META: Reminder to keep politics off this board

Submitted by theytookourjobs on

[Ed-Seth: To reiterate our policy: No poltiics. Yes, even in threads marked for deletion, because sometimes our mods can't get to them.

When something political is relevant to Michigan/college sports sometimes it can't be avoided, but in those cases we will have moderators watching the threads carefully, and those who go beyond the discussion of the issue and how it's relevant to Michigan/college sports will get moderated and often end up in Bolivia or banned.

Why do we have this policy? Because we're mercantile shits who know politics on the board is bad for business, that's why. If there is something that you feel very strongly about, there are many places to discuss them with people of different opinions. When you do so here, nobody's minds are changed, and people who see it tend to come away triggered and unhappy, and feel less comfortable about coming to our site and engaging. That means less revenue for us. Also a less nice board to have intelligent and relevant discussion about Michigan and college sports.]

So do we have rules on this or not, because what's going on lately on the board is garbage.  People hijacking threads they think are getting deleted and posting insanely one sided statements is just gross.  This site is one of the things I look forward to every day.  Most of us don't give a fuck about anybody else's political views and there are rules on this board that support that.  So are these rules being enforced or not?

ska4punkkid

February 10th, 2017 at 1:28 PM ^

ARTHUR: Old woman!

DENNIS: Man!

ARTHUR: Man, sorry. What knight lives in that castle over there?

DENNIS: I'm thirty seven.

ARTHUR: What?

DENNIS: I'm thirty seven -- I'm not old!

ARTHUR: Well, I can't just call you `Man'.

DENNIS: Well, you could say `Dennis'.

ARTHUR: Well, I didn't know you were called `Dennis.'

DENNIS: Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you?

ARTHUR: I did say sorry about the `old woman,' but from the behind you looked--

DENNIS: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior!

ARTHUR: Well, I AM king...

DENNIS: Oh king, eh, very nice. An' how'd you get that, eh? By exploitin' the workers -- by 'angin' on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic an' social differences in our society! ....If there's ever going to be any progress--

WOMAN: Dennis, there's some lovely filth down here. Oh -- how d'you do?

ARTHUR: How do you do, good lady. I am Arthur, King of the Britons. Whose castle is that?

WOMAN: King of the who?

ARTHUR: The Britons.

WOMAN: Who are the Britons?

ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.

WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.

DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. ..... A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--

WOMAN: Oh there you go, bringing class into it again.

DENNIS: That's what it's all about if only people would--

ARTHUR: Please, please good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?

WOMAN: No one lives there.

ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?

WOMAN: We don't have a lord.

ARTHUR: What?

DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.

ARTHUR: Yes.

DENNIS: But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting.

ARTHUR: Yes, I see.

DENNIS: By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--

ARTHUR: Be quiet!

DENNIS: --but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more--

ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!

WOMAN: Order, eh -- who does he think he is?

ARTHUR: I am your king!

WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.

ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.

WOMAN: Well, 'ow did you become king then?

ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake, [angels sing] her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. [singing stops] That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

ARTHUR: Be quiet!

DENNIS: Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

ARTHUR: Shut up!

DENNIS: I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an empereror just because some moistened bink had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!

ARTHUR: Shut up! Will you shut up!

DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.

ARTHUR: Shut up!

DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! --- HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!

ARTHUR: Bloody peasant!

DENNIS: Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that, eh?.... That's what I'm on about -- did you see him repressing me, you saw it didn't you?

freelion

February 10th, 2017 at 10:29 AM ^

My facebook is a cesspool of politics from people posting slanted articles and then piling on. Let's keep that crap off of mgoblog. We don't need another fake news outlet.

Blue in Paradise

February 10th, 2017 at 10:41 AM ^

I don't give a shit about whether their are posts from the left, right or center. There are literally thousands of sites on the web where you can post that bullshit for the world to see.

Can we not stick to Michigan sports? That is the only thing most people come here for.

Damn - some people are like toddlers.

