If you want to leave mgoblog, just leave. You don't need to make a post telling everyone you want to leave.
If you want to leave mgoblog, just leave. You don't need to make a post telling everyone you want to leave.
While I agree with this, "If you want to leave mgoblog, just leave", he did bring up some good points at the end. Namely:
1) Let comments have higher/lower thresholds for points (i.e. -10, +10). I agree with this, and If it were up to me, they'd be limitless. If a comment deserves +/-100, let it be so.
2) More moderation tags. I actually disagree with this. I don't see the huge value in the tags - a simple +/- would do for me. Maybe others see differently?
One more thing I would add would be to have a "zero" threshold for comments. Brian has -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 but no "0".
These are small tweaks that can be implemented if enough people want them implemented. It doesn't deserve a 1000 word essay on why mgoboard isn't good enough for the OP.
There technically is a zero, as some people seem to have zero karma points and thus their posts show up automatically collapsed (this actually happened to me briefly at one point, while this new system was being implemented). The problem is that a downvote skips zero. That should be an easy fix.
The primary problem from my perspective is that the voting doesn't seem to work predictably. If I moderate a -1: Flamebait and pick "Flamebait", that post doesn't drop to -2, but stays at -1. Likewise, occasionally the tags will switch, e.g. from "Underrated" to "Interesting" or something, but if you upvote something with "Normal", you could end up with a +1: Trolling designation that makes no sense.
I do agree that the threshold for collapse should be lower, say -5. Given the current system all you need is some disenchanted MGoMember going through voting everyone "overrated" (as appears to have happened on the Bri'onte Dunn Board post early), and virtually all of the comments get collapsed. Now, this might not be a large loss, given that most of us don't have the insider information or technical evaluation skills of say, Magnus, but it'd be nice to know that multiple people have to think something is terrible before it's collapsed. I don't want to read all of the collapsed drivel to try to find decent posts that may have been hidden for some reason.
Finally yes, things should be votable up to infinity. If TomVH posts that Gunner and Zeke have both committed and we want to upvote him 5,000 times, that should be allowable. Likewise, if you're an obvious troll, you should be able to be downvoted 5,000 times.
Haha how do you find these avatar pictures? What am I looking at in the picture?
That is the problem. I don't want to leave. But things have changed. So I stick around and have sub par experience on a regular basis.
Your sub par experience might be better for the majority of the users.
Sub par experience? Jeebus. It's a god damned football/basketball/hockey blog (with a little of this/that of the regular sports world); I never came in with expectations of "experience". Anyone who remembers the holocscan "wild west" era would accept the current "experience" for what it is...
Personally, I enjoy the comments and the "clever" posters. Dave, I think your point above is rather prescient.
I think what you said needs to happen is exactly what IS happening.
Why are you upset? Do you want some of my points?
Give em to me big boy!!!
Why don't you cry about it.
but the karma thing is annoying and if you say something unpopular your comments will have a rating of 0 for awhile. just saying
I don't really understand the karma thing. For example if you have a karma of 2 do you get 2 points everytime you post? At this moment I only have a karma of 1, I guess my karma is not so good.
I'm no expert by any means, and have no idea how Karma actually works (whether you accrue Karma points through quality of posts or through totality in MGoPoints), but 1 seems to be what most people have. Magnus has 2, I know, and I assume the same for Brian, Misopognon, Tim, etc., but I think the majority of us have only 1.
Karma is determined by upvotes (there was a board post about this a few days back), if you have a certain number of comments in a row that are positively upvoted, you get good karma, and your posts start with a 2. If you get downburst consistently, your karma goes down, and you start with a zero. It's a way to encourage "good" posters to post more, since their karmically good posts are worth more.
MeowGoBlog, but I think you're onto somethin here.
I feel like everything about the new system is being gathered through tedious board trial, error, and assumption instead of a comprehensive front page explanation. Did I miss something or are we all guessing?
I haven't seen a comprehensive explanation posted here. You might want to look at the Slashdot Comments and Moderation FAQ page (because I believe Brian said he's using the same system used at Slashdot). Not everything on the page applies, but it does explain the various moderation options and the karma system. Karma evidently runs from 0 to 2 and is based on how your posts have been moderated. Thought this was interesting:
Note that being moderated Funny doesn't help your karma. You have to be smart, not just a smart-ass.
I'm looking into it. Another strange point to the system that I just might be discovering is whenever I moderate as funny something that was insightful, the post score doesn't go up at all. I thought the number would increase from 1 to 2 or whatever, even if the tag remained the same.
However, as normal, if I moderate as whatever the popular opinion was, like clicking interesting on a 2 interesting post, it does go up one. So maybe there's a system to votes counting and it's not a glitch when my votes don't appear to...
Perhaps it's not just positive and negative moderate words that change points. Hmm. More on these strange findings in this new world later.
I tried what you did--moderating as funny something that was labeled insightful--and found that the post score did go up. So I can't help you there, but the system does seem to have some quirks.
I find the "Normal" option to be odd, and I wonder if it's set up properly. Why should applying a "Normal" tag to a post result in an up-vote? The Slashdot FAQ makes it sound like a neutral default:
Normal -- This is the default setting attached to every comment when you have moderation privileges. Normally, you should not need to actually select this option, but if your mouse slips and you accidentally moderate up or down a comment you didn't mean to, you can undo that mistake by choosing Normal before you hit the "Moderate" button.
