The Culture of DBR

[Jumbo]

The season is just two games old and, much as I feared, the board is already awash in controversy. I don't like this. I don't like it at all. And we need to figure out how to deal with this problem.

A number of posters have complained about treatment using various versions of the following: "Old-time posters treat newcomers with disdain/ we should be allowed to debate whatever we want no matter how often it has been discussed in the past/I have the right to say what I want/On other message boards, X, Y or Z would be allowed."

Here's the problem. The DBR isn't "other bulletin boards." It's the DBR. And the fact that it has its own standards, guidelines, customs and tone is what has made it the home of Duke basketball for a large number of people for more than a decade.

Stray Gator has posted something similar in the past, but I'll repeat it. The onus is on new posters to learn the culture of the place, not the other way around. This is not something I came to easily, as I've been known to be feisty in the past, but this is Julio and Boswell's house, and they make the rules. And while, yes, without any posters there would be no party, we still need to respect the way they want things done. The posting guidelines (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3350)are easy to find. But those don't tell the full story. So, if you're new here, let me explain to you what distinguishes DBR from other websites.

For years, DBR was limited by a different interface that made it difficult to post. On the one hand, it kept out more opinions. But it also forged a fairly close-knit community, one filled with inside jokes (Duke vs. Kentucky), a decent sense of perspective and -- most importantly -- a high bar set for intelligent and insightful discourse. Sure, there was bickering, petty rivalries and controversy. But the conversation, without a doubt, was far tamer than on similar sites.

DBR was a place where parents of players, like Althea Williams, felt comfortable posting. Jay Bilas would drop by from time to time. Shane Battier posted when he played at Duke. Bill Brill and Jim Sumner would share their thoughts, as would others associated with/close to the Duke program. That's pretty unusual. And when posters argued, they had to bring their "A" game. It was established early on that if you couldn't back up your argument, you were going to be ripped to shreds, so might as well not say anything unless you had something to offer. Posts such as "So-and-so" sucks were obviously not tolerated, but even stuff one step up from that (think "Duke always flames out in March") were pretty much rendered useless because so many posters were able blow them up using good, old-fashioned facts.

Last March, we switched to a new board. It is superior in a vast number of ways. I love it. But with the easier posting method has come a much larger audience. Stray always compared DBR to a neighborhood pub, but some of the intimacy has been lost. And the level of discourse has declined dramatically. Julio and Boswell have done their best to try to maintain what they started, and they've asked a number of long-time posters (such as myself) to volunteer as moderators. It's something I'd rather not have to do, but the noise level has gone up so much that it's necessary. And it's frustrating.

What a number of you need to understand is the following: There are many people here who know a lot more about situations than you do. Chances are if you're arguing with Jim Sumner, you're at a disadvantage in terms of access. Instead of just spouting off, try to listen and learn. I can't even begin to explain how much knowledge I've gained from DBR posters; I wish more people would realize that bulletin boards function much better as a place to exchange ideas in a respectful manner and to gain more information about subjects you love, than simple forums in which to vent. It is hard to see the level of intelligence, in some threads, decline so severely. Yeah, we live in a YouTube/OnDemand culture that thrives on unfiltered opinions and instant gratification. But that's not what this board is about. And if that's all you crave from your basketball site, there are tons of other places out there where you can rant and yell and complain until you resemble Ademola Okulaja.

Again, that's not what we want here. And, sadly, this manifests itself most in subjects that have already been beaten to death. Throatybeard's Handy Pocket Guide (http://www.duke.edu/~bct1/images/DBRHPR7.1asPDF.pdf) wasn't compiled by accident -- all those subjects have been debated for years and years and years and years. We're all human, and when, after 10 years, people are still complaining about "stall-ball" after a 25-point win in which Duke ran its spread offense for about the final 2:30, you have to understand that it's unbelievably frustrating. Should we show more patience? Perhaps. But should those doing the complaining be more willing to listen to reason, more moderate in their criticism and more open to learning how things work around here? Absolutely.

So, I'm asking all of you nicely to please, please, please do the following:

-Take some time to get to know your way around here.
-Think before you post. (Will your topic add anything to the community? Has it been discussed before? Do you feel you're an "expert" on the matter, or are you interested in learning a bit more? Has it been said a bunch of times already? And would you say it to a player/coach/family member of the team?)
-Think of the DBR as a community. (People are here to interact with one another, not to be witnesses as you vent.)
-And, finally, lighten up. (A sense of humor has always been a huge part of DBR. This is, after all, "just basketball." Please try to approach it in that manner.)

