game like cricket means that talk of stats etc... is bound to crop up at some point, esspecially when comparing players, which is bound to be inevitable. I'm not sure how you could enforce any sort of "non-stats" part of the forum.

Not really talking about a few post discussion in a tour thread about whether Dravid could have played a 128kph straight delivery better than Yuvraj Singh just did, but talking about the 15 page threads and pages and pages of back and forth that takes up many other threads (including tour threads).

 

[sledger]

Not really talking about a few post discussion in a tour thread about whether Dravid could have played a 128kph straight delivery better than Yuvraj Singh just did, but talking about the 15 page threads and pages and pages of back and forth that takes up many other threads (including tour threads).

Yeah, fair shout. Would be massively in favour of this sort of thing being stamped out. Might actually encourage me back to posting in this part of the site regularly again, ala 5 years or so ago.

 

[Smudge]

I know it might create more work for the moderators, but I reckon regular posters should report any posts that are:

a) dragging the thread waaaaaay off topic
b) descending into multi-quote hell - I open up some threads, and just shake my head at the posts that transcend about 1,000,000 pixels thanks to the excessive multi-quoting, or splicing one person's post up into 185 sentence quotes.
c) full of excessive spite, often hidden by the fact the post is stupidly long.

There's nothing wrong with indepth discussion, or stats - it's just that so many thread wars are personality-driven now. If you have the same two people arguing across 8 threads, that's not a debate - that's a grudge between the two of them. And if they want to keep that up, they can bugger off to an email discussion or MSN.

 

[silentstriker]

I think all of us agree on many things, and it's easy to lose sight of that. When people resort to personal insults, it just makes no sense. I do think everyone has to self-moderate to a certain extent. The forum is only going to be as good as the members make it.

For example, Ikki and I disagree on many things in cricket chat, but in Off Topic, we probably agree 99% of the time. Sometimes people can just get tunnel vision on someone, and fail to just back up a little bit and see the big picture. I think just something like that could improve the forum a lot.

 

[Johnners]

Don't really have any objections. Would surely limit the amount of threads/activity in the other half of the forum to more or less tour thread etc.. though?

Don't think that would necessarily be the case. As it stands, only 5/6 of the first page are supposed to be direct X v Y comparison threads. Obviously that doesn't take into account the threads that generally veer off-topic and end up being an X vs Y flame-war, but hopefully with a sub-forum for such discussions we can hopefully limit the number of threads that head that way.

 

[sledger]

Don't think that would necessarily be the case. As it stands, only 5/6 of the first page are supposed to be direct X v Y comparison threads. Obviously that doesn't take into account the threads that generally veer off-topic and end up being an X vs Y flame-war, but hopefully with a sub-forum for such discussions we can hopefully limit the number of threads that head that way.

Well, yeah, as you point out, problem is that any thread which surrounds the topic of one particular player inevitably turns into whether or not they are better than X, not just the straight out X vs Y threads. These are the ones that are the main problem, most of the time anyway, the recent spurt of Tendulkar threads being an exception to this.

 

[silentstriker]

Never knew I meant that much to you SS.

Haha, depends on which one of us is the buffet in that picture .

 

[jeevan]

I know it might create more work for the moderators, but I reckon regular posters should report any posts that are:

a) dragging the thread waaaaaay off topic
b) descending into multi-quote hell - I open up some threads, and just shake my head at the posts that transcend about 1,000,000 pixels thanks to the excessive multi-quoting, or splicing one person's post up into 185 sentence quotes.
c) full of excessive spite, often hidden by the fact the post is stupidly long.

There's nothing wrong with indepth discussion, or stats - it's just that so many thread wars are personality-driven now. If you have the same two people arguing across 8 threads, that's not a debate - that's a grudge between the two of them. And if they want to keep that up, they can bugger off to an email discussion or MSN.

That's the problem many times. If forum software allows it, a 'go-get-a-room-you-guys' button that pushes off elsewhere just the posts on that thread by the 2 or 3 posters in question. Deleting all posts by that poster in that thread may work too and might be a feature in the forum software, errant posts just go to a sub-forum far away in the sky where no one else can see them.

 

[Smudge]

I know James and the moderators have been loathe to delete posts, and I can completely understand why, but it has worked on a forum I moderate to nip stupid posts - which lead to more stupid posts - in the bud. They can always be put back if - once moved to a "Deleted Posts" forum only visible to the moderators - several moderators think the post is OK. Only problem is the argument around censorship, but then again, this isn't a democracy or a 'free world' - this is James' site and forum to run as he wishes.