The Baughz

February 10th, 2017 at 10:47 AM ^

Yep. Thousands of other sites for this type of garbage and yet people want to come to a Michigan sports blog to spew politics. Mods seems to not give a shit. No wonder this blog is heading down the toilet. Seth you need someone to post in a moderator action sticky? How about you or someone else on your level read the damn thing and delete it. Its been up for 4 hours.

Victor Valiant

February 10th, 2017 at 1:52 PM ^

I think it's pretty obvious Brian has been checked out of the MGoBoard for quite a while. The board is simply a way to drive traffic to the blog posts. Don't get me wrong, Ace, Brian, Seth and company do a great job actually writing the blog posts, I just don't think they give much of a shit about any of our rants and ravings any more.

The community here is largely ignored even though the MGoBlog team has ample opportunity to engage through multiple avenues. Ace, Brian, and Seth seem at best indifferent to the loyal users of this site and at worst openly disdainful of us because they know the rabid Michigan fanbase will eat up their content (and it's great content) no matter what. This site is purely a money-making venture at this point and a creative outlet for the writers/owner, not a way to connect with Michigan fans.

 

The lack of engagement, value-adds for the community, etc are marketing malpractice 101.

sj

February 10th, 2017 at 2:09 PM ^

They write the blog posts, keep the site running (mostly), and shut down the most egregious threads. They do plenty of community things with public appearances. Isn't that what they've always done? What would you rather they do? 

 

TBH, I kind of dislike it when Brian posts on a thread. I feel like his presence on the thread shuts down conversation. 

stephenrjking

February 10th, 2017 at 3:30 PM ^

I can't believe, of all the things that might merit a response in this implausible madhouse of a thread, that this is what I'm going to respond to, but here goes:

Brian's thread engagement habits have not changed significantly. Neither have the practices of Ace or Seth. There have been mods on this board for a long time, assigned to take care of stuff like this. In all other ways Brian has never engaged that much and cannot engage that much. When he does, it is usually in comments to front page content threads, which are really just extensions of what is posted on the side here.

And it has to be that way. As one of your respondents said, when Brian speaks, it tends to end the discussion. And if it doesn't, the discussion isn't very good, because it ceases to be a free interplay between differing viewpoints.

Brian has a very big pulpit here, and he can and does get irritated at things he disagrees with. Now, if I get irritated and come down harshly on something I find objectionable, fine. People might think I'm a jerk or they might push back. But I'm just a guy. So are you. But if Brian does it (and it is something he has done from time to time) it's not a snarky disagreement between equals; it's the founder/owner of the site coming down on one of its readers. Now, what Brian actually says is little different in tone, language, or content from anything said by any number of other commenters on this site. But it's different, because he's Brian.

That can make things tricky. Space Coyote, for example, will occasionally disagree with some of Brian's football analysis. Brian will occasionally disagree back. The interplay there is... odd. They aren't the most comfortable of interactions, because while they both know football, Brian is Brian and Space Coyote is Not Brian.

The same applies, to a lesser extent, to things said by Seth and Ace. It's not because they are different, but they are in a different position. Their position irrevocably alters how they can interact. 

As an example: A Michigan State student can text his fiance, who is a percussionist in the MSU Marching Band, and flirtatiously ask for her to text him a pic of a dress she wore to an event. Nobody thinks anything about that. But if the band director does it, it is reported in the State News and merits threads in various football message boards like this one. 

Similarly (politics all over the place here) regular citizens and columnists can and do criticize judges all the time. They may make fun of them or simply question their legal reasoning. But if a president does it in an address before congress or on twitter, it is a big deal, because they're the president.

I disagree with some of what Brian and company do and disagree a fair amount with their political views, but don't mistake their recalcitrant forum postings for disengagement. They watch things closely and put a fair amount of work into making the board a good place, and I appreciate it, even if I would rather threads like this get nuked.

stephenrjking

February 10th, 2017 at 6:50 PM ^

(Good call man, I've been a daily reader since 2009, well before I started posting, and interacted with Brian when he was FunkyMoses on the USCHO boards in the early 00s. I may be letting the mists of time affect my memory, but certainly since the Hoke era dawned his participation has been pretty consistent).

