New announcement, please read last post 8/16/2016

[Youk Of The Nation]

This thread is meant mainly for our new members from the former BDC boards. You guys are great, and you've brought a lot of new blood into the Red Sox and general baseball discussions on this site, which can only be good.

This is not a warning of any kind, just a friendly suggestion from the guy whose job it is to keep the forum navigable and uncluttered. In the short time since you all arrived, you have created nearly as many threads as the rest of our members combined over the few months before you joined. We all appreciate your opinions and comments, just as much as we appreciate those of our longtime members. However, every passing thought or comment does not necessitate it's own new thread. If everyone created a thread for the same "topics" that have popped up over the last week or two, we would quickly end up with hundreds of active threads, many of which would only have a handful of posts before falling into disuse. Limiting the number of active threads has always allowed our members to keep track of, and participate in, any discussion or debate happening on TalkSox without too much trouble. We want everyone to be able to offer their own insights (even the Yankees fans, in the grandest tradition of Evelyn Hall).

So, going forward, just think about the thread you want to create. Is the opening topic likely to need a separate thread for involved discussion?

- Specific comments about in-game occurrences or performances can generally be posted in that day's Gamethread. They could also be posted in existing threads dedicated to discussion about specific players (the Travis Shaw thread, the Pablo Sandoval thread, the David Ortiz retirement thread, et cetera).

- Comments or insights about general happenings for the Red Sox or baseball in general can almost always be posted in the 2016 Red Sox Season discussion thread, or the Yankees Season discussion thread, or the General Baseball Gamethread. In fact, we could (and should, and will) start a 2016 Baseball Discussion Thread in the General Baseball forum, we usually have one and I'm surprised we don't at this point.

There are plenty of topics that absolutely deserve their own threads. A player getting busted for PEDs, major or minor trades as the season goes on, questions meant to spark an interesting conversation (i.e., "The Sox Player of the Month for April". That's an excellent idea by one of our new members, and I think it should be a regular thing at the end of the month going forward.)

Some of you may be posting multiple threads in order to involve yourself in the conversations between more established members. You have no need to worry around here. Make your observations, make your opinions known in any of our threads on any topic, people will respond to you. I promise none of our new members will be ignored.

Thank you for listening!

Your benevolent despot,

YOTN

[Kimmi]

Another shout out to our awesome mod YOTN!

It's not my place to say, but I agree with you about the multitude of new threads. For me, it's been a little overwhelming. The members that are here from BDC are great, as are their discussions, but I think that a lot of the discussions can be conducted in threads that already exist.

My 2 cents, but I'll survive either way. :)

[Jack Flap]

The proliferation of unnecessary/repetitive threads always kind of bugged me at BDC, so honestly this is a welcome change.

I guarantee people will adjust to the different standards and expectations, and your patience is certainly appreciated in the meantime.

[billge]

I shall post no more forever.

[devildavid]

Even though I came from BDC my natural reticence and shyness makes me very cautious about starting a new thread. BDC tended to churn out more threads than could be digested without a bad case of dyspepsia. I do appreciate a well moderated forum and agree with the philosopy here. I do like to express my opinion and very often I find myself in the minority. But I don't feel in any way restrained to do so here.

[Dojji]

I shall post no more forever.

that is the exact opposite of what we want. This isn't SoSH where every minor deviation from the established mindset is subject to immediate censure. All we ask is that you check to see if your thoughts might belong in an existing thread before creating a new one, because it's easier to keep track of long chains of conversation if they're all happening in more or less the same places.

[SinceYaz]

I do agree that we had many multiple and superfluous threads, as well as many just plain trolling threads at BDC. I learned what the ignore button was all about :)

I hope Bilge comes around. I know I won't post as I used to because quite often my threads had that rare number of replies. In many ways I was being an apologist (Apologia majora .... Master Apologist - completely made up latineese there). I tended to go after Sox fans that had poor things to say about the Sox. My mantra is essentially if it's your team, be FOR it. And a team means us. "They" are who we attack ... starting with the Yanquis of course, and then any other team. Cheerleader, to some. Homer, to others. Sobeit.

It just means we will have to tailor our habits. If we have another forum where we were more gunlsinger-ish than here, we can always spout off there.

Youk, you might mention that if we are wanting to follow our own posts, there is a mechanism here to do that. It may help us newcomers feel less like we are just drifting into the miasma if we know where our thoughts are.... Ownership of our thoughts was a freedom at BDC that is less obvious here. It just takes some adjusting.