Obviously, the system here and the one at Slashdot aren't set up exactly the same way, but it seems as if people here are using "Normal" to give people a generic up-vote. Yet there's no generic down-vote.
I also agree with whoever complained about the location of the post score. I find that its placement right next to the post subject interrupts the natural progression of reading the subject and then reading the text of the post.
I somewhat agree, that is why I usually avoid reading most of the comments unless I notice one of the posters that I enjoy reading.
When I do dip into the comments sections, that is pretty much what I do these days. I skim until I find a name I recognize and read those posts...
Big fan of Orson, can't stand the comments.
I hate the new "moderate" function.
I miss the raw power of the Neg.
I don't want to moderate...I want to Regulate. "You can't be any geek off the street; gotta be handy with the steel...earn your keep."
MGoBoard still regulates on the down low just like always
First, the blog has blown up since 2008. I don't have any numbers, but I would bet that MGoBlog is looking at huge increases in posters each month. I'd assume (I wasn't around for the beginning) that this means it went from more of a niche site to a more general one. I think this is what you're describing as bad, but incorrectly attributing to the point system.
The tagging system you mention is exactly what we have now, with the exception being that points are given for posts. Ultimately, and this is going to be tough to hear, the only thing you can do is stop visiting the site. If people agree that the new system is lacking and dislike it enough to leave, it will eventually change or Brian will lose all of the time, effort and cash that he put into the site.
Agreed. I would say that the points system makes it a lot more enjoyable for a lot more people. It may alienate some of the people who came before the points (back when it was a smaller community, i would assume), but it does way more good than harm.
I'm a big fan of the points; for people who post it's nice to get a "reward" for posting good content, it's also satisfying to neg someone when they deserve it. For outsiders (and apparently views are 33% posters and 66% lurkers) it gives some indication of the quality of content. Obviously it isn't perfect, but I think it works well.
People don't just get points for posting good content, they get them for posting any old worthless garbage. The quality of the posts has been hurt by points as much or more than it has been helped. You have to sift through way too much bickering and mindless chatter these days to find the good stuff.
They're given out to people who benefit the board. If a cat picture gets one hundred points, then one hundred people liked it. I agree with what you're saying, but look at the news for example.How much crap is included to draw fickle viewers? People don't just want mechanical evaluations of Denard's throwing motion, people obviously have a desire for both that and cat pictures.
I agree that the cat pictures are grossly overdone... and I have yet to post one, but this opportunity was too good to pass up.
Like I said before, I agree that it doesn't add anything. However, there's obviously interest. I'd like to hear an explination of why Brian would get rid of page views instead of deal with a few loyal consumers who probably aren't going anywhere.
That is part of my problem is that there is no real incentive to clean up the board, except for keeping it from going beyond a tipping point where it drives people away and his page views go down. In fact any flame out posts are in some way a good thing [up to that tipping point] in that they bring tonnes of page views...
People get points for posting the most worthless stuff or bickering back and forth like children. Even on good threads, too many people chime in without anything of value to add and they get points for their mindless drivel and bad jokes (term used very loosely).
The idea of posting a picture of a cat or something shouldn't be rewarded. It doesn't add anything to the discussion, and quite frankly causes the important stuff to be somewhat covered up.
In addition, the countless posts that are redundant, followed by the points out the said redundancy just get old. In order to solve this, topics should potentially get pre-approval before being posted although I understand the difficulty in this.
The problem is that not everyone agrees with you. Some people like pictures of cats. So who should decide whether cat pictures are rewarded with points or not? I say we put it to a vote... wait a sec...
It seems to me like the system is currently set up to deal with exactly this problem. When something is posted that does not add anything to the discussion, the MGoPopulace gives it a negative point value. When something is deemed contributory, it earns points. Simple. This ensures that it's not just one person's opinion (read: yours) driving the point system.
Do people really want to see cat pictures on a sports message board, or do they just pretend to feel that way because it's one of Brian's personal quirks, and they want to copy whatever he does?
Of course I truly want to see cat pictures on a sports message board. Where else would I go to see cat pictures?
Nerds! Nerds! Nerds!
I was around before the point system and it was a wasteland of McFarlins and others. I really enjoyed how things were back before the site blew up.
You enjoyed the wasteland more?
i assume he means before the ApSt game. before that, it was just haloscan but the site wasn't so big that it attracted Mlive/O$Ucks posters. that was the golden age of commenting. the comments were as well thought out as Brian's content.
I am not sure that was the moment, but yeah, basically that is it. I understand that with growth comes change. I could handle the points thing even though I don't like it, but what bothered me was getting dinged by the automated systems for one lousy post. Yeah, it garnered like 150 neg votes, but, hey, everyone has an off day and I was penalized upwards of several thousand points. And then the few hundred I had left were stripped for doing...wait for it...nothing. If I don't post, I lose points? That seems counter intuitive. If life gets busy or some other reason pulls me off line, I should be able to come back with my points reputation in tact. Perhaps it is less the points themselves, than the way they are administered.
