Double Standard

[Brooklyn Bearcat]

I am posting this in 'General' because I do respect the fact that threads should at least be specific to the sport of the forum in which it is posted; and this thread is obviously not relevant to any sport, per se.
However, I do believe that any conversation, between Bearcat fans should be allowed. For example, a Huggins thread IS UC related, whether he is still our coach or not. Or a general Big East conversation should be allowed as well, even if the words 'Cincinnati' or 'Bearcats' are never uttered. As UC fans, we have to be aware of the sports world beyond UC and take an interest in teams, programs, players, coaches, issues, events, etc that might not be UC specific, but can still be relatable to the UC program. It is important that we see UC in the context of the greater sports world or just the world in general and if somebody wants to make an observation about something outside UC and bring it to the attention of Bearcat News, if for no other reason than they find it interesting, then there is no reason why it should not be discussed on our forums. After all, we can expand our understanding and appreciation for UC sports if we can juxtapose it against other schools and athletic programs.
That said, a thread that SHOULD be closed is one that is basically an argument between two or a few participants, one that has nasty remarks towards another member, or one that brings up speculative subjects that are not even rumors (ie: Bobby Knight to UC; however if you want to pose the topic in which you ask who you would like to see as the next coach, that should be OK). But as long as it is civil, a philosophical discussion about whether the Big East is better than the ACC in basketball, or an observation about Ohio State, should be more than welcome on this site.

One idea that I have for this site:
Some of the members who have greater access to UC sports should write weekly updates on sports besides basketball and football, with player profiles, game recaps, and other important bits of news. I believe that the UC AD and marketing departments see BearcatNews as an invaluable vehicle for discourse about UC and as a news database, and would gladly grant press credentials to members who would like to cover and offer exposure to some of the underexposed UC sports, and then maybe even football and basketball.

OK, that's it for now. KEEP THREADS OPEN!!!!

[NorrisHopper30]

Yes they should be closed if they are all on the same topic. It crowds the forum with the same topic, if they aren't closed they should be merged.

[Lobot]

Yes they should be closed if they are all on the same topic. It crowds the forum with the same topic, if they aren't closed they should be merged.

Personally I try and merge such threads when possible. When multiple threads are created with same topic on purpose as was done this week with John Riek, it's safe to say they will be deleted.

[shaunsimpson]

I am posting this in 'General' because I do respect the fact that threads should at least be specific to the sport of the forum in which it is posted; and this thread is obviously not relevant to any sport, per se.
However, I do believe that any conversation, between Bearcat fans should be allowed. For example, a Huggins thread IS UC related, whether he is still our coach or not. Or a general Big East conversation should be allowed as well, even if the words 'Cincinnati' or 'Bearcats' are never uttered. As UC fans, we have to be aware of the sports world beyond UC and take an interest in teams, programs, players, coaches, issues, events, etc that might not be UC specific, but can still be relatable to the UC program. It is important that we see UC in the context of the greater sports world or just the world in general and if somebody wants to make an observation about something outside UC and bring it to the attention of Bearcat News, if for no other reason than they find it interesting, then there is no reason why it should not be discussed on our forums. After all, we can expand our understanding and appreciation for UC sports if we can juxtapose it against other schools and athletic programs.
That said, a thread that SHOULD be closed is one that is basically an argument between two or a few participants, one that has nasty remarks towards another member, or one that brings up speculative subjects that are not even rumors (ie: Bobby Knight to UC; however if you want to pose the topic in which you ask who you would like to see as the next coach, that should be OK). But as long as it is civil, a philosophical discussion about whether the Big East is better than the ACC in basketball, or an observation about Ohio State, should be more than welcome on this site.

One idea that I have for this site:
Some of the members who have greater access to UC sports should write weekly updates on sports besides basketball and football, with player profiles, game recaps, and other important bits of news. I believe that the UC AD and marketing departments see BearcatNews as an invaluable vehicle for discourse about UC and as a news database, and would gladly grant press credentials to members who would like to cover and offer exposure to some of the underexposed UC sports, and then maybe even football and basketball.

OK, that's it for now. KEEP THREADS OPEN!!!!

There is much that you say there that I agree with. The problem that we currently have is that threads are being hijacked and turned into the same topic. Why is a topic about the NCAA tournament turned into a Mick vs Huggins thread? That should not be happening since we have two other hijacked threads with the same topic.