Off to work, just another place to raise sand, since most are silly Yanqui fans! :cool:

[Bellhorn04]

Even though I came from BDC my natural reticence and shyness makes me very cautious about starting a new thread. BDC tended to churn out more threads than could be digested without a bad case of dyspepsia. I do appreciate a well moderated forum and agree with the philosopy here. I do like to express my opinion and very often I find myself in the minority. But I don't feel in any way restrained to do so here.

You are an asset to any forum, dd. You speak your own views honestly and you are capable of having a civil disagreement.

[S5Dewey]

Hmmm...
One thing I've very much liked about this board is the way it's moderated. I've noticed that there's room for some profanity - which is fine with me - as well as some decidedly un-PC stuff - which again is ok with me. I've also noticed that when a discussion begins to get out of hand YOTN steps in and politely asks the posters to "take it outside". All of it is good.

Regarding threads now, those of us from BDC come from a slightly different place, a place where threads were started on a whim. The best survived and the rest fell out, also called normal attrition or survival of the fittest. A thread about, say, Travis Shaw, could morph into being about player's salaries and then to the cost of the concessions at Fenway. I saw it as a bunch of people sitting around a table in a bar drinking beer and talking about whatever came up. Apparently this forum is more structured than that.

I'm uncertain whether any feedback is wanted regarding the thread's OP but here's some anyway. In spite of the fact that I've started two threads since I showed up here I very seldom do start a thread. When I do it's often just something I throw out as an observation - my thread about David Price's best friends is an example of that - and I'm only looking to see if others have considered the same thing. I don't see the thread as having a long shelf life and that's fine. I expect it to be at the bottom of the page within a day or two.

I now feel a little, as Archie Bunker would say, "Stifled". I'm not trying to be difficult. I realize that I'm the new kid in the old sandbox and I'm trying to get along. I'm just wondering how much latitude I have regarding "soft" topics and non-stat observations that don't really fit in the more serious threads/conversations.

Your feedback is appreciated. :o

[Bellhorn04]

We might need some sort of 'catch-all' thread for those whimsical thoughts that became threads on BDC.

[Northern Star]

I think Talksox has too few threads but I agree with not wanting to go too far the other way. Nothing more annoying than six threads on the same topic.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Hmmm...
One thing I've very much liked about this board is the way it's moderated. I've noticed that there's room for some profanity - which is fine with me - as well as some decidedly un-PC stuff - which again is ok with me. I've also noticed that when a discussion begins to get out of hand YOTN steps in and politely asks the posters to "take it outside". All of it is good.

Regarding threads now, those of us from BDC come from a slightly different place, a place where threads were started on a whim. The best survived and the rest fell out, also called normal attrition or survival of the fittest. A thread about, say, Travis Shaw, could morph into being about player's salaries and then to the cost of the concessions at Fenway. I saw it as a bunch of people sitting around a table in a bar drinking beer and talking about whatever came up. Apparently this forum is more structured than that.

I'm uncertain whether any feedback is wanted regarding the thread's OP but here's some anyway. In spite of the fact that I've started two threads since I showed up here I very seldom do start a thread. When I do it's often just something I throw out as an observation - my thread about David Price's best friends is an example of that - and I'm only looking to see if others have considered the same thing. I don't see the thread as having a long shelf life and that's fine. I expect it to be at the bottom of the page within a day or two.

I now feel a little, as Archie Bunker would say, "Stifled". I'm not trying to be difficult. I realize that I'm the new kid in the old sandbox and I'm trying to get along. I'm just wondering how much latitude I have regarding "soft" topics and non-stat observations that don't really fit in the more serious threads/conversations.

Your feedback is appreciated. :o

My feedback on that would be basically a trimmed-down version of my original post. "Soft topics" don't need their own thread most of the time. You can just make the comment in an existing thread where it somewhat conforms to the original topic. A perfect example would be last night. Someone, I don't remember who, created a thread called "Takestrikeoneitis" and the opening post was simply a statement that a couple players on the Sox are suffering from it. That was a post that could have been made and commented on within the gamethread that was currently running. Another example would be the thread the other day about why no one calls Pedroia "The Destroia".

"Soft" topics or thoughts that are inspired by events unfolding in live games can almost always spark a better discussion within the Gamethreads than they can as separate threads that will quickly die when a "soft" topic loses its hook.

[Northern Star]

every board I've been on, I've believed in one game thread throughout the game. Some boards try to get away from that, which is a disaster.

[devildavid]

You are an asset to any forum, dd. You speak your own views honestly and you are capable of having a civil disagreement.

Thanks. Right back at you.

[Northern Star]

Also, it's the Red Sox. Profanity is mandatory.

[StephenCurry30]

I understand what this site is doing and they want to keep a strict, well strict isn't the right word, there is leeway here, but a more professional look. But I don't get why I can't say butthole? One of my known things on other forums has been to call players buttholes. I would understand if there was no profanity at all, but there is a lot of that, not that anything is wrong with that all.

