Meta: If you could change 1 thing about MGoBlog, what would it be?
I don't know who negged you, so I offset it. Thanks for the tip.
I had to log my recalcitrant ass in just to respond - we should be able to see who negged a post, not just a thread. Make it so we can click on a single post and see who negged it. It would cut down on the cavalier, curious negging.
but I think that would just end up leading to petty arguments and bickering.
You mean more than there already is?
Yeah, I think you are right, that's what I get for trying to think after a half gallon of sangria at Dominicks. The threads would get clogged up with too many "Please explain to me why you negged me" type of responses. I actually could see myself replying with that sort of thing.
...realized the folly of your ways. Since the folly was due to you imbibing Dominicks sangria, you earn an automatic pass from me.
...torturing me.
;-}
God I love that place. I WILL be back.
I have employed some drupal folks to improve neg/pos reporting. May not be exactly what you requested but it should be much better.
I installed Stylish and searched at userstyles.org for an "mgoblog" script--to no avail. Where do I find the script you mentioned above?
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/mgoblog-stylish-theme-widescreen-folks
There are some other modifications listed in the thread, and you can kind of use trial and error to make further adjustments on your own.
@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);
@-moz-document domain("mgoblog.com") {
#banner, #container, #headercontainer, #header-region-container, #footer-region-container, #suckerfish-container {
width: 1250px !important ;
}
#page-right, #round-right {
width: 1274px !important;
}
#sidebar-left {
width: 180px !important;
}
#sidebar-right {
width: 210px !important;
}
#sidebar-outside {
width: 0px !important;
}
#inside-content { width: 1250px !important; } body { font-family : Liberation Sans, sans-serif !important; font-size : 16px !important; } .indented{ margin-left:50px !important; } .title{ font-family : Georgia, serif !important; font-size : 20px !important; }
#mainContent {
width: 840px !important;
padding-left: 10px !important;
padding-right: 10px !important;
}
#round-container {
width: 912px !important;
}
}
You could write a new blank style and paste the entire thing, or use the "Write a new style for MGoBlog.com" option that pops up when you access the extension from the bottom of the browser, and only paste the stuff between the first and last goofy brackets.
Many thanks--works like a charm! Stylish gets added to the pantheon of extensions that includes Tab Mix Plus, Greasemonkey, and Flashblock, among others.
The only problem I have with the extension is I sometimes forget that I even have it running, and I'll accidentally post a picture or video that is too big for the normal viewers.
add FireGestures, you won't regret it
Why is this desirable? Do you want the main column to be larger? Smaller is not generally workable because 560 is the minimum width of an HD youtube embed.
Definitely larger. It's small enough as it is and there's no reason to go smaller. However, replies to replies to {insert recursion here} end up getting tiny - the moment a youtube embed or image is linked at this point, it overlaps other content.
Plus, I love me some floating layout - currently theres unused space on my browser's sides, with a 1100px wide window (usually I'm around 1600). I don't personally maximize my browsers but a hefty number of people I know do - having that fill out at wider resolutions would be great, but not necessary.
I like the comment environment on the sbnation blogs a lot...with the live updating and special keys (like 'z'='scroll to next unread comment'). Not sure how hard something like that would be to implement.
The aforementioned drupal folks I have employed are working on making the comment environment considerably more AJAX-y, but full-on SBNation comments are not feasible. I'm hoping for a major improvement, though.
Biggest request: A mobile version of the site. I e-mailed Brian about it in like October and he said he'd have it up and running during the offseason. I'm expecting it any day now ...
Also: This is meant to be both snarky and legit, but I think the site and its community would have been much better served in the past few months with much more conference-realignment coverage and analysis and much less soccer stuff. I think the proprietor missed a major opportunity for a one-time reprieve of the dreaded offseason traffic dip. Brian has the 'net cred, readership base, and resulting network of sources to have been right there with Frank the Tank and Chip Brown at the center of the insight/reaction loop, which would have done a much better job of picking up new regulars than just about anything else that's been printed here since the offseason began. I was surprised at how little attention the topic has received here in the last few months, especially considering there was nearly nothing even nearly as relevant happening and I suspect Brian was, as usual, being fed insider info. Even if he wasn't, I'd have loved vastly expanded versions of his own views on established facts and widely circulated rumors.
Brian's mentioned over the years that much of his time is dedicated to nuts 'n' bolts during the offseason, so I assume that's what kept things so quiet around here. Still, as a reader, I'd have voted for more conference-realignment chatter over just about anything else.