I rarely paid attention to my points, which were few, as I don't post very often. They keep dropping off and soon I will have none, apparently. I don't want to try to keep my points by clogging up the board with inane posts that add nothing.
I have become a wealth of knowledge to my friends, neighbors, co-workers and even strangers when it comes to Michigan sports, mostly football. I can spout off names of potential recruits, statistics to shut the uninformed bashers up, defensive schemes and I can calmly assess reasons that things went wrong - all because I have been reading this site for about 4-5 years now.
One thing that I do provide this site is 50-100 pageviews daily. I suppose a lot of people do the same, even though they don't add much content, either. Taking points away for inactivity is counter-intuitive. Taking points away from posters for being a complete troll is pretty smart.
I just hope it doesn't come down to, one day, I get on a plane and am sitting right next to Lloyd Carr or Rich Rodriguez or Mike Boren and have a 2-3 hour conversation but am not able to post about it without having to hijack someone's thread.
I'll volunteer to let you hijack the shit out of whatever thread I make in the future for that.
Now you've got me thinking how awesome it would be to get that on MGoBlog. Jim Lahey's five minute conversation with Carr was cool enough, but a whole plane ride?
I meant to say it was a wasteland and then we got the up/down vote system. I really enjoyed the old up/down vote system.
Ken, I was around during the haloscan era...you remember the anti-Lloyd mafia (that didn't work out so well) and the high volume of just craziness in posting. The old system of neg rewarded quality posts and hammered the McFarlin/guy with 30 ID's always starting new threads etc.
This new system is less visceral, less immediate than the old one and for me, less relevant.
I don't know if it was during the halo scan days, but I remember a lawyer who came on here and starting talking nonsense. Some one found his picture and posted it because he looked like a creepy child molester. He then threatened everyone in that thread that he will sue them. That was fun really funny stuff.
I personally don't like the expiring points because I can't stay above 100. I guess the moral of the story is don't post stuff that can get you pwned by the -1000 neg bomb.
Dude, you're saying it yourself - you got negged to oblivion for something you did. You deserved it.
There's a reason points expire - it's the exact reason that prevents what you're doing. People who used to post, then come back randomly to drop some bombs and flame things/people when they don't care anymore.
The funny thing is that you could probably just sent Brian an email saying you're a long time poster that made a mistake, express your regret, and explain that you don't want to be prevented from using the board. He'd probably give you your points back.
Also, people post this stuff because it's funny to the board's main demographic. You may not be in that demographic, or you may be in the minority. Either way you're just complaining about something because it's something that doesn't interest you personally, but does interest others. But there's atleast one person that agrees with you:
I got negged to Bolivian, get it right.
You should know things before you start making comments that are incorrect. I am actually a regular poster on here and do not come back randomly to drop "bombs" and flame.
I would never bother Brian about my points. The truth is I know I deserved the neg bomb so I took it like a man. I just said I hate the expiring points because I'm selfish and I hate entering CAPTCHAs.
I have no idea who your last paragraph is meant for. I hope it is for the OP because I love things that most people find stupid. I was a regular contributor to those awesome late night threads that J Hackney created.
But I don't know if I read it live, someone had linked it, or I just noticed it when I was reading through the history of the site.
I miss a good troll like McFarlin he gave me lulz
"Got popular", when you meant "site crashes and was destroyed". Though at least there were other posters who seemed to misunderstand in the same way.
Are you kidding me with this shit? Isnt this kind of post EXACTLY what the OP and people who side with him hate and are railing against? It adds absolutely nothing to the conversation And yet, who else would upvote this?
You nailed it right there. I agree 100%
The points system is common of the vast majority of message boards. I can get not liking it if you were used to life without points, especially if you dont go on a lot of message boards, etc., but to me it helps identify good posts and reward good posters. It may alienate some, but there are lots of people (like me) who are used to points (i go on reddit all the time, for example). To us, points are a very good thing, and I think it signifiantly enhances my mgoblog experience.
tl;dr: Points are the way of the future, man.
Also, if you think mgoboard is bad, volunteer to mod a CiL during a game just once. Sure, the points system has isn't faults on mgboard, but once you see the torrent of poo that a CiL event can be with ~5000 users all trying to say the same juvenile thing...mgoboard starts to look real good in comparison.
You never allow my "that play was so awesome!" posts on the chats?!
Don't wish that on anyone man. I modded the first CiL, Utah 2008. Holy cow I hate people so, so much after that.
One was Penn State last year. And holy shitbrick, Batman, was that a trip onto the wrong side of the tracks.
Between the dumb comments, the Fire RR ANGAR comments, the UNNECCESARY CAPS LOCK AND !!!!!!! comments, and the dong punch comments, I developed a huge amount of respect for the regular mod types.
My trick was liberal use of the 'ban user' option. Some people would just came right back with a new user names, but it would keep some of the larger idiots from coming back again and again and again, posting the same comment.
I don't know how I made it through modding most of the CiL games last season...
I went with the "Holy Shit I'm Never Doing This Again" approach. Not very effective for that game, but it's worked since then.
I was a huge fan of "ban user" too. I typically banned "FireDickRod" about 53 times per game, but he kept on posting. I think CIL wasn't designed to have 1000 users delivering 1000 posts per game.