Anywho, I do enjoy the forum, it has a nice mix of personalities, people, trolls, stat geeks, die hard fans and so on. Keep up the good work and God Bless.

[Youk Of The Nation]

I understand what this site is doing and they want to keep a strict, well strict isn't the right word, there is leeway here, but a more professional look. But I don't get why I can't say butthole? One of my known things on other forums has been to call players buttholes. I would understand if there was no profanity at all, but there is a lot of that, not that anything is wrong with that all.

Anywho, I do enjoy the forum, it has a nice mix of personalities, people, trolls, stat geeks, die hard fans and so on. Keep up the good work and God Bless.

There's nothing wrong with occasional profanity, and no one said there was. Your problem was that about nine or ten of your first fifteen posts contained almost nothing of value, only the words "ding dong" "butthole" or various forms of "suck his own dick" and the like. Curse every once in a while if you want, but people don't come to TalkSox to read posts that look like they were written by a 13-year old who just discovered the internet.

[Thunder]

There's nothing wrong with occasional profanity, and no one said there was. Your problem was that about nine or ten of your first fifteen posts contained almost nothing of value, only the words "ding dong" "butthole" or various forms of "suck his own dick" and the like. Curse every once in a while if you want, but people don't come to TalkSox to read posts that look like they were written by a 13-year old who just discovered the internet.

I appreciate your efforts in this thread, YOTN, and I agree that we need to point out the influx in new threads. It had started to irk me just a tad. But the bold above is not sitting well with me. I turned 13 a few months after joining this place, and I think we can all agree that I have the cleanest vocabulary on the site. Stereotypes like those are what is killing life as we know it.

[Northern Star]

There's nothing wrong with occasional profanity, and no one said there was. Your problem was that about nine or ten of your first fifteen posts contained almost nothing of value, only the words "ding dong" "butthole" or various forms of "suck his own dick" and the like. Curse every once in a while if you want, but people don't come to TalkSox to read posts that look like they were written by a 13-year old who just discovered the internet.

I never knew Dutchy, but it sounds like this is him, no?

[Youk Of The Nation]

I appreciate your efforts in this thread, YOTN, and I agree that we need to point out the influx in new threads. It had started to irk me just a tad. But the bold above is not sitting well with me. I turned 13 a few months after joining this place, and I think we can all agree that I have the cleanest vocabulary on the site. Stereotypes like those are what is killing life as we know it.

I didn't say "all 13 year olds". I said "a 13 year old who just discovered the internet". As in, the immature little brats who get online for the first time and realize they can say all the stuff their parents won't let them say, and run all over the internet joining message boards dedicated to topics they don't care about just so they can post "LOL penis! Asshole! Suck a dick!" for the novelty value of it.

[SoxHop]

I appreciate your efforts in this thread, YOTN, and I agree that we need to point out the influx in new threads. It had started to irk me just a tad. But the bold above is not sitting well with me. I turned 13 a few months after joining this place, and I think we can all agree that I have the cleanest vocabulary on the site. Stereotypes like those are what is killing life as we know it.

I'm sorry, but WTF are you even talking about??????? If you take offense to that you ...... ummmmm........... well........ good luck............

[Youk Of The Nation]

I never knew Dutchy, but it sounds like this is him, no?

No. StephenCurry30 is capable of normal posting. Dutchy was not.

[StephenCurry30]

There's nothing wrong with occasional profanity, and no one said there was. Your problem was that about nine or ten of your first fifteen posts contained almost nothing of value, only the words "ding dong" "butthole" or various forms of "suck his own dick" and the like. Curse every once in a while if you want, but people don't come to TalkSox to read posts that look like they were written by a 13-year old who just discovered the internet.
These things were all kind of jokes that were used on the other forums and I guess weren't understood on here. Travis Shaw has a nickname of "Mayor of DingDong City", the Red Sox advertise it on facebook/twitter and there is even t-shirts for it, one of which I shamelessly own.

Honestly the other stuff is me not wanting to curse because I didnt think it was tolerated, so instead of like "fuck clay buchholz" I would usually post on BDC "Clay buchholz is a butthole" or other people would call him "gay buttholz" and stuff similar. I understand that is not tolerated here and will try not to do it, sometimes its just habit and I know its stupid, but I'm an immature, red sox loving fan, who is kind of a retard when it comes to message boards. For that, I apologize sir.

[StephenCurry30]

I am not dutch, nor am I sure what that is even implying, haha

[Youk Of The Nation]

These things were all kind of jokes that were used on the other forums and I guess weren't understood on here. Travis Shaw has a nickname of "Mayor of DingDong City", the Red Sox advertise it on facebook/twitter and there is even t-shirts for it, one of which I shamelessly own.

