How about 2 post game threads? Rant thread and Analysis thread.
There's always going to be a need to rant (can't modify human behavior!) so just try to keep it in one place.
As a side note, there's a great atmosphere over at snrub before, during, and well after the games.
Those posters (often myself included) who want to be a part of the convo, but don't feel like dissecting minutes 12-14 of the second half in 1000 words can have a blast, without clogging up the EKB. It can also be a great way to gauge how your planned post may go over on the boards. Sometimes moments of genius happen at snrub and directly find their way to the board. However, blatant negativity is not welcome there either.
Breen has done a great job of maintaining the chat room. (Except for the Clemson game ) Many thanks to him for offering that media.
How about 2 post game threads? Rant thread and Analysis thread.
There's always going to be a need to rant (can't modify human behavior!) so just try to keep it in one place.
Can we provide a link to a site for ranting? Perhaps we could also empower the mods to transfer the rants to that site, much as they are able to move posts to an appropriate thread.
BTW, I think rants are appropriate if they pertain to anti-duke sentiment, or about those who aspire to be Duke rivals, e.g. unc, uCon, ky, ucla, md.
Rants about BBQ should also be allowed.
It is quite beyond the scope of DBR to suggest a site (or comprehensive list of sites) for ranting. Think of it this way: would the board(s) that we list enjoy being on a list of "places to go to rant?"
And thank you for the empowerment, but technology doesn't allow us to transfer messages between sites. If it did, we'd be getting some interesting stuff from other boards. Not to mention reciprocity: if we could send posts there, then they could send posts here. I don't think we're interested in receiving posts that were deemed inappropriate for those boards!
Come here to discuss Duke Basketball in an intelligent, level-headed fashion (that includes the positive as well as the negative). If you found DBR, you're quite capable of finding an additional site that will accommodate your desire to post in a much less restrictive environment.
Look, we're not saying that you don't have good reason to vent or rant. Vent or rant to your significant other, friends, co-workers, dog, sofa, or potted plant. Or other e-sites. But don't do it here.
In this context, venting or ranting involves language, emotions, or concepts that you likely don't want recorded for posterity. And neither do we. And others (including coaches, players, former players, and their families) don't want to read that, now or archived years from now. If you can express your feelings in a constructive manner, they'll be allowed to stand. That wouldn't be considered a rant or vent for the purposes of this argument.
I apologize that my post sounded more serious than intended. I think you appreciate the potential humor in my proposal. I have had several PMs from others who certainly appreciated the humor and suggested potential sites. Why do people seem to think Carolina boards are appropriate venues for ranting?
On the technical end, don't we have some really smart people on this board that could make my proposal feasible but not reciprocal?
Ahhh, the joys of communicating with text. Sometimes it's wise to use smilies to ensure the intended inflection. (Sorry, I'm also working for another volunteer organization right now who are making requests like this who are dead serious at wasting the next year of my life so they can save 3 minutes.) This does illustrate a point that sometimes the inflection that one means isn't taken that way by the reader.
Of course we do! But we're a little busy at the moment...(and we wouldn't want to get in trouble!)
It isn't just textual communication. Just when you think you have found something so completely preposterous that you can suggest wryly for humor's sake alone ... someone responds, "Yeah, why don't we try that" - and with nary a hint of humor. Sigh.
Is there an emoticon for malaise?
Some posts that are sure to garner moderator criticism/infractions have proven to be the most worthwhile. Witness recent threads along the lines of:
-Practice/Schmatice, EW and Plumlee need to play more
-Z/GP/Nolan has/have been really ineffective lately- let's sit him/them and start Scheyer.
-Are the Coaches to blame?
These are threads we've all seen lately, and on their face, they seem destructive in nature. Anyone voicing the above complaints is sure to do so with a fair amount of frustration-- I'd go so far as saying without frustration, those posters wouldn't have taken the time to post. The "Are the Coaches to Blame" thread smacks especially of an "It's Over" mentality.
However, we've seen the coaching staff take steps to address the exact concerns addressed in the above posts-- EW and Plumlee are playing, JS is at the point, and Coach K is jacket throwing to exhort the crowd, which is quite a departure from his recent stoic/face in hands benchsitting, and we have changed our offense and defense appreciably of late. It almost seems the coaching staff has read these "excessively destructive" threads and added them to the playbook.