The CIL events totally burned me out last season. I found myself visiting a lot less often from Saturday after the game through late Tuesday. My favorite was the people who bitched about the conspiracy against them because their comments weren't posted. Nevermind their comments were something like: "Go Blue" or "BLITZ IM ANGAR." Ugh.
As for the OP, I think you're being a little too harsh. I don't like the new system very much, primarily because great posters aren't rewarded and shitty posters have to rise to the level where mods need to cave them before there's a penalty. I liked the positive and negative system because someone that posted a ridiculous flamebot post would lose 150 points and probably not be able to create content for a while.
That's why I've started temporarily docking large amounts of points from users that create really shitty threads. There's no way for the blog to moderate itself short of caving the user and I think most shitty post creators just need to really see how irritating seeing the same thread created four times in two days or how immature a post bitching about Jim Tre$$el and O$U is and they'll self-correct.
I agree with the part about needing custom tags. The overall snarkiness of the people on this blog is really entertaining
Negbanged just because I can.
I don't see why anyone decides their complaints are important enough that everyone needs to hear about it. You have gripes, ok. Give suggestions to the board. Seems rather self important that everyone must also read about your undying loyalty and furious gripes about what an awful FREE product you're receiving.
I love the new tagging. This is one of the few boards that I rarely see troll threads because of all of these things. Everythread is normally relevant/interesting in some respect which once again, this is the only board I can say that about.
Do you really need to see a trolling tag to understand that trolling is in progress?
Some people absolutely do.
You do realize that asking for him to ignore trolling is just like me asking you to ignore points and pretend like they aren't there and therefore everyone would just be arguing about something really dumb...
If you don't like certain posters, just download the ultra-mgoboard extension for chrome and hide the users you don't enjoy reading. If you don't like a board topic, don't read it. If you still feel sad,
how you say? WAH wah...
I still do not understand the new moderate features...
Right underneath everyone's signature tag there is a "moderate" button. Click it for a plain +1, if you want to neg or add that it was "interesting, informative or insightful" or whatever click that and then click moderate.
Good things are +1, flamebait, trolling, overrated are -1.
Think of it this way. It's like Who's Line is it Anyways... The moderate function doesn't count.
This post and title reminds me of an E.M. Forster novel.
I'm not really clear on what you hope to achieve by posting this. If it's just to vent, okay, but it sounds like that's what got you in trouble in the first place. If you went from 5 figure points to under a "trusted user," at the minimum you got docked well over 9,000 points, so you must've dropped a doozy.
If you're trying to get every poster on the board to read your treatise, feel shame, and vow to only post quality content from here on out, it would be nice but I'm afraid it ain't gonna happen. You can probably see that by some of the comments that have already been made.
If you're hoping to incite a revolution and get everyone to rail against the point system, I don't see that happening either. It's community moderation, reward, motivation to make quality posts, and dick repellant (in the sense of being dickish, not actual penis) all rolled into one. If the point system was in good working order like it used to be, I really think it makes the board better, not worse.
TL;DR version: I'm sorry the band that you listened to first is now really popular and all the tweens and old people like it too, but it's popular for a reason: it's good. If you can't ignore the other fans, you just have to move on.
I think your TLDR version said it better than I could. It's a god damned sports blog that we all read for content. This ongoing bitching about points and all and how these are awarded/not awarded etc. is tiring.
seldomly post. I think this is the best site for info around, with or without points fwiw
I don't know how many points I have because I'm on my phone, but I think it's like 150 and I've been on this blog longer than basically anyone (including TomVH) and even so I get shit for "trustworthiness" whenever I drop a source or something
How can I believe anything you say??? You have fewer than 300 mgopoints so you must be a 19 year old from Idaho living on North Campus who thinks Bo is a character from the Monsters, Inc. film...
... Generally, i think the point system was a plus. I really don't like the new "Moderate" system. Maybe I just got used to the simplicity of the +/-, but I find the new board (the last couple weeks) to be overkill.
I also don't like that posts get hidden automatically when they receive "troll" votes. Clunky GUI that leaves replies to posts that are hidden.
In general, the site is great and Brian's efforts have been amazing. It doesn't mean that the site is perfect and we should always assume new = improved. It is a WIP and with the current board design, my participation has definitely decreased. I only look for a few posters whom I value and skip the rest, which is disappointing, because there is some great humor that can be lost now.
Directly under "Comment Viewing Options" between the OP and the comments, you can set your threshold to -1 and it should show all the comments. I haven't tried it, but that's how it should work.
EDIT: BiSB posted basically the same thing right below me, but I didn't read far enough down and I went ahead a made a reduntant post in an OP that is upset with redundant posting. So, sorry about that.
The tagging system erodes your enjoyment of the site. And "no skinny dipping" rules erode my enjoyment of hot tubs. But some things are necessary to avoid uncontrollable clusterf*cks. The only thing between this board and MLive is some sense of consequences for stupid trolly comments. And we're holding on by a fingernail here.
As for vanishing posts, every user can set his or her (okay, who am I kidding... his (Sorry MGoJen)) own threshold. I have mine set to show all comments, even the negative ones. Just because YOU want to see dumb comments, and I want to see dumb comments, doesn't mean that EVERYONE should have to see dumb comments.