Honestly the other stuff is me not wanting to curse because I didnt think it was tolerated, so instead of like "fuck clay buchholz" I would usually post on BDC "Clay buchholz is a butthole" or other people would call him "gay buttholz" and stuff similar. I understand that is not tolerated here and will try not to do it, sometimes its just habit and I know its stupid, but I'm an immature, red sox loving fan, who is kind of a retard when it comes to message boards. For that, I apologize sir.

That's all I'm asking, and I appreciate your response.

As for the other thing, we were referring to a former user whose name was "Dutchy". Some of your early posts, i.e. "Farrell too busy beating his little penis", were very similar to the kind of stuff he posted, so we were reminded of him. That post I mentioned actually made me check your IP address, but the very fact that you toned it down after the first time I asked you to proved pretty conclusively that you weren't him. He was incapable of acting like a normal human being.

[SoxHop]

On one more note ...... My horse who reads this board with me has suffered serious racism and homosexual abuse else where other than this board.

So keep off the racist and gay stuff.........

I don't mind people funning about me, but don't be funning about my horse being a certain color or why he's so gay........ the shit aint funny at all......

[redsoxdirtdog]

Not trying to be a smaht arrss, but as I look through the threads that are staying on the front page, many were started by new BDC members. The fact that they seem to have staying power, i.e. posts.... many posts, indicates to me that there is interest in a number of them. Feel free to knock them, & implicitly the new "rabble-rousers," but don't these things generally work themselves out. Most new threads have limited appeal, and die a pretty quick death, i.e. my lame attempt to push a new debated over Iggy vs. X-Bo. Brilliant concept that it was.....But for my lousy & obtuse title, I really would have crushed it. Instead, I whiffed. Swinging for the fences & pulling my head again. Ughhh. ; (

Anyway.... I get the sentiment of not starting a thread for every thought that pops into your head, but I personally think it would be a shame to stifle some very creative & knowledgeable new posters. Or some of the new hot-heads for that matter?

That's ok. We Irish are familiar with blending in & taking shyte jobs for the Proper Bostonians. ;) NO worries! We'LL pipe down & be good. Promise! That is until we take over..... ;)

[redsoxdirtdog]

Hang on. Some lunatics are hammering on my door. Oh shyte! Looking through my curtains..... what the hell is the TSX Police Dept.? & what the hell are they doing in Orego****

pending removal

[redsoxdirtdog]

This post has been removed.

[Jasonbay44]

^^^ ummm.. What is going on here

[redsoxdirtdog]

Terminated.

[redsoxdirtdog]

^^^ ummm.. What is going on here

LOL. :0

Jus entertaining myself JayBay44. :eek: False alarm. No animals were harmed in the filming of this safety video. Trying to get tired so I can wake up early, go out & get another round of mother's day gifts, as my wife gave me that.... "don't worry, so long as it's not shrubbery again....." pep-talk. SHYTE! You'd think i'd remember that one. Dann! Always go with your guy kid! I was going to do the cute SilveTab blingy jeans, 1 or 2 sizes too small trick. That one always works. That's a freebie! The rest you have to pay for on my Web page. ;)

[Thunder]

I'm sorry, but WTF are you even talking about??????? If you take offense to that you ...... ummmmm........... well........ good luck............

That was light-hearted and a false complaint. Don't worry about it. I'm good. ;)

[mvp 78]

To be fair, Dutchy would post normally for about a month. He'd start to go after A700 and then would have a mental break and would shit post for a few hours and send disturbing pm's before getting banned.

[Thunder]

To be fair, Dutchy would post normally for about a month. He'd start to go after A700 and then would have a mental break and would shit post for a few hours and send disturbing pm's before getting banned.

How disturbing were these PMs?

[CliffKlowers]

I appreciate a moderator who weeds out redundant and irrelevant threads on a daily basis. Profanity is most effective when used sparingly. It loses its punch when overdone such as in the army barracks. Good job moderator.

[Kimmi]

Coming from a forum where the moderators were suffocating and biased, among other things, the moderating here is a breath of fresh air. Trust me when I say that YOTN is not trying to stifle anyone's opinions or creativity. He is more than fair when issuing warnings or banning people, and to my knowledge, he has not threatened any new members with being banned.

I am not particularly a fan of some of the crude language that is used here. However, it is something I'm very willing to put up with rather than have the board go to the other extreme.

I have heard a couple of references to the moderating on this forum being "strict". That is not the case at all. You all know how out of hand the new threads could get at BDC. YOTN is not telling anyone that he/she can't start a new thread, just to see if your "idea" could perhaps be stated in an existing thread. It really does help keep the clutter down and to keep the ongoing conversations easier to follow.