Before anyone leaps to his defense, this is not a criticism of Brian's work or of the blog. It's my favorite place on the Internet, I've been a daily visitor literally since the first week it was live, and Brian does an awesome job. I'm only answering a specific question about what could be changed.
Respectfully disagree re: conference expansion. We had adequate coverage of the process and Brian managed to avoid the constant "__________ IS GOING TO HAPPEN" and the inevitable "Well, that didn't happen but this did" retraction. The two examples you gave just spouted off everything that was fed to them without much critical analysis.
Sometimes more is less.
Re: world cup soccer. Stanzi's right. More practically, it's not that big of an inconvenience to folks to scroll past the World Cup updates.
I like the soccer coverage and think Brian did a nice job with re-alignment, plus am pretty sure if he had inside info he could have discussed, he would have. But why everyone jumped on this I'm not sure. I pos'd you just to counter.
I loved the world cup coverage. I do not know that much about soccer and don't follow it that closely but the World Cup is something that took over the entire nation. Most of my friends were talking about it sports fan or not.
This blog's coverage of the World Cup enabled me to talk to my friends like I know what I am talking about when I clearly do not. For that, I thank Brian.
Brian is a trusted source in analysis so it was really nice knowing I could get a pretty clear picture from his coverage.
less dickish atmosphere. It's a fine line- we all love the self-policing culture, and the resulting high standards for posting. Those things alone make this site second to none.
But often times, a well-meaning poster or replier get hammered completely disproportionate to their transgression, and it's a little unsettling.
Plus, mobile. C'mon Brian.
I agree. Although, I've found that using a different browser on my BlackBerry - BOLT (free via the BlackBerry App Store) - helped considerably. You can do just about everything, though its still a bit clunky compared to being on a "real" browser like Mozilla, Chrome, IE, etc.
It would be nice to be able to reply to the author of a thread or any other user in an off-board manner at times. I know there has been a few times I was seeking information from Mods that I had to go through Brian to get to them.
I think it would help for a lot of things - selling Tickets, Misogopon's Wedding Tailgate, Some of the Job hunting/law school deciding/etc. things, I know that I would feel better giving 1 person my email address over a message than posting it on the board.
An easy way to moderate would be a "report a violation" button in the messaging interface that alerts the mods to either inappropriate content or trolling.
Actually a "report a violation" button on forum posts to alert the Mods might not be a bad idea either. I know a large enough neg-bang gets the attention, but this would be an easier way to let the mods know if someone is just straight up trolling
This would also work well for the times people have needed to post email addresses (like the Wave invite thread). Instead of having mods keep track of the thread in order to stomp the addresses after they've been read, everyone could just PM the correct poster.
As long as I can block Tater because that guy has a tough time understanding NO means NO.
I'm sure she would like the block button too. Poor girl gets mobbed at times.
I'll add PMs to my list of potential improvements. there is a comment overhaul on the way that I mentioned above that I would like to get done before I do anything else that might make that harder. Drupal does have modules that make those sorts of things possible so I should be able to get that done at some point.
which comment someone is replying to. Sometimes a reply is several comments down and loses its context.
More Cowbell
How about better policing of useless comments? Or a better way to control conversations that go terribly off-topic?
"Useless" and off-topic comments are an essential part of MGoBlog, Imagine if none of us had a sense of humor... we'd all be bitching about Cristopher Walken quotes and how they're unnecissary.
Kill the points.
They're fodder for senseless debate, and a way for petty people to stalk those they don't like rather than actually expressing their disagreement. Plus, if you'e been here long enough, they cease to matter. I have 11,000 points - I could be the nastiest dude on this blog (am I?) and there is almost no possible consequence that the "policing" can exact from me.
sounds like someone is asking for a neg-bang....
/kidding
he's just a communist who wants to live in a truly utopian society where we all have the same number of mgopoints.
On a Marxist site, points wouldn't exist; we'd all figure out another way of separating ourselves into the Blogeoisie and the MGoLetariat, (and it would work great, too; right up to the point where Brian sent him to the glue factory).
You're describing a socialist site, where the upper 10% of points holders would be neg-banged at greater frequency and/or points values. These points wouldn't go directly to lower-level users however. Brian would need to set up the MGoPoints Distribution Administration to ensure that these points were spread to lower-tier users whether they were active contributors on MGoBlog or not. Of course, the MGPDA would have to keep a share of the points themselves as compensation for their direct and indirect costs.