Finally, as someone who has what could conservatively be described as a shit-ton of points, I can inform you that once you reach a certain number (not sure if it's 500 or 1000 now) of points... Points. Do. Not. Matter. I received no free t-shirt for cracking 30,000. I never got my date with Megan Fox (DAMN YOU, RABACK). I didn't even get access to the super-premium content in which TomVH tells me everything he knows. Nothing. And unless you go uber-jackass, getting (and staying) above that threshold is not hard. So... yeah.
No wonder I got into so much trouble last time....
And Raback got Fox, Magnus, Alba...what was left for us? We were sold a bill of goods, my friend.
Sucks to be you . . .
. . . you get Kirstie Alley.
Have to give credit to the OP for walking the fine line between constructive criticism and emo whining without crossing into the dark, eyeshadowed side and making some good points besides. That said, South Bend has nailed it so hard. Naked hot tub clusterfucks are fun until the one asshole with syphilis jumps in and everyone's regretting the whole occasion.
A board needs either a reliable crew of moderators big enough that someone's around more or less 24/7, or some kind of points system to keep out the trolls. And this is basically Brian's livelihood and it relies on scads of board traffic to bring in the shekels, so it needs to be a quality, troll-free product with a reputation. I'm all for anti-troll regulations and further I'm all for the board police that keep things readable. I'd rather scroll past cat pictures than crap written by Bucktards with nothing better to do and MLive-quality posts that lack any language structure.
I realize that plenty of people complain about trolls on the board. Frankly, I just don't see it.
Yes, and it seems to me that's largely because of the various troll fences already in place like the point system, yes?
"it seems more the case that the "troll" label is applied to anyone that the majority disagrees with." "
Attitude is everything, and my mother used to say that you can disagree without being disagreeable. Magnus disagrees with a lot of crap, but he does so in an informed and rational manner. As such, he isn't labeled a troll.
Compare that to the one guy from the basketball season (MFaninOH?) who took every opportunity to say how Michigan couldn't make the tournament because of all of the flaws in the team. He wasn't a troll in the technical sense (he was apparently a MIchigan fan), but he was considered a troll because he was a douche about it. People who state unpopular opinions might get individual posts negged, but they won't get the troll treatment unless they do so in a shitty manner.
For the record, I've also waded through several waves of negbangs for various "missteps" such as supporting Morgan Trent, pointing out that Denard sucked as a quarterback in 2009, insisting that Brandon Minor should play more, going on one of my anti-Vincent Smith-playing-time tirades, etc.
If negbangs were a death knell, I wouldn't have been able to earn this Brandon Graham avatar, a hot tub rendezvous with Jessica Alba, and my $10 Chili's gift card.
+1 meaningless MGoPoint to you.
I understand that you think you've got some sort of "insight" or are due something because you've been "here" awhile, but enough of this whinny points talk. This blog is the best because it provide unique in-depth analysis of the team we all love - not because it allows us to have our own online "identities." Grow a pair and enjoy the content.
I think you take message boards way too seriously. I don't really post all that often but there is a lot of good, free info here and I like that. I also like the cast of characters here. If you don't want to read good information with a small bit of BS posted by some dumbass user, don't go to a message board. They are all like this regardless of how they are run or how points are accrued. You also didn't approach the point that the threat of neg banging may prevent a bunch of ridiculous posts per day. You have to realize this site has gotten a lot bigger. Bigger=More of everything. There's more good info but there's more stupid stuff as well. That's how it works and that's why this place can operate.
In short, if you don't like it, don't read it. Pay your $100 to read the Rivals board or something. Afterall, there's no junk ever posted there.
However, resistance is futile. Just keep this point in mind. There are post of interest on the site which appeal to you, correct? The other banter, let it be! I believe you mentioned as much in listing your diary favorites. Democracy has always been a messy affair my friend. Easy!
It's a capitalist proprietorship. Brian calls the shots subject to price mechanism pressures, and will adjust his business model according to the demands of his consumers.
BOOM von Mises'd
BOOM, I didn't make you do it bitch'd.
...a fucking lot.
So your saying Brian is a user and we are just programs?
Who is his Clue then?
What kind of clue are you talking about?
Play the game.
I am Confuse'd.
I just want to know the OP's other account.
I don't want to start a new thread just to deal with my own board issues (cough cough OP cough), but I'm curious.
I will soon be leaving South Bend for East Lansing (WOOO employment). And yes, I know, out of the holier-than-thou frying pan and into the inferiority-complex-broseph fire. The question: should I change usernames? Have others dealt with this problem?
Making a note of the change in your sig line should clear up any confusion. I vote to keep the user name.
Like it or not, you are who you are.
Definitely keep the username
could care less:)
So you're saying that you do care?
Congrats! You get to leave the country for Capitol City!
Blue in South Bend >>> Blue in East Lansing. Also, I think we already have a 'Blue in Lansing' user.
But there's no such thing as Jessica Bisb.
If you do change the name, make sure to keep the avatar. It's embarassing how much I use that to identify certain posters.
(And how did this get modded as "flamebait?" Off topic I can see, but on such a meta thread...)
"The Old Days" = 09/05/2010
Methinks you didn't read his post.
Brody, is that you?