[Kimmi]

This post has been removed.

I don't think I have EVER seen a post removed at this site. Just sayin'.

[southpaw777]

Im just glad that I dont have to moderate anymore.
Just moved back to NH. Good to be back home

[Kimmi]

Im just glad that I dont have to moderate anymore.
Just moved back to NH. Good to be back home

Hi southpaw. It's good to see you.

As you know, I was not a fan of the moderating job at BDC, but I've always been a fan of your posting. I hope you'll stick around and get the chance to post more often. No hard feelings.

[a700hitter]

To be fair, Dutchy would post normally for about a month. He'd start to go after A700 and then would have a mental break and would shit post for a few hours and send disturbing pm's before getting banned.I broke the crazy bugger each and every time, and he would break quicker with each subsequent identity.

[southpaw777]

Hey Kimmi��
No, no hard feelings at all from me. I just wish things didnt have to go down like it did at BDC.
Im just happy to be back as just a Sox/baseball fan posing about the game and team i love

[mvp 78]

I broke the crazy bugger each and every time, and he would break quicker with each subsequent identity.

He seemed to be ok when sober. I think he would just binge drink and go completely over the edge. Of course, I was never on the receiving end of a bad pm.

[StephenCurry30]

As for the other thing, we were referring to a former user whose name was "Dutchy". Some of your early posts, i.e. "Farrell too busy beating his little penis", were very similar to the kind of stuff he posted, so we were reminded of him. That post I mentioned actually made me check your IP address, but the very fact that you toned it down after the first time I asked you to proved pretty conclusively that you weren't him. He was incapable of acting like a normal human being.
I see, I thought they were implying I was dutch and that was the reason for my posts. I can honestly say I've never used this site before this account, and the IP check should have confirmed that, and i don't even know how to pm people, so anything of that nature wasn't me.

[Jack Flap]

Hi southpaw. It's good to see you.

As you know, I was not a fan of the moderating job at BDC, but I've always been a fan of your posting. I hope you'll stick around and get the chance to post more often. No hard feelings.

Since we've been asked to leave BDC drama out of here, I'll just say that I don't think anyone really thought Southpaw or the other guy (Bosox Joe?) were the source of the problems with the moderation over there, and leave it at that.

Southpaw, good to see you made it over here.

[Kimmi]

Since we've been asked to leave BDC drama out of here, I'll just say that I don't think anyone really thought Southpaw or the other guy (Bosox Joe?) were the source of the problems with the moderation over there, and leave it at that.

Southpaw, good to see you made it over here.

Agree.

[Northern Star]

On one more note ...... My horse who reads this board with me has suffered serious racism and homosexual abuse else where other than this board.

So keep off the racist and gay stuff.........

I don't mind people funning about me, but don't be funning about my horse being a certain color or why he's so gay........ the shit aint funny at all......

Was your horse born before 2010? Who's his sire?

[Northern Star]

I appreciate a moderator who weeds out redundant and irrelevant threads on a daily basis. Profanity is most effective when used sparingly. It loses its punch when overdone such as in the army barracks. Good job moderator.

What the fuck are you talking about?

[southpaw777]

Since we've been asked to leave BDC drama out of here, I'll just say that I don't think anyone really thought Southpaw or the other guy (Bosox Joe?) were the source of the problems with the moderation over there, and leave it at that.

Southpaw, good to see you made it over here.

Thanks for the kind words. I like it over here. Good people, good baseball coversation and debates. All respectfully done. Think ill stick around a while

[southpaw777]

I have one question...
Why isnt my avitar that i selected visible? Do I have to reach a certain status or posts?
Maybe its just my ipad...no biggie.

[Slasher9]

I have one question...
Why isnt my avitar that i selected visible? Do I have to reach a certain status or posts?
Maybe its just my ipad...no biggie.

very good to see you lefty. always enjoy your posts.
i dont think you have to wait for certain status as i had an avatar up right away. if you are using one you have saved on your computer click browse and then select the avatar. then you should just have to click "save changes" on the bottom right.

[southpaw777]

very good to see you lefty. always enjoy your posts.
i dont think you have to wait for certain status as i had an avatar up right away. if you are using one you have saved on your computer click browse and then select the avatar. then you should just have to click "save changes" on the bottom right.

Hey slash! Thanks bud!
Well, I Did that, but still nothing...lm thinking maybe my ipad is just being a little wonky. It was working when i first signed up here, but isnt ahowing up now for some reason...oh well...no big deal really.