Seth

February 10th, 2017 at 5:04 PM ^

Ouch, man.

I can't speak for anyone else but I think I participate quite often on the board.

As for the other guys, I mean, where do you think we get the ideas for content? If you read the main page or listen to the podcast I think you'll find there's a ton of thoughts responding to or mentioning the board. I don't think we'd get any work done if we all responded to every thread, but the community is a huge deal to all of us. It's the first stop to gather the Michigan zeitgeist. When you read Brian's bolded alter-ego, that is basically a distillation of what's on the board.

What I haven't done much lately is Dear Diary. That's because the diaries don't come as often and the board is often a thread of news that's already posted.

We've never been much for divulging or discussing info on the boards that wouldn't go on the main page. I think that's the sort of thing the services do well, and if we started doing so it would be stepping on their toes. Putting insider info behind a paywall is one thing, but having it on a free site isn't a good idea I believe. Let Rivals and 24/7 and Scout do what they're good at, you know?

I also think we ease up at certain times of the year, this being one of them. I've got the new HTTV on my plate and we're putting the new site design together. Brian takes a step back after the football season to recharge. Ace probably gets into the comments the most often, but I know he gets depressed at the level of a lot of the basketball commentary.

TIMMMAAY

February 10th, 2017 at 6:30 PM ^

You are definitely the most visible of the site admins, but I get why Brian stays off the board (or what I imagine as the reason).

But really, I think the reason so many people are upvoting the above comment is because nobody from the site could be troubled to at least chime in on any of the recent "site issues" threads. It's not a big thing, but it gives a bad look. I don't understand why not just acknowledge the issue, at least. I think that would have shut down a lot of the bitching. 

Seth

February 10th, 2017 at 3:48 PM ^

I was at the kickoff meeting with our new site redevelopers. Sorry, we have a few moderators who work for free and then those of us who work here chip in when we can. I figured getting the ball rolling on MGoBlog 3.0 was a higher priority.

Also stopped by Bentley Library to play with 1880s photographs and memorabilia, and tried a new Korean place for lunch, and put up today's softball article.

bluebyyou

February 10th, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^

We could stick with sports if the only items were the scores and stat lines.  Politics and other worldly events are part of sports.  We are fortunate on this blog that many participants can express themselves well and take the time to do so.  To not embroil ourselves in a discussion of how these issues impact sports would be most unfortunate yet that seems to be the path that has been chosen for us.  To some extent, these topics tend to cause acrimony, but they are very relevant issues and it's a shame they are so quickly quashed.

Tater

February 10th, 2017 at 11:11 AM ^

There is a difference beteween the social impact of sports and mundane but heated political discussion.  I fail to see how sports had any impact on the elections or vice versa this year.

If Betsy De Vos were to single-handedly destroy the public education system and it affected recruiting, I think it should be discussed here.  If the travel ban affected sports, I think discussion would be relevant.  

Otherwise, bitching about the left/right orientation of the board or the elections is really pointless.  IMO, it doesn't belong here.  There are plenty of other forums for that.  Nobody ever changes anyone else's mind anyway.

bluebyyou

February 10th, 2017 at 11:42 AM ^

If changing someone else's mind was the sole criteria, I'd have gone in a different direction, although if someone articulates a response that you disagree with, I'd like to think you would at least consider the merits of the opposing argument.

Some of the recent issues that involved Michigan football include a player protest during the National Anthem, Jim Harbaugh meeting with an Arab student group about a movie selection and the "beyond a reasonable doubt vs preponderance of the evidence" standard that surrounded a sexual assault complaint involving a former place kicker.  Outside of our program, Missouri's response to the handling of racial epithets and related conduct would seem like a fertile ground of discussion as would these other topics.

I don't believe the problem is one of topic as much as it is the juvenile response of some posters whom are incapable of expressing an opinion without personal attacks, but that happens on many threads with no political leaning at all.

dcmaizeandblue

February 10th, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^

I must have missed what words I used that sounded left leaning to you. Or maybe I just really don't give a shit about message board comments that mention something poltitcal. They usually get removed anyway so why waste time with it?