Let's discuss the closing of threads

[Irishbearcat]

They are the site administrators, and maintain this forum voluntarily at no cost to any of us. Rather than chastising them for managing the forum so that it operates in the manner they envision, which is their right, we should be thanking them for their tireless efforts in providing us an opportunity to discuss UC athletics with others that are interested in discussing UC athletics. Would any one of you out there want to take on their responsibility? I am confident that if you knew the number of hours they work on this site and gathering informtaion for it, you would not. Thanks to Keith, Mike and all the rest of the BCN staff. You do a great job and, in my opinion, we are blessed that you provide us this forum.

Peace and blessings to all.

I moderate three other boards. That is a choice each person makes. It doesn't mean that you act as god, but select where/when moderation is needed. Deleting threads or posts where things may be contentious (but not ugly) is confusing to me. This is supposed to be where debate happens....if everyone agreed, then only one person would need to post. How boring is that?

[MikeInClifton]

I moderate three other boards. That is a choice each person makes. It doesn't mean that you act as god, but select where/when moderation is needed. Deleting threads or posts where things may be contentious (but not ugly) is confusing to me. This is supposed to be where debate happens....if everyone agreed, then only one person would need to post. How boring is that?

In my opinion, we are trying to gear the conversations toward debate. Unfortunately, we are still getting pissing matches and whining. I am fine with debate. Cant wait to see it happen again. Its just that its rare as opposed to the norm.

When we see more 'ugly' than debate, threads close.

[MikeInClifton]

Because the administrators on this site think they're the end-all, be-all. They think they've got all the skills needed to effectively build and nurture a community, when, in fact, just the opposite is true. The more we bitch, the more they feel like they might lose power somehow, so the more threads they'll close.

This thread is still open and your post is still here.

This has stopped being a forum because now, we're only allowed to talk about whatever the administrators want to talk about. That kind of "administrating" will lead to a forum devoid of any thought, emotion, or, ultimately, traffic. It's already beginning to happen, and I can't say I feel bad about it.

The numbers we see do not reflect your comments - quite the opposite. We've actually had a strong spike in new members, likely because of the football success and basketball team starting 10-2.

I've often referred to other boards that may have different rules on moderation. Yappi and JJHuddle have College Basketball boards and Rivals, Scout, and the NCAABBS board are Bearcat specific. No one is stopping anyone from participating on one of the other boards, more than one board or all of the boards! I participate on Yappi and JJHuddle myself occasionally.

[jeffto]

Threads that deteriorate into arguments between members will be closed.

This the one that you must be careful with as far as imposing your will. I assume you mean personal attacks between members. What you think is offensive to the participating parties may not be to either (any) of them.

As long as there's no cursing or totally inappropriate comments, I would think the better course is to let it go. If people are thin skinned, perhaps they shouldn't be on here. Also, there is an infraction system in place for people to report inappropriate comments.

Just another example: I would never call LongTimer or Doss an idiot as an insult; just a statement of fact. Should my comment be deleted?

[MikeInClifton]

Just another example: I would never call LongTimer or Doss an idiot as an insult; just a statement of fact. Should my comment be deleted?

At least the smiley this time told me you are probably joking (as opposed to the other thread), but if I answered that question seriously, I would say 'yes' for two reasons.

- 'idiot' is a subjective term. One mans 'idiot' is another mans 'normal'.
- The logical reply to being called an idiot is to defend oneself, so therefore the victim of the 'idiot' label would likely attack you verbally and then the thread descends into chaos. Or at least thats whats happened in the past.

[TheLivingLegend]

with the amount of complaints that take place with this topic, its shocking that nothing changes. o well life goes on

[Billy Don]

with the amount of complaints that take place with this topic, its shocking that nothing changes. o well life goes on

222222222222222222222222222222222222

[jeffto]

At least the smiley this time told me you are probably joking (as opposed to the other thread), but if I answered that question seriously, I would say 'yes' for two reasons.

- 'idiot' is a subjective term. One mans 'idiot' is another mans 'normal'.
- The logical reply to being called an idiot is to defend oneself, so therefore the victim of the 'idiot' label would likely attack you verbally and then the thread descends into chaos. Or at least thats whats happened in the past.

Actually, Idiot is quantifiable, based on IQ. Less than 20 = Idiot. However I may have used the incorrect term. Imbecile (20-49) or Moron (50-69) would probably be more accurate.

[MikeInClifton]

Actually, Idiot is quantifiable, based on IQ. Less than 20 = Idiot. However I may have used the incorrect term. Imbecile (20-49) or Moron (50-69) would probably be more accurate.

. . . .and yet some of them still can use a computer! haha

[TheLivingLegend]

222222222222222222222222222222222222

was there a purpose to that?

[jeffto]

was there a purpose to that?

That was for self classification. 22 = imbecile. An imbecile wouldn't know when to stop pressing the key.

[Billy Don]

That was for self classification. 22 = imbecile. An imbecile wouldn't know when to stop pressing the key.

Name calling is what losers do after they have been beat. Winners always put in a good word for the person or team they have just beat. With that being said I think you have put a lot of good posts on this board sir.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

That was for self classification. 22 = imbecile. An imbecile wouldn't know when to stop pressing the key.

Yep. I've read (here) something like Attack The Message, Not The Messenger.

But it's only selectively enforced. And never on this particular messenger (Jeffto).

[jeffto]

Name calling is what losers do after they have been beat. Winners always put in a good word for the person or team they have just beat. With that being said I think you have put a lot of good posts on this board sir.

I agree, you have put a lot of good posts on this forum - unlike the poster who posted just after you. He lives and breathes negativity.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I agree, you have put a lot of good posts on this forum - unlike the poster who posted just after you. He lives and breathes negativity.

If you read what I posted, you'll see (EDITED) the facts within. May I suggest you try it.