Éditer l'avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • La grandeur minimale recommandée se veut de 800px par 800px
  • Grandeur maximale: 1MB
Glisser l'image pour repositionner
Sauvegarder
Annuler

Rooney

Go Jets Go
Membre depuis
6 mar 2018
Équipe favorite
Jets de Winnipeg
Deuxième équipe favorite
Red Wings de Detroit
Localisation
Winnipeg
Messages dans les forums
3410
Messages par jour
2.76
Sujets de discussion
737
Biographie
Winnipeg born and raised, proud Jets fan.
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 17 heures
Forum: DiscussionSun at 8:30 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div><strong>The AGM section is too often becoming a "Twitter news breaker" cesspool whenever hockey news comes up, in my opinion</strong>.
(If you haven't noticed it, its simply because I've deleted probably over 200 AGM's in the past week alone!)

Ok so I went full kamikaze this past week on AGM teams that have not been respecting the AGM rules. Ive clamped down because of the increase in hockey related news being released like Expansion, trades, etc but also the sheer amount of new people coming to post AGM teams for the first time. Which is a great thing from a site perspective but has been a hassle from a moderator perspective.

Maybe Im the one whose mistaken the rules here but if we want the forums to be used properly, IMO we can't allow people to post "Breaking news" and "Twitter" like posts, to the AGM's. Letting anything slide will only empower users to continue to post any and everything to the AGM section. Instead of the forums where they belong. Making the forums useless and less viewed, which is why people don't want to post there in the first place. See the conundrum?

I've been moving as many threads to the proper sections as I can but at a certain point this was only reinforcing the users lack of responsibility to post to the proper place. Once again, not solving the root problem.

The criteria I use for the base minimum effort needed for a valid AGM post to NOT get deleted, which is mind numbingly simple are:

1 - Is the AGM complete? E.g full roster was completed. Not half-assing a team just to post click bait news in the title (CAREY PRICE HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO SEATTLE!)
2 - Does it break any of the actual forum rules? Trolling, etc. which is obvious.

That's it. That's all I use as a base to NOT delete an AGM. If you don't break those 2 rules, the post, however click bait-y, won't be deleted by me because its earned the right to be viewed at the very least.</div></div>

A 'loophole' - if you will - that I'm more than okay with is if users take it a step beyond just the clickbait-y title and/or Twitter feed that we see some AGMs incorporating. To use Price as an example, if its a Montreal or Seattle AGm that has clear and distinct moves surrounding the possibility of Price being claimed and is in every otherworldly way a proper AGM, I'm fine with the titles and that neck breaking speed at which a user might hit publish in order to be first.

I think there's an onus on us to make sure that these kinds of AGMs don't get caught in the crossfire. I think I accidentally dusted one yesterday and a couple Arizona teams I saw regarding the Ladd dump that would have been otherwise fine were also deleted in haste.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div>Many users have been complaining about it but that is a very small effort needed to post an AGM team IMO. So regardless if the post has a valid subject or interesting concept idea, if it doesn't follow the rules, its not an AGM. At this point its at the moderators discretion to either move or delete the thread but one of those options has to be selected IMO.

User doesn't complete team but makes one single trade asking "How close am I"? - Delete/move it. Should be posted in the Trade Machine section of that's the case.
User doesn't complete team but creates AGM simply to show who he would expose in the expansion draft? - Delete/move it. Should be in the Expansion draft section.
User doesn't complete team but posts a team detailing who he wants his team to choose in the Entry draft? - Delete/move it. Should be in the mock draft section or maybe one of the team forums.
Etc etc etc

Also most times, its not that the users "don't know". They simply don't care and just want to be the first when it comes to posting click bait. The minute I started deleting those useless posts seconds after they were made, they starting creating actual roster AGM's again with the exact same topic they had previously but now following the rules which Im ok with. But now its weeding out the people who didn't really want to create an AGM in the first place but did it just to get noticed in the AGM section. That's the demographic that clutters up the AGM section.

So what do you guys think? Are there exceptions to those rules that Im missing? Should I be more lenient and only remove those who are grossly breaking the rules? Or maybe more importantly should the rules be modified so we don't have to make these distinctions anymore?</div></div>

I try not to rock the boat too much and try to focus exclusively on the ones that are really breaking the rules. I find we lose more than we gain if we're so strict with the deployment of our rules that a genuine 3-page discussion would be lost because the AGM is complete but only references a recent trade or signing. However, if you're finding it's the same user(s) over and over again and they're clearly just trying to pool likes and clicks, by all means infract them.

