For the love of God. I'm begging.
fair point that
Forget raising the minimums, just make starting new threads 'cost' points. If you have 105 points, you can start a thread, but, after you do you should only have 5 left.
Or we could all just stop reading the board for a few days, that might work, too.
Just signed up today and was wondering how I could start a post. Didn't know about the point system.
You need 20 points to see the points and to be able to vote. You're at 16 now.
it was raised to 100 a couple weeks back.
I knew the minimum to post was raised, but I figured that you still only needed 20 points to start seeing points and voting.
They can contribute by posting in the threads that are useful rather than having 10 threads on the same stupid opinion for the 1 guy that might have a good thread to contribute. If his opinion is worth anything he'll get points and post it later.
...but you earn your wings here.
Naw, I'm new, and I'm as pissed and clueless as the next guy.
Jesus H. Christ, does this topic need to be brought up every time there is a loss??? Talk about reduntant. Just let Brian run the site as he sees fit.
And wasn't going to post this,- but it gets old after a loss or even a close win- to have everyone trying to yell the loudest about why we should or shouldn't fire RR. Sorry for the redundant post, but it's tiresome and clogs the tube.
+1 for the South Park reference
yes because it's only in the event of a loss that every stupid poster comes out of the woodwork to post a rant on the board. It makes the board really un-fun to read for the rest of us who actually enjoy reading news about Michigan rather than opinions on Michigan. If I wanted to see that I would go look at the Mlive message boards.
Brian does a pretty damned good job at running this blog, but he doesn't do it without a lot of help. Some of that help comes from regulars who work with him as moderators, and some of the help comes from the regular posters who self-police and try to get things to function in a way that allows for meaningful dialogue regarding Michigan athletics. When things are slow, off-topic posts grow like weeds. After losses it is like a full moon in the Emergency Department. All the Crazies come out!!!
I am more than happy to read something meaningful from a new poster. I only ask that they look at the board to see that their insightful information hasn't already been posted 12 times. I think rather than having to have a minimum number of points to post, you need to have made a minimum financial contribution. Sort of a "get behind the paywall" to give your pearls of wisdom.
The minimum to post should be higher. Someone with no points should have to earn some points before they can post.
Oh wait...you mean a THREAD.
People who have plenty of points write idiotic things. Plus, as someone else rightly pointed out, you prevent those who can contribute something of substance from doing so.
...it also prevents trolls and idiots from repeatedly posting the same crap (particularly after a loss). I think I can live without the periodic insight from a new member if that meant that sort of thing was eliminated or, at least mediated.
The wannabe thread police are starting to piss me off. it's an anonymous internet message board, you can't expect the majority of new threads to meet your standard of quality. I've seen just as many quality threads initiated by low-point users as shit threads from high-point users.
Deal with it. Let Brian and Co run the god damn site or find a new message board to waste your time on.
.....as much as I love to listen to thy with the most points banter the same endless rhetoric I like some fresh voices and new views to be introduced to discussions.....lets not turn this place into some county club.
How about a function related to the amount of time you've been a member of the site? Suggestion: 465-x=required points.
Where x is the number of days you've been a member of the site.
x will also max out at 365.
I would agree with something like that.
To start a new thread you will now need at least 8000 points.
are longer-term members that just might not be that into posting.
I'd be fine with 100+ points and/or 30 days of membership before thread privileges.
I'm not looking for a country club either, but many of the most irritating posts (if not threads) are from people who signed up 4 days ago!
That is NOT enough time to get a feel for this place, or to understand whats been covered ad nauseam.
I am a longtime member, even longertime reader, and I have very few points to my name.
Raising point limits to post actually culls out the people best-suited to not make ridiculous posts; those that could post, but choose only to do so when they have something that they really feel is worthwhile to add to the discussion.
There is a lot of dumb going around lately, and something could stand to be done so this place does not turn into mlive or something similar. The suggested solution just is not the right one IME.
P.S. Alternately, if any mod/Brian decided to award me a couple thousand mgopoints for being selective with what I post instead of jumping into every thread to gain points, I would be fine with that solution, because let's face it, it's all about me. If I had tons of points, I might agree with the solution given.
I agree with this completely. Some restrictions should be in place for new posters, but they shouldn't be so overbearing that newcomers are discouraged from joining the community. I think a waiting period would be very beneficial.
1. I started a thread one time that people apparently hated and it got shut down like immediately. The moderators are on the case. Let them handle it.
2. The guys with the least points say a lot more interesting things than they do uninteresting.
3. The power of the back button keeps it from being much of an issue. Guys who are all put out by repetitive opinions being expressed should stick to commenting on ones that meet their standards and ignore the rest.
Both sides have a point but the bottom line is it would be great if it were resolved absent rudeness towards others. Sit and think for a moment about what we are griping about here.
I used to have plenty of points to post and start new threads. I guess you have to be happy with the defense or you'll get negged. I don't care if someone negs me, but don't do it unless you have some sort of retort to explain yourself.
The current system lets people who have nothing to say censor those who do.
Yeah, it sucks when people just neg away, but in my experience those are outliers. Now, I have seen quite a few posters start out with "I don't care what you think, my points about topic X are right because..." and that tone can be offputting. I rarely neg someone for having a differing opinion, but I will neg someone who is an ass about it.
The current system lets people who have nothing to say censor those who do.
No, because the people who have nothing to say never accumulate the points in the first place.
I'm starting to care less and less about points as the season progresses. Sure, there are the occasional trolls, but the mods keep it pretty clean and I just ignore the posts I could care less about unless they are particularly obnoxious or raise an interesting point in an otherwise needless post. Yeah, it's an anonymous website and maybe people should chill out a bit, but part of it is that there are so few places on the Internet where somewhat-logical sport discourses occur, and I personally want to the site maintain some semblance of quality compared to, say, Freep, Deadspin, MLive, etc.
I say, do away with points. Lets go "scout.com" style and let our emotions get the best of us every Saturday. To live anonymously and vicariously through a message board and take all our anger at life out on RR and 18 year old kids.....that would be a blast. Whose coming with me?
I would try to find this number myself, but I don't really have the time, energy, or drive to spend going through stupid posts. Anyway, if someone who really wants to do it were to compile all of the stupid posts over a week or two, then write the point totals of the posters when the posts were made, and put them in order, they could then go, say, 4/5 of the way to the highest number, and make that the minimum to post.
Since we can probably safely assume that twenty percent of "stupid" posts are made by intelligent people having stress-induced transient ischemic episodes, 4/5 or eighty percent of the way to the "top" might be a great place to draw the line.
Maybe another way would be to just jot down point totals of authors of stupid posts starting now, and figure out the "magic number" after a week or two.
1. Raise (again) the min to post
2. Have some standard after game threads Positives, Negatives, Denard/Tate QB , Defense Special Teams. This should also provide a conduit for the lurker that is moved to post
3. If people want to post repetative stuff about standard post game topics it will cost (500/5000 I don't care )to start an additional thread