Maybe its Bistro from Scout lore
Although I agree that the point system needs fine tuning, I think the site is still enjoyable. It was enjoyabe during the Haloscan days, and it is enjoyable now. Although I'm not an avid poster, I don't think the message board is the main function of this website (at least for me). Read what you want to read, post if you want to post, and who cares what everone else thinks - as long as you don't get the almighty ban hammer.
I think one of the biggest problems with the blog is all the MGoHating. I understand that redundant posts and spelling/grammar issues are obnoxious, but how many posts with decent content are overly blasted for their faults. A bad post deserves to be called out, but for 50 different people to call them out is just as cluttering and unnecessary. I understand that many MGoPosters are Michigan graduates, and thus highly educated, but must we extend our academic snobbiness to blog posts?
That's part of the self-monitoring of the board, especially with redundant posts and comments. Instead of messing with points, a few "Hey, we landed on the moon!!!" comments is a form of good-natured embarassment that will make posters check the board first. The threat of a "Cool Story, Bro" is a way of get people to ask themselves, "is this personal anecdote really worth its own post?"
I'm not a huge grammar Nazi, and I only support those kinds of things in extreme situations (see: every post on RCMB). Often that happens as a result of people responding to a post they disagree with.
the moon "landing" was faked.
Is exactly why I prefer conversational repartee to comment moderation, which collapses posters I often like reading and gives posts with some genuinely interesting or worthwhile opinions (regardless of whether I agree with them) a trolling or flamebait tag. I wouldn't mind this so much if people used those tags much more judiciously. But that would have to be a community effort (of "hey that's not really trolling, there are some debatable points in there...) to self-police the overuse of negative moderation. Perhaps I'm the minority, but some of the more "raw" posters who have very intelligent opinions that are usually a little against the grain are part of what make this board interesting. I'd hate to see their opinions bred out w the new system from a mere neg 1...
"hey that's not really trolling, there are some debatable points in there..." oh hilarious mgoposter...
My comment was respectful, original, in no way inflammatory, and I'm not in any way opposed to disagreement. Can someone rationally explain how that's trolling?
EDIT: the one above was me assuming calling it trolling was a joke, just assuming the best.
I offended someone. If so, I apologize.
I hope our defense is like that - swarming over each ball. Not one of them - but EVERYBODY - much like Mgobloggers swarm over a bad post.
GO BLUE! GO MGOBLOGGERS!
Check out the RCMB, especially the thread that aaamichfan linked in the Ojemudia discussion on the mgo.licio.us board, and you'll have your answer. We absolutely need it.
I haven't been on mgoblog very long so I don't know what things were like back in the good old days but I can tell you the amount of useful information on this site is amazing. Not sure who this TomVH guy is but I'd buy him a beer any day.
Mgoblog is really pretty cool; The hate for Ohio State is genuine, the contempt for Notre Dame is heart warming. I'm glad to be here.
Welcome aboard. As for TomVH, his name is Tom Van Haaren, and his twitter page comes highly recommended:
You may be drinking alone.
But this fall in East Lansing...
This was a bit lengthy just to tell everyone you dislike Mgoblog due to the board.
Em0 could get to 100 points pretty easily today and have a truly epic meltdown and all he'd have to show for it would be bad karma. I want punishment in this life, not the next!
I completely agree with the post. I've been reading the board for a while since before I was a member. When points actually mattered I was always hesitant to post due to the fact that if you posted some solid content you might end up being negged if someones opinion wasn't the same as yours. In the end it detered a good many people from truly posting worthy content that could actually keep a good conversation going and led to people trying too hard to be on the spot funny.
See, I hear people say this but I've never seen anyone really negged away because they posted legitimate content even if it was controversial. Now, I have seen people get negged for posting stuff like "RR failed this team because he didn't recruit Michigan Men" for the 1395th time. Sure, some idiots might dock you a couple of points here or there, but honestly the threshholds here are not that hard to maintain.
My point is, post away. If people constantly disagree with your ideas it either means you just have a different world view (which is fine) or your comments are lacking something fundamentally relevant.
not necessarily saying people get neg bombed for a post but just saying they run the risk of getting significant negs if against the grain of mass agreement. I don't necessarily see it a lot but I've seen it a fair enough amount to where it affected my posting a bit
I never understand the complaints about points - the threshold for posting is pretty low, so even if you were knocked down below that level comment a couple of times and then you'll be back in business. And I hate all of the "it was better back when" crap. I wasn't here for the Haloscan days, but I've been a poster/lurker for a couple of years and this site is hands-down the best source of UM/college sports coverage around. Yeah, sometimes there are some redundant posts and some tired memes, but that's the Internet for you. Brian, Tim, and Tom all produce top-notch news posts on a daily basis, and some of the MGoUsers produce great diaries and timely analysis you can't even find on the pay sites.
So yeah, sucks that the OP was negged and is unhappy with the direction of the site, but creating a post ON THAT SITE to rant about it seems a rather curious method for addressing those feelings.
Agrees with you about it being the best, I believe; that's why he comes back. He just wants it to change some. From the numbers, it appears the vast majority agrees. I think it's valid to voice an opinion for the betterment of the site, and I think healthy changes may come of it. In a sense, this is a measure of us "self-policing." I am also of the opinion that whenever someone posts a "mgoblog sucks I'm never coming back" thread (which this is not) there may be lessons for the board to learn in it, and I am always listening.