I have a personal disdain for the trade machine function but I agree with your deployment of moving those kinds of threads or the entry draft choices to their appropriate subforums. The line blurs a bit regarding AGMs made to show a set roster but only the player exposed in the draft (unless I'm misreading your point): how do you differentiate between what should be allowed and a set roster without any signings? We allow for daily roster AGMs and god forbid there's a team this summer that doesn't actually need to make a signing or a trade. I'd really defer to the remainder of the AGM rules on that one: if the team is set then I'd probably leave it alone.

I suspect most of these issues should go away as we get through expansion and free agency and as planned work to develop the AGM section comes to light. I think we're in a transitory time where we need to keep some degree of order but are forced to wait to really enforce these things until AGM is expanded.
Forum: DiscussionSun at 7:37 pm
Hi guys, can't remember if posting here automatically tags all mods so I'll just manually add everyone in case it doesn't.

<a href="/users/Rooney" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Rooney</a>
<a href="/users/Ajp_18" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Ajp_18</a>
<a href="/users/alwaysnextyear" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@alwaysnextyear</a>
<a href="/users/BeterChiarelli" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@BeterChiarelli</a>
<a href="/users/DoctorBreakfast" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@DoctorBreakfast</a>
<a href="/users/DragonRaptorHybrid" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@DragonRaptorHybrid</a>
<a href="/users/toque" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@toque</a>
<a href="/users/FlamesFan419" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@FlamesFan419</a>
<a href="/users/Jarvis" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Jarvis</a>
<a href="/users/Ryan" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Ryan</a>
<a href="/users/Banks" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Banks</a>

I have a couple things I want to bring up so we can ensure we're all on the same page and not giving differing information to people. Since certain rules can be somewhat grey at times and left slightly to judgement, I think it might be worth discussing it a little so we don't contradict each other in explanations with users. I'll start with IMHO the most prominent one though:

<strong>The AGM section is too often becoming a "Twitter news breaker" cesspool whenever hockey news comes up, in my opinion</strong>.
(If you haven't noticed it, its simply because I've deleted probably over 200 AGM's in the past week alone!)

Ok so I went full kamikaze this past week on AGM teams that have not been respecting the AGM rules. Ive clamped down because of the increase in hockey related news being released like Expansion, trades, etc but also the sheer amount of new people coming to post AGM teams for the first time. Which is a great thing from a site perspective but has been a hassle from a moderator perspective.

Maybe Im the one whose mistaken the rules here but if we want the forums to be used properly, IMO we can't allow people to post "Breaking news" and "Twitter" like posts, to the AGM's. Letting anything slide will only empower users to continue to post any and everything to the AGM section. Instead of the forums where they belong. Making the forums useless and less viewed, which is why people don't want to post there in the first place. See the conundrum?

I've been moving as many threads to the proper sections as I can but at a certain point this was only reinforcing the users lack of responsibility to post to the proper place. Once again, not solving the root problem.

The criteria I use for the base minimum effort needed for a valid AGM post to NOT get deleted, which is mind numbingly simple are:

1 - Is the AGM complete? E.g full roster was completed. Not half-assing a team just to post click bait news in the title (CAREY PRICE HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO SEATTLE!)
2 - Does it break any of the actual forum rules? Trolling, etc. which is obvious.

That's it. That's all I use as a base to NOT delete an AGM. If you don't break those 2 rules, the post, however click bait-y, won't be deleted by me because its earned the right to be viewed at the very least.

Many users have been complaining about it but that is a very small effort needed to post an AGM team IMO. So regardless if the post has a valid subject or interesting concept idea, if it doesn't follow the rules, its not an AGM. At this point its at the moderators discretion to either move or delete the thread but one of those options has to be selected IMO.

User doesn't complete team but makes one single trade asking "How close am I"? - Delete/move it. Should be posted in the Trade Machine section of that's the case.
User doesn't complete team but creates AGM simply to show who he would expose in the expansion draft? - Delete/move it. Should be in the Expansion draft section.
User doesn't complete team but posts a team detailing who he wants his team to choose in the Entry draft? - Delete/move it. Should be in the mock draft section or maybe one of the team forums.
Etc etc etc

Also most times, its not that the users "don't know". They simply don't care and just want to be the first when it comes to posting click bait. The minute I started deleting those useless posts seconds after they were made, they starting creating actual roster AGM's again with the exact same topic they had previously but now following the rules which Im ok with. But now its weeding out the people who didn't really want to create an AGM in the first place but did it just to get noticed in the AGM section. That's the demographic that clutters up the AGM section.

So what do you guys think? Are there exceptions to those rules that Im missing? Should I be more lenient and only remove those who are grossly breaking the rules? Or maybe more importantly should the rules be modified so we don't have to make these distinctions anymore?
Forum: Armchair-GMFri at 4:48 pm