[Slasher9]

Hey slash! Thanks bud!
Well, I Did that, but still nothing...lm thinking maybe my ipad is just being a little wonky. It was working when i first signed up here, but isnt ahowing up now for some reason...oh well...no big deal really.

when on forums i find it impossible to do anything but post simple text from my ipad. try loading your avatar from a old fashioned computer and see if that works.

[southpaw777]

when on forums i find it impossible to do anything but post simple text from my ipad. try loading your avatar from a old fashioned computer and see if that works.

Gonna unpack the laptop today and get it all set up...Ill try it on that. Good idea.
Thanks!!!
Figured maybe since i was just a single A scrub right now I may not have the privilege yet:)

[mvp 78]

Hey slash! Thanks bud!
Well, I Did that, but still nothing...lm thinking maybe my ipad is just being a little wonky. It was working when i first signed up here, but isnt ahowing up now for some reason...oh well...no big deal really.

I do most of my posting from an iphone and have been able to change all of my settings on there. I feel like sometimes it takes uploading it twice before it actually works. That may be due to a glitch, but more than likely just due to my impatience.

[SinceYaz]

Hey slash! Thanks bud!
Well, I Did that, but still nothing...lm thinking maybe my ipad is just being a little wonky. It was working when i first signed up here, but isnt ahowing up now for some reason...oh well...no big deal really.

I can't get my avatar on either, but it appears to have too many pixels... so I'll have to change.

[Maxbialystock]

This thread is meant mainly for our new members from the former BDC boards. You guys are great, and you've brought a lot of new blood into the Red Sox and general baseball discussions on this site, which can only be good.

This is not a warning of any kind, just a friendly suggestion from the guy whose job it is to keep the forum navigable and uncluttered. In the short time since you all arrived, you have created nearly as many threads as the rest of our members combined over the few months before you joined. We all appreciate your opinions and comments, just as much as we appreciate those of our longtime members. However, every passing thought or comment does not necessitate it's own new thread. If everyone created a thread for the same "topics" that have popped up over the last week or two, we would quickly end up with hundreds of active threads, many of which would only have a handful of posts before falling into disuse. Limiting the number of active threads has always allowed our members to keep track of, and participate in, any discussion or debate happening on TalkSox without too much trouble. We want everyone to be able to offer their own insights (even the Yankees fans, in the grandest tradition of Evelyn Hall).

So, going forward, just think about the thread you want to create. Is the opening topic likely to need a separate thread for involved discussion?

- Specific comments about in-game occurrences or performances can generally be posted in that day's Gamethread. They could also be posted in existing threads dedicated to discussion about specific players (the Travis Shaw thread, the Pablo Sandoval thread, the David Ortiz retirement thread, et cetera).

- Comments or insights about general happenings for the Red Sox or baseball in general can almost always be posted in the 2016 Red Sox Season discussion thread, or the Yankees Season discussion thread, or the General Baseball Gamethread. In fact, we could (and should, and will) start a 2016 Baseball Discussion Thread in the General Baseball forum, we usually have one and I'm surprised we don't at this point.

There are plenty of topics that absolutely deserve their own threads. A player getting busted for PEDs, major or minor trades as the season goes on, questions meant to spark an interesting conversation (i.e., "The Sox Player of the Month for April". That's an excellent idea by one of our new members, and I think it should be a regular thing at the end of the month going forward.)

Some of you may be posting multiple threads in order to involve yourself in the conversations between more established members. You have no need to worry around here. Make your observations, make your opinions known in any of our threads on any topic, people will respond to you. I promise none of our new members will be ignored.

Thank you for listening!

Your benevolent despot,

YOTN

Please allow a contrarian view. I have no real knowledge of how many threads talksox can sustain, but offer the simple thought that, for the most part, more is better. Take a look at the threads below this one--

JBJ vs. Ellsbury. Fun when it started, but has now run its course. Nothing new to say, really.
A realistic View at 2016. Definitely not run its course because it relies on new insights and opinions about how the Sox are doing.
Red Sox Offense . . . thrilling as Good for maybe another day or two.
Who are David Price's friends? Interesting at first blush, but has definitely lost its bloom.
2016 Starting Rotation. Probably last all summer, but could easily be rolled into "A Realistic View at 2016"
The Official Dead Horse Topics Thread. Can always be added to.
The David Ortiz Appreciation Thread. Time to let it go.
Referendum on John Farrell. My thread. 307 responses. But right now it's a tired topic. Kill it and resuscitate only if the Sox spiral down.
Mookie? Kill it.
Pablo Sandoval. Kill it.
Clay Buchholz, keep it for awhile--still plenty to argue about.
Dead Money. Kill it.
Missing Iggy Pop? Fun at first, needs to die.