I find it's always a good policy to listen to people. The wise become wiser.
I don't disagree that the OP feels the site is still worthwhile, but I also wonder why the crux of his/her argument (that the point system and tagging needs to be overhauled/better explained) couldn't have been discussed in a manner that wasn't "this place used to be awesome and then everyone ruined it" in tone. Also, it is a pet peeve of mine when people complain about being negged and presume that it was because their opinion was unpopular yet justified, while most times the reason for the negging was because they said something inflammatorry for effect.
I picked up that tone as well. The OP may have overexaggerated his feelings for effect. I didn't mind bc I somewhat agree with the OP's ideas, but I can see your perspective of the manner being annoying.
Interestingly, many "tempered" posts that are apologetic or tow the line don't often get responses. The pos's and neg's seem to be attracted to stronger statements. However, that makes the inflammatory neg often inevitable.
wasn't the simple +/-1 system a whole lot simpler, and better?
My only complaint is that, as someone who doesn't have time to comment/moderate on the MGoBoard a whole lot, I'm still trying to figure out some of these new functions.
I thought the simpler up/down voting method was better -- really, it's not hard to figure out why something was a good or bad comment. But I'm not going to complain about it or anything. IMO, this is the best
team-specific website you'll find anywhere, and whatever Brian wants to do to enhance MGoBlog is fine with me as long as he keeps churning out amazing Michigan content and coverage.
And I get it except during the season when the number of repeat/inane posts gets so ridiculously high that it is pretty tough to find relevant posts. So whatever it is the mods are doing to minimize posts from users who are too lazy to do a search of the board before they post is a good thing. Most other college sports boards are only a few degrees from 4chan in terms of the maturity & relevancy of posts, so keep on doing what you guys are doing. If someone wants 100 points so they can post the mods can take 100 from me and give it to them, but really if you can't get to that threshold you are doing something wrong.
if you can't get to that threshold you are doing something wrong.
Agreed wholeheartedly. Outside of the occasional pissing match where two people neg each other back and forth, this in a mature crowd. I can't think of any situations where a QUALITY post lost points, and if you're around long enough and not a troll or a moron (in which case this isn't the place for you), you'll pass the "trusted user" threshold -- and nothing else matters.
I was a regular as far as back as the Haloscan days, and that was pretty much madness in terms of having any sort of coherent thread or conversation. The MGoBoard is actually very clean and well-organized overall.
Two things I would like to see modified: (1) Shifting each comment's "score" to some place more obvious and away from the title, and (2) more flexibility with the comment-display threshold (it appears that the current lowest possible threshold is -1, but I'd rather set it at like -5).
I really don't like the current rating system for a bunch of reasons. Here are a few: using a dropdown menu to categorize is kind of a pain; i don't really understand how posts get tagged, like if a post is tagged once as funny and once as insightful what happens; putting the +5 and -1 limits makes it hard to scan threads for really great or controversial comments... I wanna know where the action is.
There's no opposites for "insightful" and "interesting" -- maybe "dumb" and "pointless" would work. Replace the useless "overrated" and "underrated" with those two and it would be more useful for me.
As it stands, I usually don't have a choice that even generally describes my negativity toward a comment.
I've noticed that using a different tag ups the total (up to 5, right?) but doesn't seem to change the original tag description. You'll notice a couple of "Flamebait" posts above with positive totals-- suggests that someone flamebaited a post that others thought worthwhile, and up-voted to counteract the flamebait label. But the label stays.
It is also not clear to me what I choose when I agree with an opinion, but don't want to post that I agree with it. I used to just +1. Now, all of these choices and none that just say "agree".
I guess I used to operate under the logic:
+1 = agree, funny / lmao, insightful / thanks for the information, or even disagree but appreciate your view point in the conversation
-1 = you sir are an ass, vehemently disagree, troll
(Suck up cat gifs didn't get anything from me.)
The point about points: everybody had their own logic, but by and large back before the implosion / iPhone only disaster, and before the complexity of these points cost your points and those points expire, it seemed like the point system self moderated the posts.
This new thing requires to much thinking now, but may grow on me with familiarity.
On the positive side, Brian is working to keep the blog "hip" with iPhone and Android apps and other improvements. I'll can deal with progress, because the underlying content and community -- especially for an M-fan in North Carolina -- is worth trying new things now and then.
I prefer to think of him by his One True Internet Name:
New Recent Hot Tom
I don't know where else to ask and I can't start threads, but whats happening with WTKA's website? The new site has been up for days yet there isn't a single podcast to listen to. Are they not going to let us listen to the shows later on cast anymore!?
I saw a notice somewhere that they were re-building the podcast page - the rest of the site has been redone.
I think from reading the blog for a while, I've been very impressed by how new users come on and post a shit-ton, get a bunch of points, then largely disappear. Some people seem to reply to every post and every comment, sometimes that's a benefit, and sometimes it's not. Consequentially, the mgoboard is hit or miss. no big deal. The reason most people are here is for the front page and the TomVH posts.