We're all going to fail from time to time. I certainly do. But we need everyone to make more of an effort, NOW, or this is going to be a long, unpleasant season, regardless of Duke's record. Please make everyone's lives easier and do your best to keep this an intelligent, respectful and fun community that many of us have loved for years.

Thanks.

[DukeCO2009]

It'd be nice if you lightened up yourself, Jumbo.

I've read this board for ages, but I never joined because, frankly, a lot of people here are intimidating as hell. Is that really what ya'll want? To me, it sounds like you'd be perfectly content if only 10 or 12 people posted here and the rest of us stayed out. Hardly sounds like a good board to me...

[RelativeWays]

Most boards that want to foster some sort of uniform posting protocol have longer "lurking" periods so new posters can get the feel of the place. I think I had to only wait a day or so before I had full posting privileges so I could have posted random and ultimately worthless posts. Maybe a bit of a shorter leash for newer posters is required? I dunno, I haven't seen this thread in question (and I'll be disappointed if its been deleted). To be honest, I really don't know what type of posting behavior gets the ire of the moderators outside of obvious trolling. Do moderators here typically post warnings in the threads in question before locking them?

[Stray Gator]

Very nicely done, Jumbo. I would add these comments: I believe experience has shown that those who are willing to spend a little time learning their way around and becoming a member of the community--who pull a chair up to the table, instead of just tossing gratuitous opinions on the table while passing through, so to speak--usually find it worth the time and effort. If you're willing to accept that you don't already know all there is to know about Duke basketball (or college basketball in general), and you're genuinely interested in listening and learning more, as well as adding your own experiences and perspectives, then you'll find this forum to be a great resource as a fount of information and entertainment.

As Jumbo observes, what makes it special and different here is the sense of community, and familiarity, and shared interest in maintaining a high level of civility and mutual respect to ensure that the DBR remains a more comfortable place than most sports message boards. And it doesn't cost anything to join. All the community requires is that everyone honor and abide by the rules and guidelines that the site owners have established, as is their absolute right and privilege. Those rules and guidelines include reasonable restrictions on the content and tenor of messages--not to suppress honest debate, but to keep the house "at peace" by ensuring that the exchanges remain fundamentally cordial and that the discussions move along instead of incessantly replaying themselves in a loop that leaves everyone else disinterested.

Anyone who's willing to play by the "house rules" here is welcome and is encouraged to participate--even fans of rival programs (and we do have a few longtime participants who bleed a different shade of blue...or orange or red or other colors). Anyone who finds the community standards here too confining or otherwise not to their liking should simply find another forum that has an atmosphere more suitable to what they're seeking. The culture of DBR isn't for everyone. But with the help and cooperation of those who decide it's worth a collective effort to keep it intact, we'll do our best to preserve the culture of DBR so that it can continue to be our favorite online "neighborhood pub."

[Lord Ash]

If I may;

I appreciate what you are saying Jumbo, and thank GOD for DBR; when I read some of the absolute, total nonsense that people post on other forums I just feel sick. DBR is a fantastic resource for great info, analysis, and discussion of everyone's favorite team.

However, while I do laugh a lot reading the Pocket Guide, I also sometimes wonder if it sometimes does some harm, in that once a topic makes The Guide, it somehow feels like it becomes taboo to talk about. I certainly don't think that is beneficial. And I think that this is a feeling more and more potentially valuable DBR members are feeling.

Also, I've actually gotten more PMs in the last hour than I have in almost my entire time at DBR (two,) both of which were from newer posters saying thank you for the post I made earlier about board tone, and included quotes like "It's nice when a longer-term poster can see it from the perspective of a newbie." and "I've literally been reading these boards for years, and the reason I've never joined the fray is because of the pervasive holier-than-thou attitude a lot of the regulars have." I just don't think this is a great thing to hear from newer posters who are Duke fans as well.

I am a Duke alumn. I was a varsity athlete, and a captain at that, as well as the guy who gave us the first win over Carolina in my sport's history. I was also a member of tent #1 during the Pete G year. After graduation I worked as a pro agent and as the general manager for a few minor league teams, and wrote for a number of national publications and contributed to a few books. And to top it off, I am a rather strict admin at a very large video game website who doesn't allow a single bit of drama to interfere. So I do understand a lot of what the regulars are saying, I understand sports and Duke, and I understand how tough it can be to manage an internet forum, where often things are typed in the heat of the moment AND without any clarity of "tone of voice." I support the work that the mods and owners here at DBR have done in keeping DBR the fantastic, MATURE place (mature being a term the internet often laughs in the face of) that it is. However, I think a little care, especially when dealing with a frustrated newbie or someone who might not get what 1E means, might help ensure that newer posters really appreciate what DBR is while still feeling free to grow as a mature and responsible Duke fan.