Those are just my opinions and I am certainly not qualified to decide what goes and stays. My point is simply there are plenty of new topics that should see the light of day, but this thread and your OP have encouraged us to avoid raising new topics because of the limited resources of the website. I think new topics, even dumb ones, are worth a quick look as long as you have a mechanism for pruning the ones that people aren't reading or especially not replying to.

[mvp 78]

Those are just my opinions and I am certainly not qualified to decide what goes and stays. My point is simply there are plenty of new topics that should see the light of day, but this thread and your OP have encouraged us to avoid raising new topics because of the limited resources of the website. I think new topics, even dumb ones, are worth a quick look as long as you have a mechanism for pruning the ones that people aren't reading or especially not replying to.

No one is telling you not to make new posts. It's just a suggestion to avoid topics like "wow, last night's game was great" when there is already a thread for it or "Travis Shaw is a beast" if there is already a thread about 3b or Shaw still on the front page.

Also, if there are limited resources on this website, how could one reasonably expect there to be a mechanism for daily site purging?

We are used to fewer threads because it's easier to track which conversation belongs where. When there are 4 different threads about Buchholz, it just dilutes the conversation rather than adds to it. As the great UN? once said, "bigger isn't always better, it's the motion in the ocean."

If you have a great idea for a thread, make a new one.

[Jack Flap]

I have no real knowledge of how many threads talksox can sustain...this thread and your OP have encouraged us to avoid raising new topics because of the limited resources of the website...

I don't think 'limited resources' has anything to do with it, unless I missed something...it's more about keeping the forum tidy and easily readable, I think.

I like having one thread dedicated to specific Buchholz discussion, one for Sandoval, one for Farrell, etc...and most other random thoughts can go in a game thread or a larger catch-all thread like "2016 Starting Rotation" or "2016 Realistic View." I try not to start new threads as a rule of thumb unless there's something newsworthy (like a new signing or trade) or the topic legitimately doesn't fit into an existing thread...but that's just me.

[Maxbialystock]

No one is telling you not to make new posts. It's just a suggestion to avoid topics like "wow, last night's game was great" when there is already a thread for it or "Travis Shaw is a beast" if there is already a thread about 3b or Shaw still on the front page.

Also, if there are limited resources on this website, how could one reasonably expect there to be a mechanism for daily site purging?

We are used to fewer threads because it's easier to track which conversation belongs where. When there are 4 different threads about Buchholz, it just dilutes the conversation rather than adds to it. As the great UN? once said, "bigger isn't always better, it's the motion in the ocean."

If you have a great idea for a thread, make a new one.

Oh, I agree we don't need four threads on Buchholz and am fine with one for now. I also don't think we need four different threads on last night's game. However, I did have the temerity to start a thread on the rubber game win at the White Sox because I thought it was a defining game. We took 2 of 3 on the road from a good team. In the 3d game, we got 3 innings from our starter Owens, but won 7-3 while 7 different guys got an rbi. It lasted a day or two, but then was buried in the game thread, which of course is the kiss of death even though I thought it was a subject worth discussing on its own.

But here's my real point. Why not encourage new threads and then bury them after a day or two in something like Kimmi's beating a dead horse thread. The criteria for burying could as simple as the number of replies per 24 hours, which is very easy to check. In the fall/winter I blog on a college basketball site that has tons of new threads after every game. But within a day or two most of them slide down the front page and move to the second page where they pretty much go out of circulation. I would have been happy if my White Sox defining game thread had died after one or two days because few saw fit to reply. That makes sense.

I also like "A Realistic View at 2016" because a lot of different topics come up in there, plus it has moonslav and his stats, which are usually pretty good. That format works perfectly for talksox. So I'm flexible. But I still like a policy of encouraging new topics.

I also like to express contrarian views as you might have figured out by now.

[mvp 78]

But here's my real point. Why not encourage new threads and then bury them after a day or two in something like Kimmi's beating a dead horse thread. The criteria for burying could as simple as the number of replies per 24 hours, which is very easy to check.

I also like to express contrarian views as you might have figured out by now.

There is only one active moderator on here, so I don't think his time should be spent determining which threads to bury unless they don't fit in our format. Unless we are going to pass around a collection plate for YOTN, I don't believe he has the time for that. I think he's doing a great job on his own and don't believe more needs to be put on his plate.

Your White Sox post may have been better received if it was titled "Are We at a Season Defining Moment for the Sox?" Since posts tend to stick around for a while here, it would be better if the title was more descriptive of what the discussion would be about.

Contrarian views are fine by me.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Yeah I don't particularly care for the idea of having to scan through each thread after it has been active for a while to see whether or not it should be merged into another one. That was part of the reason I made this thread in the first place.