In general, worrying about points on a blog is a waste of time, but I do appreciate the OPs idea that points do have a negative side in that people post stupid things just to get points. I disagree that the system has ruined the blog. I do wonder how many less pointless posts there would be if Brian instituted a point ceiling, so that once you get 1000 points, you can only lose points for stupid comments. It will never happen though, so whatever.
Just becuase Brian has an opinion that doesn't agree with yours doesn't make him "pissy." It just makes him someone with an opinion different than yours. Besides, there are still plenty of subtle, smarmy, anti-RR bitching comments going on, too.
I don't agree with Brain 100 percent, but it IS his blog, and it is Brian who puts in the 80-100 hours a week or whatever it is to make it as good as it is. This sorta reminds me of something I used to say in my own coarse way until I heard a lot better version of it a month or two ago:
"If two people agree about everything, one is leading and the other is following."
As for points, I can take them or leave them. At best, they are the ultimate in self-moderation. At worst, they are like a bunch of high school kids deciding who to kick out of the pool. They usually work out more to the positive, but they are often decided more on emotion than anything resembling rationality.
Ultimately, though, Brian is allowing everyone in this community to participate in its editorial direction. That isn't all bad.
This post contributes nothing. Just posting for the sake of it.
To paraphrase: This "improvement to the point system" contributes nothing. Just "improving" for the sake of it.
Simple question: For all the legitimate back-and-forth debate about the value of a point system, does anyone think the recent "improvements" to the system do anything to enhance any benefits we were already getting from the existing point system? It all looks like unnecessary complication and clutter to me.
Now, get off my lawn.
Completely agree, but I moderated your post as "trolling" just because of how ridiculous the whole system is.
Such a great board, such an unnecessary change.
Now YOU get off MY lawn.
but I can't. My favorite side effect of the "new and improved" system is when someone says they can't moderate or plus/minus anymore -- which is true for me also -- and someone else responds by explaining that you just need to hit this or that button. Which, like duh, is great advice -- as long as the buttons show up in the first place. I've been poking the bejesus out of an imaginary "moderate" button, but strangely, nothing happens. Well, at least I've been cured of any tendency to over-vote.
Nice "flamebait", jerk
I've been reading for a few months and one thing that sticks out is everyone trys to be 'that funny guy', trying to get points for making a completley absurd and lame comment. It just throws everything way off topic and ruins the core discussion. Seriously some people need to stfu and not make stupid comments.
what she said. Hey-O!
This would be a much better place without all the riff-raff. It's hard to sort through the actual content and all the nonsensical jokes/gifs/etc.
As much as I like the board for its variety of opinions, sometimes I think it would be better just to read the main page and the diaries. Brian, Tim, Misopogon, and TomVH all do a pretty good job of sorting out the good information from the useless stuff. I could probably get almost as much info simply from reading the main page and such, but since I don't live in Wolverine country, this (and TTB) are virtually my only opportunities to talk about Michigan football.
I think I will reach a point in the not-too-distant future when I will leave it up to the aforementioned guys to sift through the content for me. It will be a sad day, but frankly, this site is getting too big and too many people are clamoring for MGoPoints.
The thing is, MGoPoints keep some people around...
...and they drive others away. I'm not sure which mode would be a better for business to Brian, but I get the sense that points are necessary now that this site has so many readers and commenters. The fact that 186 (and counting) comments have been made on this one thread is an indication that the board would probably be unmanageable without some way to rein in trolling/immature posters.
is that you care.
All jest aside, the MGoPoint system is fuel for nihilism. Quality and meaning are subdued by the artificial value of quantity and mass-appeal. Much like human personalities, internet comments are most popular when they reach a supreme lack of depth. These comments can be comprehended by all; and whatever might not be comprehended will be substituted with cognitive adjuncts -- "ideals" of the weaker minds.
mgoblog was once a niche community of intellectuals. But the powers that be have not deterred the swarm of plebeian gawking at the majesty the can scarcely comprehend. My guess as to why is the same as with all movements -- profit motive. dollars are measured in quantity, not quality.
My dollars are measured in quality. It doesn't do me any good to have a bunch of $1 bills if they're too crinkled to be accepted by the Snickers machine.
That is more or less where the place where I have come to, Magnus. I read the main page daily. Then some days I have a little extra time or am procrastinating on something and read a few threads that look like they could be interesting. It used to be that the threads were a constant companion throughout the day, relieving the boredom of being a one-man shop. It was like sitting in the coffee shop or the pub all day with a group of buddies talking about the football program we love. But now there is just too much, as you say, "riff-raff, to wade through. And coming to that realization that the site has changed enough that most days all I want to do is read the main pages and get on with my day is a sad thing. I miss that rowdy bistro from the "old days." It was sophisticated, informed and fun. Maybe points are just a sign of change, but in watching how things have changed since their introduction it seems to me that through the law of unintended consequences that they are the "problem."
I guess I took the time to vent in the OP on the chance that there is some solution that will be able to salvage enough of the character and spirit of the "old days" while allowing site to move forward with substantially increased readership and participation. It would have to be a system that does not reward posting for the sake of posting, that does not penalize people when they are unable to choose not to post for a period of time, a system that is easy and quick to use and a system that does allow the best content to come to the forefront.
You forgot to mention me, bro.
[insert Big Lebowski reference]