9F!

:D

[captmojo]

Well spoken moderators. Memory fails me but someone said once on a thread related to football, that we should pause and consider that if what you are about to write would not be suitable to say before the team, the parents or the coaches, you should keep it to yourself. I would like that poster to take a bow. These words of wisdom, I have tried to keep in mind when writing and I encourage the moderators to smack me back in line if I cross this path.

Thank you for a job well done.

[bfree]

Good stuff Jumbo. As a (relatively - 4ish years) long-time lurker who occasionally posts, I'd appreciate if you would lay down some thoughts on recruiting discussions. Recruiting is something I care about more than most, and I'd be curious if you had any sort of guidelines you could add to this thread when discussing recruiting priorities, hits, misses, other teams, expectations, etc. Keep up the good work. Thanks.

[RelativeWays]

It may be hard for some users to determine what the "house rules" are exactly. If I were a mod, RockChalks thread would not have struck me as trolling, only very slightly antagonistic. I would have monitored the thread to see how it went, and if the thread turned to an exercise in denigration, then I would have clicked it up. "House Rules" are amorphous when you're at the mercy and whim of three or four different moderators, who most likely have different tolerances for threads of a contrary nature. Remember that the message board is a place for the dissident as well, it makes discussions fun!

[RelativeWays]

I am a rather strict admin at a very large video game website who doesn't allow a single bit of drama to interfere.


LORD ASH NEOGAF MOD CONFIRMED! ;)

[Jumbo]

Lord Ash,
Points very well taken. And I think stuff like this is really good to discuss periodically as a community, as that makes sure everyone feels involved/has a stake in the quality of DBR.

[Jumbo]

It may be hard for some users to determine what the "house rules" are exactly. If I were a mod, RockChalks thread would not have struck me as trolling, only very slightly antagonistic. I would have monitored the thread to see how it went, and if the thread turned to an exercise in denigration, then I would have clicked it up. "House Rules" are amorphous when you're at the mercy and whim of three or four different moderators, who most likely have different tolerances for threads of a contrary nature. Remember that the message board is a place for the dissident as well, it makes discussions fun!

All good points. And with a like 10 moderators, we do have the benefit of discussing things. You'll see that the RockChalk thread was opened again. So, I hope that is evidence that the mods not only talk to each other, but respect the feedback of the rest of the community as well. As I said, we're all posters who, at Julio and Boswell's request, just added some extra responsibility to our plates.

[dyedwab]

I really appreciate this post, Jumbo. DBR has been my homepage since I first discovered it in 1997, with the parquet floor front page. I don't think I posted my first comment until 2001, and I still rarely post but read multiple times a day.

I would argue the DBR is as essential to the community of Duke basketball fans as almost any other entity outside the Athletic Department. Part of that is the high level of dialogue that takes place on the board. Even before the moderation, long time posters like Stray Gator, Jason Evans, Jumbo, and others helped maintain what this place is. And the moderators have done a great job in maintaining that.

[Lord Ash]

I think what we REALLY need to discuss is Johnny Rockets, and how cool the oldies music there is.

:p

[RelativeWays]

Jumbo,

I hope you know that most of us DBR users really appreciate the mods here so if any of my points came across as criticisms against the moderators, please don't misconstrue. In a lot of ways I really don't know what flies and what doesn't here because you seldom see any threads locked. I think that speaks well of the community here. In any event, I think we've all been to a few online communities where either the mods are treated like I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. by the users or they're feared as ruthless tempermental despots ready to drop the banhammer. There are some sites where a banning is the e version of becoming one of the Disappeared in Argentina.

[Lulu]

Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant. That's DBR. You follow the party line or you go somewhere else. It's really not a place for people who are just fans and want to talk about their team. Everything that is Duke basketball has already been established, and it's really annoying for the "old-timers" to have to correct every erroneous statement made and opinion held. This of course must be done because allowing such posts to exist would further misinform all the lambs, eventually destroying the reputation of DBR, the basketball program, and likely the university. If you only played high-school ball and have never coached a collegiate program then you know you have nothing to offer, so please remain quiet. Read what the almighty have ordained to be true, and be happy for what little you get. If you just want to talk because you're excited for the new season, or because your favorite player isn't playing, or because you can't see the dominance that is the Duke post player, well, that's what a mirror is for. Please respect this board by not allowing yourself or your opinions to be associated here.

Both myself and my other half are '90s Duke alums. This board embarrasses both of us with its better than thou attitude which pretty much serves as an extension of what all other fans think they hate about our program.