When almost every thread turns into an argument about the same topics or involves chest pounding between the same 5 people over and over again it turns people off to this website and limits the relevant conversations.

I tend to agree with the off topic posts being relevant in the grand scheme even thought they do not mention UC directly, but the problem is that the more we get burnt the less likely it is to happen. Like the NCAA tournament thread. We try to discuss the tournament and have 10 out of 12 threads about Huggins and his losses in relation to Mick.

The goal is to keep as many threads open as possible, but the goal is also to have "like" topics and conversations contained in the same thread. The more everything turns into the same topic and the more every thread becomes and argument between the same people the less likely people are to continue to contribute to the site through posts.

[Lobot]

That said, a thread that SHOULD be closed is one that is basically an argument between two or a few participants, one that has nasty remarks towards another member

This the number one challenge that I personally have moderating the board. we have a set of people who intentionally bait/troll and attack other users. This leads to threads that become nothing but arguments and shuts off people who wish to discuss the thread topic. I've tried friendly letters to most of these people without much success. We do have a plan to address this.

[BearcatRob33]

This the number one challenge that I personally have moderating the board. we have a set of people who intentionally bait/troll and attack other users. This leads to threads that become nothing but arguments and shuts off people who wish to discuss the thread topic. I've tried friendly letters to most of these people without much success. We do have a plan to address this.

It's a shame that a few people are ruining so many good threads. It's reassuring to hear that those people are being addressed.

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

When almost every thread turns into an argument about the same topics or involves chest pounding between the same 5 people over and over again it turns people off to this website and limits the relevant conversations.

Maybe this is the question that needs to be asked:

Why do the admins allow "the same 5 people" to "limit the relevant conversations" for the 95% of posters who are just here to talk about UC basketball?

See where I'm going? When you close down threads containing legitimate discussion, the terrorists win.

[Lobot]

Maybe this is the question that needs to be asked:

Why do the admins allow "the same 5 people" to "limit the relevant conversations" for the 95% of posters who are just here to talk about UC basketball?

See where I'm going? When you close down threads containing legitimate discussion, the terrorists win.

I'm completely with you and I only close down threads when it's become hopeless in most cases. I prefer to delete the offenders' posts and leave the thread going but that can be difficult sometimes.

[Irishbearcat]

More leeway would be nice. Save the moderation for spammers and personal attacks.

My 2 cents.

[Lobot]

More leeway would be nice. Save the moderation for spammers and personal attacks.

My 2 cents.

I understand where you're coming from but if that were the only criteria this place would be completely unmanageable. Period.

[BearcatRob33]

I'm completely with you and I only close down threads when it's become hopeless in most cases. I prefer to delete the offenders' posts and leave the thread going but that can be difficult sometimes.

I wish you'd delete the offenders instead of just their posts.

[jeffto]

I understand where you're coming from but if that were the only criteria this place would be completely unmanageable. Period.

What the heck does this mean? Manageable=discussing topics the moderators' prefer? What exactly is "at risk" if a discussion becomes "unmanageable"?

Censorship is usually not an American ideal, but aspire to it if you wish.

[Lobot]

What the heck does this mean? Manageable=discussing topics the moderators' prefer? What exactly is "at risk" if a discussion becomes "unmanageable"?

Censorship is usually not an American ideal, but aspire to it if you wish.

Manageable to me means streamlined threads with posts that respect other posters.

What is at risk is the integrity of the forums. If we let 5 different threads about John Riek go on at one time, the place is unreadable. If we let every thread devolve into a pissing match between members, it's unreadable.

As far as choice of topics go, I don't make those rules I just enforce them. Talk to the admins.

If enforcement of the forum rules equals censorship to you then that is your issue to take up with them.

[jeffto]

It's become quite obvious to me that Mike is the brains and the conscience behind this effort. With him unable to devote time to it, it's devolved into a shadow of it's former self.

Perhaps if the mods and admins want members to treat each other with respect a good starting point would be for the mods and admins to treat members with respect.

[Lobot]

Can you cite some examples where you believe that did not happen? That would help us carry out what you're asking for.

I do my best to treat people with respect when I moderate. Most of the time I will give you a reason why I'm closing a thread or moving something.