Nah you'll have a bit part. The body floating the river opening chapter.
So, I'm going to be written off in the first chapter. So who is the psychopath? Or do I have to purchase the novel to find out?
Forum rules
- Thread starter Elias
- Start date
So, I'm going to be written off in the first chapter. So who is the psychopath? Or do I have to purchase the novel to find out?
I'd offer to be the psychopath, but it's a bit too obvious a type cast.
Back on the scout forums, the mods did a great job of merging and deleting redundant threads. It's overwhelming at times seeing so many borderline pointless threads being started, or seeing two different threads (for example) titled "Geno Smith" and "Is Geno Smith a starting QB?"
I believe we can keep discussions about one player in one thread.
I believe we can keep discussions about one player in one thread.
J
JohnnyBaseball1
Guest
His eyes gleamed with intensity as he scrolled down the page, searching for his next victim. His name was Cy Copath, and he was one troll who wasn't content to stay under his bridge.
F
flgreen
Guest
U
ucrenegade
Guest
yes and no like we said before all threads made link to our twitter account so the more threads as long as they are not exactly the same but vary in some aspect the more viewers we get and possible mbrs
that is why scout was so small and ji so huge you can't limit social media like it is the 1990's anymore need to evolve and adapt.
as mods we will do our best to keep it under control but don't expect only one thread per person we talk about esp if it is big news and there are varying stories coming out and days apart.
we want as much eyes on the forum as possible.
I can see and understand the logic to your reasoning. The more exposure the more potential hits and members.
Where I disagree is when those people start reading the similar threads with the same arguments many times word for word by the same posters being abusive to each other I can't imagine why they would want to join and become tangled in the mess.
i agree. There's a fine line and I do think you and renegade are on the same page as well.
Part of the problem is differing motivations. As a poster, your motivation is for the board to be as user-friendly as possible. You don't want to have to wade through several Geno threads, all rehashing the same arguments.
On the other hand, renegade's motivation is on the business side, creating more threads to get new users and more traffic to the site.
Those two motivations are somewhat at odds, and they reflect the two different styles of the communities. For scout, there wasn't that financial interest before Sooth came along. It was a board, and we were interested in keeping the board as tight as possible, opting for quality over quantity. When you're working with a business interest, though, recruitment can trump retention.
The problem is, there is a point of diminishing returns. If too much of the focus is placed on bringing in new users, the multitude of threads could hurt retention. Some posters may leave out of frustration, in which case you are bringing in new users solely to maintain your levels.
Two different motivations, two different communities. Quality of ease of board, or quantity of hits and marketability. Is there a common ground, a gray area? Maybe.
Agreed. We'll find out soon enough. I do agree too many threads on the same topic clutter the board. I think it'll need to be done on a case by case basis really. Some things merit a new thread and others don't. When we answer that question, we'll be set.
What's your opinion on the current state of things? I think it's somewhat in the middle although the three diff threads on QBs are a mix but somewhere along the lines do get on topic....
I think in general, the board is in pretty good shape. There needs to be an end to the bickering and baiting, and hopefully that will come to an end. The board rules you suggested, with the feedback of the posters, make for a strong start.
It is possible there are irreconcilable differences between how the old JI and how the old scout were run, and the expectations of both sides. We're definitely not at that point, nor really that close, but it is something of a possibility.
F
flgreen
Guest
It depends Sack. Take the Training camp thread. There are multiple stories in TC. Stories on different rookies. If you want to find a story on say Mauldin , who I'm interested in, or Jarvis Harrison, 5th rounder, with a lot of upside, at a real need position, you would have to go thru the whole TC thread to find an article on them. Not very user friendly.
If we are going to have to put all stories on the same player in the same folder,
How about Richardson? Suspended 4 games, big story. A couple of days later, he gets arrested. That's also a big story that IMO, If it is just tossed into the thread with his suspension, a lot of readers aren't going to get to read it, because they are going to assume the new post is more of the same on the suspension, and get the story somewhere else.
IMO it's up to the mods to determine what is just redundant, and what is actually a news worthy thread.
Just my opinion for what it's worth.
If we are going to have to put all stories on the same player in the same folder,
How about Richardson? Suspended 4 games, big story. A couple of days later, he gets arrested. That's also a big story that IMO, If it is just tossed into the thread with his suspension, a lot of readers aren't going to get to read it, because they are going to assume the new post is more of the same on the suspension, and get the story somewhere else.
IMO it's up to the mods to determine what is just redundant, and what is actually a news worthy thread.
Just my opinion for what it's worth.
Good point. I have no problem on a thread on individual players like that.
That said, with Richardson, do you just open a new thread? Or do you add the new information to the existing thread and update the title? Or perhaps you open a new thread and close the old one.
F
flgreen
Guest
This is probably something we should all get together in the Admin/mod board and discuss. We all have different opinions, I'm sure we can reach a happy middle ground
I agree, let's hash it out!
This has always been my preferred option but opening a new thread while closing another also works for me.
MY problem occurs when a few threads open on a specific player or topic because of a slight difference. No matter what the difference started out as they all end up discussing exactly the same thing. As far as the 1st point I have no problem at all with players having their own threads even if they are being discussed in a TC type thread. I read every post but for ease and for those that don't it makes a lot of sense.
How about if we open a new thread when there is breaking news, but after a couple of days, merge the threads. This way it is easier to see that there is some news (which could easily be buried in an old thread), but after a day or two merge with the prior. Probably would take more of the mods time, but since I am not a mod, why should I care. Just kidding -- I appreciate the job you guys do.
U
ucrenegade
Guest
i actually prefer to do it that way or if you see the thread turning into another smith vs whoever debate merge it right away.
It just means as mods stay on top of the threads maybe with being three of us we can divide the board up so we aren't tripping over each other's toes. Or we can do just do a whoever see's it first and leave it to the mods discretion as to when to merge.
F
flgreen
Guest
LOL
Ya stole my thunder Bro.
This was going to be my compromise when the Mods and admin meet on this.