Unless we're only talking about cleaning up tone, which I don't think was the intent of Julio's original post, "Cleaning up" would tend to squash the threads described above, which have proved to be prophetic. Baby with the bathwater, and all that. Got to be careful.
Although undoubtedly an oversimplification, it seems to me there are two kinds of problem postings:
1. Substantive posts in the wrong tone: mean-spirited, overly negative, or edging into ad hominem attacks.
2. Mindless, senseless drivel and schoolyard taunting of no interest to anyone.
I guess I thought this thread was trying to stamp out #2, in an effort to raise the average level of content on this Board. However, there seems to be some angst among posters who feel that the policing of #1 is being done with a heavy hand.
Would it be fair to ask that we agree what we are disagreeing about?
sagegrouse
You say these threads are "sure to" garner moderator criticisms and infractions, but do you have any backup for that actually happening? I recall many of those threads flourishing, with substantive discussion on both sides, without being closed and without degenerating into slam-fests against the players and coaches.
If people got dinged in those threads, it's likely for the content, and not the subject, of their post. There is a significant and meaningful difference between a) "Brian Zoubek has not been playing well and shouldn't see the court until he improves" and b) "Zoubek sucks." Both have the same subject matter, but the content of the latter makes it problematic.
Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.
You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner
You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke
Those threads trinity92 mentioned are worth discussing -- and that kind of discussion is why the site exists. Yes, they do bring up negative aspects of the team. But the tone of the posts is generally constructive. We're talking about the difference in saying, "<player> had way too many turnovers and was out of position a lot," and "<player> sucks and is the biggest disappointment ever in Duke history." If we didn't tolerate general negativity towards the program, we'd have nuked those threads a long time ago.
We are talking about cleaning up the tone, and that was the point of Julio's post. Here's the relevant part of his post, with emphasis added:
We welcome all opinions here -- just state them in a thoughtful and civil fashion. That's all we're asking.So what is expected? Here it is, as simply as we can put it.
* Be civil. You can disagree without getting into a fight. This goes for management and mods, too. Civility is the key to it all.
* Post intelligently. If you just want to insult people, or don't put much thought into it, or you do things which don't contribute meaningfully to the site, we don't want it.
* While we don't mind thoughtful criticism of either the site (fire away) or Duke's program, we have never wanted to be one of those sites where people go to just rip their favorite team. What good is that? It's one thing to say, you know, I think that was a bad move strategically or so-and-so got outplayed. But when you say something that would tend to cause injury to the program...well, that's not what this site is about. There are a million places to go do that. You'll be welcome there. But not here.
So what do we want? We want intelligent, passionate fans who make this the most interesting place to share thoughts about college basketball, and Duke and ACC hoops in particular. We've always seen it as a neighborhood pub, and hooligans are not welcome. We have bouncers!
In reading the Maryland forum today (particularly the topic regarding Nolan Smith's injury) I can say that I have a new understanding for what sets DBR apart from other "similar" boards. We don't all gather around our computers and applaud the injury of an opponent, and our posts are not peppered with profanity (an amusing alliteration). Looking at their board, I can't help but realize how great DBR is. People on here post well thought out, in depth, and sometimes quite long things that are actually worth reading. There is true insight and analysis of the game and our team, and that is what makes it great. This is more than just a board of basketball crazed fans, it is sophisticated. The last thing I think any of us wants to see is moving, even a little bit, in the direction of certain other boards.
I may be rather new to posting here, and I may also be guilty of the occasional rant, most often at halftime during games that aren't going well, but I don't want to see DBR lose what makes it great. Thanks to the mods who are keeping (or at least trying to keep) the boards under control.
I gotta say that after reading the Maryland boards regarding Nolan's injury, etc., I seriously considered contributing a long, very reasonable post as an older neutral (obviously false, but necessary to keep from being immediately banned) observer that had ACC ties. In it, I was going to mention how the IC, DBR and Maryland boards each conducted themselves, and note how comparatively vicious, hatefull, venomous, immature, etc. the Maryland boards are in relation to even the IC board, and how detracting they are to such a fine school. But then, I decided it would be useless.
Sigh!
ricks.
you just get some good Texas BBQ