...with you. The point system is exactly the reason why the MGoBoard is largely devoid of trolls. When the trolls reveal themselves, the MGoCommunity has the capability to squash them. This accomplishes a few things:
- When they occur, troll/member flame wars are fairly swift and decisive
- Trolls attract other trolls so their relative paucity here in and of itself discourages such behavior
- It allows the MGoBlogerati to bond over a common goal thus building community
How do you guys handle this sort of thing over at WLA? It seems like your proletariat mouthpiece shtick would attract trolls like a flame to a moth.
I don't much care about my totals but I do enjoy that the board doesn't read like the sophomoric idiocy you see on Ess Eee Cee boards. God help things looked like an ESPN article comment board. Take a look at a Michigan story there and count the trolls.
I believe when Chris Saad, the owner of JS-Kit (they bought and changed Haloscan to be crappy) told us that their new comment system had a great moderation system and asked how we kept out trolls without one, dex said, "Scorn, derision, and handlejacking." So yeah, the official moderation system at WLA is "Scorn, derision, and handlejacking."
...Sounds to me like the WLA Central Committee and its use of "scorn, derision, and handlejacking" is exactly analogous to negbombing except for the WLA, it's the leaders of the movement who are culling the herd, while here, the MGoBlogerati do it democratically. Neither system is entirely fair, but both are generally effective.
Probably too few members to be a WLA Central Committee. More like a Politburo.
The only thing that worries me about negbanging is that occasionally a guy with a decently reasoned argument that flows against the conventional thinking will get bombed back into oblivion. it would be interesting to study how negbangs change the perception of a post. If you read something that's +10 or +50 would you be more likely to think its a good argument because your peers seem to think so? Conversely, when you see a post that's -25, are you going to be prejudiced against the post before even reading it? Are you more likely to make that vote to take a guy from -75 to -76 than from 10 to 9?
I think there are three ways to address that. The first is to make people accountable to how they vote by showing the voting stats for each individual post. Unfortunately, this being the internet and with nothing real tied to it, it'll all just devolve back to people negging each other for no apparent reason other than "Tacopants did it to me first!"
Option two is easier: just hide the amount of points a post gets. If people want to upvote or downvote, make them read the full post (and possibly any replies) and really decide if it was pos or neg worthy. This eliminates some of the follow the herd mentality, and probably removes some of the incentive to join in on a neg bang to see how low a person's post can get.
The third option (and most complex!), which I would also implement with #2, is to make negging a dynamic system that has a net negative effect on points. I know points were originally designed with +1 for a post, +2 for a pos, and -2 (-1 from you, -1 from the person you neg) for points distribution. I'm not sure about anybody else, but I no longer get docked points for negging people. My proposal would bring that back, but make negs significantly mroe expensive for people with more points. I would say something like every neg you give gives the person you neg a -1 still, but gives you -1% of your points. For me that would be around 44 or so, MgoShoe would lose 171 as of right now for each neg. A floor of -2 points per neg would be established, so that its still costly for people with few points to neg. if you make it more expensive to neg somebody, it'll stop happening as often. Of course, this disproportionately punishes the top 25% of the handsomest, smartest, and/or funniest Mgobloggers, with me included in that group, natch, but it's a risk I'm willing to take.
Also, if you occaisionally neg the dumb posts and post a fair amount of content that gets you upvoted, you'd probably stabilize somewhere around 700-2000ish points after a few months. Any more and you're either posting chicks making out with each other every day, hoarding points (only 96,000 more until my MgoRetirement!), or are actually Brian.
Wait a minute...these points have no value with my Capital One card? Well fuck me!
While I agree that the point system isn't perfect, you can't kill it, at least not yet anyways. Points allow those who visit the website to help regulate the content, and that's very important to help control what is and isn't written, such as who can write a diary and what a diary is about. Yes, there's statistical anomalies such as one account that continuously votes down another or if you are, hypothetically speaking, an undercover troll who is going to spam this board with hate speeches and pro-OSU propaganda while absorbing the following negbang with your 11,000 points, but I imagine that Brian can control that without too much issue.
In the end, I'm certain that Brian will agree with me when I say the reader needs to have a strong say in what kind of content is posted here. Right now, while it isn't alway consistent with its policing, using the point system accomplishes that.
If a thread is huge or filled with a bunch of long replies, seeing which ones have gotten a lot of positive/negative feedback helps find the most interesting ones to read.
Also, I think points are a decent anonymous feedback system. It's one of the things I like about the blog. On a personal front, when I get negged it makes me re-think my opinion and try to restate or clarify. Maybe that's the type senseless debate you're referring to but as long as people are trying to communicate at least somewhat civily, I don't think that's a bad thing.