Why We Want the Boards to be Positive -- A Case Example

[devil84]

This was on the front page at the beginning of the Memorial Day weekend, and if you didn't peruse the main page over the weekend, you might have missed it. It's worth a read.

We’ve talked a lot over the years about the importance of not being overly negative on the boards, particularly when it comes to recruits. Sooner or later, it was going to cost someone. As it turns out, it may be Wisconsin.

You just never know who is reading the boards.

[johaad]

Boards definitely need to be more positive. But I don't think this is the norm. I don't think most recruits would take what is (generally) the more extreme of the fan base as the gospel. I wonder what they were saying about him? Anyone know?

[brevity]

The problem with most message boards is that they are populated with horrible people. (Not so much this one, mostly due to backbreaking work by moderators, and self-policing by members who miraculously insist on maintaining a positive reputation.)

Oh sure, message board contributors are probably nice (or at least tactful) in real life, and would never act so harshly face-to-face, but many become horrible people when they can hide behind relative anonymity and are free to be their worst. Outside of maybe middle school and high school, society rarely reaches the level of despicable behavior, crude statements, and personal attacks that you find on the average message board.

And while DBR usually operates on a higher standard, Duke fandom in general is not immune to the drop in civility. It's only a matter of time before other schools, including Duke, will suffer when boorish fan reaction negatively impacts recruiting.

Remember that for most elite prep players, the primary goal is using their basketball skills to make a living in a professional league, so that they can provide for themselves and for others. There are many ways to get there, and to them a handful of colleges will look similarly situated. Narrowing the choices can mean searching for negatives. If they are so inclined, visiting fan sites and message boards can be a good place to start.

[BD80]

The problem with most message boards is that they are populated with horrible people. ...

I completely disagree. The problem is relatively normal people who find a board such as this as a way to vent in some way. Every time these posters are challenged about their negativity, they respond with the standard refrain "it is my opinion and it is valid, this board would be no good if everybody were a Pollyanna."

Those posters should consider this excerpt from the article:

... a story about the Madison native's alleged academic woes, ... led to some Wisconsin fans spending their days publicly bashing the Class of 2010 standout on the Internet. They questioned his attitude, character and intelligence. ...

Sound familiar? It did to me.

Can we get at least ONE mea culpa from one of those posters on this board? I doubt it.

[tbyers11]

Boards definitely need to be more positive. But I don't think this is the norm. I don't think most recruits would take what is (generally) the more extreme of the fan base as the gospel. I wonder what they were saying about him? Anyone know?

Being a Madison native, I had followed this rather closely. Vander Blue committed to UW last year as a soph when he was a very good but not great recruit. His play last summer and this year in helping lead Madison Memorial to a state title boosted his rep quite a bit. There were whispers whether his more "free-form" game would mesh well with Bo Ryan's structured swing offense. There were rumblings that he may decommit from the UW after a meeting between he, his mom, and UW advisors and coaches sometime the week of the 11th.

The message boards took off with rumors that he wasn't decommiting, but was actually having academic issues that the UW was trying to get out in front of to make sure he would be eligible. Others were saying that if he was going to decommit and go to Marquette (in-state rival), he could go jump off a cliff (my cleaned up version). There is precedent here because Wes Matthews, Marquette's star senior forward this year had gone to high school at Memorial. Additionally, the other star player on Memorial's state title team this season, Jeronne Maymon, is going to Marquette. Allegations of poaching and whether Blue's game was too "street" for Wisconsin came up. You can guess where that led.

This all occurred over a period of about a week until he had a press conference on the 20th, officially backing off his oral commitment to UW. He said that Wisconsin is still involved but that he is weighing his options. Here is a blog post from the Madison paper about some things he said in addition to the CBSsports article linked above. Basically, he said that the comments about his academics really upset him and his mom.

[Atlanta Duke]

a story about the Madison native's alleged academic woes, ... led to some Wisconsin fans spending their days publicly bashing the Class of 2010 standout on the Internet. They questioned his attitude, character and intelligence. ...

Sound familiar? It did to me.

Can we get at least ONE mea culpa from one of those posters on this board? I doubt it.

If you are referring to posts on the recruiting saga of John Wall, my impression was a number of posters (me included) questioned whether recruting a one and done player with sketchy academic credentials was worth the price if that is what it takes to remain in the top tier of basketball programs. Like many posters, I framed my concerns in the context that (I believe this is an accurate paraphrase of statement ), John Wall might otherwise be a wonderful young man in addition to being a wonderful basketball talent.

Mea culpa to asking whether Duke should be going down that road

[brevity]

The problem is relatively normal people who find a board such as this as a way to vent in some way.

As I hinted above, those ARE the horrible people, or at least a subset of them. In my eyes, they cease to be "relatively normal" when they are given an outlet to express themselves without filter and choose to expose their true natures.

People are of course free to let their thoughts drift wherever they do, but sharing them in a publicly available forum is another matter. There are plenty of ways for people to vent without debasing themselves and offending others in front of a wide audience.

Every time these posters are challenged about their negativity, they respond with the standard refrain "it is my opinion and it is valid, this board would be no good if everybody were a Pollyanna."

Many real-life spoken discussions about the stuff covered in message boards can involve two or more people in disagreement without getting ugly or petty. It's not unreasonable to demand the same in writing.

I have what would probably constitute some extremely unpopular opinions about Duke basketball and its fandom, but I choose not to share them because I know the audience here, and believe that starting those threads or steering existing threads in certain directions would provide limited utility and even less payoff.

Sound familiar? It did to me.

I do agree that DBR's levels of civility get severely tested in the recruiting threads, which at times become unreadable. There's a misguided belief by many frustrated people that national championships are won solely based on the personnel on hand. I rarely post in those threads, and what I have to say is fairly neutral and after the fact (congratulatory to signees, well-wishing to those that go elsewhere).

[CameronBornAndBred]

I read that story last week, and of course thought of DBR and other message boards. I've never read anyone bashing a recruit here, however. I've read plenty of posts on how the poster might not support the recruiting of a player, as recently evidenced by the John Wall thread. A few of us, myself included, (and Jumbo even) stated our reasons why we were not thrilled by us going after Wall. But at least our reasons were followed by valid points and weren't mean spirited or attacking in their premise. From the Wisconsin scenario, that was the impression I had that the offending fans' attitude must have been leaning towards.

[BD80]

If you are referring to posts on the recruiting saga of John Wall, my impression was a number of posters (me included) questioned whether recruiting a one and done player with sketchy academic credentials was worth the price if that is what it takes to remain in the top tier of basketball programs. Like many posters, I framed my concerns in the context that (I believe this is an accurate paraphrase of statement ), John Wall might otherwise be a wonderful young man in addition to being a wonderful basketball talent.

Mea culpa to asking whether Duke should be going down that road

The problem in my mind were those debating his "sketchy academic credentials" without solid information that such an issue even existed. The same was true with respect to Bledsoe. Frankly, I don't think such issues should discussed on the board, because they assume a negative about a potential recruit. As the cited article illustrates, there is a potential downside to the University. There is no real "upside" to such discussions.

I realize that my argument boils down to "trust in K," but I can live with that.

[JasonEvans]

I realize that my argument boils down to "trust in K," but I can live with that.

And seeing as we pretty much have zero input into his recruiting decisions and practices, "trust in K" is about all we can do anyway. It has gone pretty darn well so far. I'd say he has earned that trust

-Jason "it is suprisingly easy to act like a jerk on a bulletin board" Evans