[Maxbialystock]

One more time, then I will drop it. I see no need for Youk to read every thread. My idea is to simply check the number of replies after the thread has been going for, say, one day (or two days). If the number is low, move it to the scrap heap thread.

That said, I truly appreciate what Youk is doing because talksox is a good website and fun to contribute to. I had no idea we only have one mod.

Max

[redsoxdirtdog]

The moderating seems very good, & I like the soft handed "suggesting," as oposed to heavy handed rebukes.

I would however slightly disagree about thread starting. While I hate it when guys start repetitive and competing threads on the same topics, most of the threads I see on the front board are pretty unique, and have very distinctive topics. Makes it easy to follow a player or topic you are passionate about, as opposed to a catch all, who knows what the topic will be dejur??? No interest in going there to have people talk past others.

A solid reminder not to start a thread for every fleeting thought? Yes!

So, all in all good job.

[mvp 78]

That's because the posts that YOTN was talking about are no longer on the front page.

[mvp 78]

Except for the "batting ninth" one.

[bosoxmal]

Well said.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Alright, I'm going to close, unpin, and move this thread back to the Front Desk forum, now that it has served its purpose. Thank you everyone.

[Youk Of The Nation]

In the few days since I removed this thread from the top of the Talk Sox forum, we have had a welcome thread for one user created by another user in the General Baseball forum, a thread created for a video clip of a girl's softball game in the Talk Sox forum, and a thread about a topic we were discussing in the General Baseball forum created in the Talk Sox forum. I guess I should keep this up a while longer.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Well, I really, really didn't want to have to do this, but I am out of options. I tried politely asking, I tried politely asking again, I tried ignoring the problem in hopes that you guys would figure out how obnoxious you were being on your own, and I tried the message board equivalent of yelling at you. I wanted to avoid coming down hard and going the tin-god route, but this has gone on far, far too long. I am now getting PMs from some members, (and not just from those who have been here for years) about the proliferation of useless, stupid threads. So here goes:

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who starts one of these threads, will be warned once through PM. The second offense will result in a 14-day period where you will be required to PM me your thread ideas and receive permission before starting them. The third offense will result in a one-week ban. Any further offenses after the conclusion of that ban will result in bannings increasing in length by one week. (Two weeks for the first, then three, et cetera). I really, really hate this. I want everyone to be clear about that. I rejected this option five months ago out of a desire not to be a dictator, but rather than attempt to modify ridiculous behavior, it's actually gotten worse.

Here is a list of threads which will fall under the category above:

- Threads whose opening post is something that clearly belongs in an active Gamethread. This includes things like: "I'm sick of our guys getting thrown out at home", "Wow, Mookie is really hitting well tonight", and the like.

- Threads about individual players that ask hypothetical questions that are already being discussed in threads on the front page. This includes: Threads asking if a guy should be moved from the rotation to the pen, or vice versa, threads about where one specific guy is batting in the lineup, threads about how great a certain player is at something, and the like

- Threads about broad, unspecific, or nebulous topics that would better fit within existing discussions. This includes things like hypothetical and unlikely trades that could easily be discussed in Hot Stove or Trade Deadline discussion threads.

- Functionally useless threads, including: Threads in the Gamethread forum asking why there is no gamethread, threads suggesting new player nicknames, or threads for random video clips or quotes.

This is by no means a complete list, so I will ask again, as I did months ago, that you seriously consider, even for a few friggin seconds, whether or not your new thread idea can be added to an existing discussion.

Some of our newer members have been here for a little less than six months, and the first FIVE pages of threads in the TS subforum are made up almost of exclusively of threads started by you guys. And that is not even including the 150-200 threads I have deleted or merged in the past five months. And to any of you who believe that I am exaggerating, think again. I have deleted or merged at least one thread almost every day since you all joined, and sometimes more than one. If anything, that number is probably low.

Now people are messaging me, asking me why I am not doing anything about the fact that people are flagrantly ignoring the repeated requests not to clutter up a formerly easily navigable forum with a bunch of threads with no points to make. When you are annoying me, sometimes I just have to suffer through it in noble silence. When you start annoying a few other people, you are on the path towards making this place unbearable. So enough is enough.

One more thing: I am not unlocking this thread. Unlike the first time I asked, back on page 1 of this thread, this is not an invitation for people to argue with my decisions or explain why they believe they aren't doing anything wrong, or explain why maybe if I just thought of it this way I would be much happier just letting everyone keep doing what they're doing. I don't want a bunch of aggrieved PMs decrying my dictatorial cruelty in demanding that you be allowed to continue making four separate threads about Travis Shaw every week. That first page is still there for anyone who wants to dispute the fact that I tried doing this the polite way at first. Just stop.