[feldspar]

First of all, let me say that I like the idea of this thread, I really do.

I think, honestly, what makes this the hardest is that we have no clue what's going on in the minds of the moderators. Why? Because they have their own personal message board where they discuss these things at length in private.

I understand the thought process behind that, but I also think that the moderating team has lost sight of the fact that conducting moderation in that fashion leads to the rest of the board being left in the dark when it comes to policy and procedure around here.

Threads such as this are a step in the right direction, but I don't feel that it's the end of the line as far as fixing the problem.

In my opinion, the moderators have been quite quick to judge posters and a little less quick to question their own actions. Or, they do question their own actions, but they do it in private, which creates a definite air of over-moderation of which several posters have now commented.

Furthermore, I would venture to say that your characterization of the board being "awash in controversy" is...for lack of a better analogy....claiming that there are WMDs in Iraq and we better Shock and Awe to take care of the problem.

There may be new posters joining by the day and some people might get tired of the same 5 or 6 issues being debated over and over again, but I don't find the board's problems any different than they used to be, just on a larger scale because of a larger number of posters.

Let's not overreact. Let's not jump to conclusions. Let's just talk about basketball and let people talk about basketball. I concede that my opinion is shaped by the fact that I'm not a moderator, but that's the only vantage point from which I can comment.

[Stray Gator]

... Memory fails me but someone said once on a thread related to football, that we should pause and consider that if what you are about to write would not be suitable to say before the team, the parents or the coaches, you should keep it to yourself. I would like that poster to take a bow. These words of wisdom, I have tried to keep in mind when writing....

Wise advice, indeed. ;)

I'd like to respond to Lord Ash's comments, because a common criticism of the DBR board is that we are inhospitable to newcomers when they raise subjects that have been thoroughly discussed before. I think it depends on the way the subject is presented. If someone new jumps in and says, in effect, nothing more than "I always hate to see K go to the slowdown game, because it lets the other team catch up, etc.," longtime posters are going to roll their eyes because we hear that same tired refrain countless times every season; it adds nothing to the dialogue.

On the other hand, if someone says: "I think the delay game will be a problem this season more than last year because this team is going to depend heavily on a running game to generate offense," it raises a new perspective on the issue; and someone might retort: "Well, I think the delay game will be more valuable this year because a team that runs hard for 35 minutes, even with liberal subbing, will likely be tired down the stretch and thus will have more trouble defending as well as scoring." So it's certainly possible for newcomers as well as longtime residents to debate "old issues" in interesting new ways that are not just a rehash of past conversations.

But all in all, I agree with Jumbo's suggestion that it is best for newcomers to spend a little time "observing and listening" before weighing in. Again, try envisioning this as a giant roundtable in your neighborhood pub, and assume you are approaching the table for the first time. What would you think is the best way to become involved and get invited to take a seat? Interrupt the ongoing conversations in a loud enough voice to draw everyone's attention, because you feel you have something important to say--without knowing whether it's already been discussed ad nauseum? Or listen for a few minutes to pick up on the stream of conversation, and then select a suitable spot to ease in where you can add something of value to the discussion? Which approach do you think will more likely result in a warm welcome?

Everyone here was a newcomer at one time. If the atmosphere was so inhospitable to newcomers, wouldn't the room be empty?

[Jumbo]

Jumbo,

I hope you know that most of us DBR users really appreciate the mods here so if any of my points came across as criticisms against the moderators, please don't misconstrue. In a lot of ways I really don't know what flies and what doesn't here because you seldom see any threads locked. I think that speaks well of the community here. In any event, I think we've all been to a few online communities where either the mods are treated like I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. by the users or they're feared as ruthless tempermental despots ready to drop the banhammer. There are some sites where a banning is the e version of becoming one of the Disappeared in Argentina.

Nothing was offensive in the slightest. Also, I don't even like to be thought of as a moderator. To paraphrase a certain basketball coach, "I'm a poster who happens to moderate." The moderation thing is relatively new. My care for DBR is much older.

[Jumbo]

Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant. That's DBR. You follow the party line or you go somewhere else. It's really not a place for people who are just fans and want to talk about their team. Everything that is Duke basketball has already been established, and it's really annoying for the "old-timers" to have to correct every erroneous statement made and opinion held. This of course must be done because allowing such posts to exist would further misinform all the lambs, eventually destroying the reputation of DBR, the basketball program, and likely the university. If you only played high-school ball and have never coached a collegiate program then you know you have nothing to offer, so please remain quiet. Read what the almighty have ordained to be true, and be happy for what little you get. If you just want to talk because you're excited for the new season, or because your favorite player isn't playing, or because you can't see the dominance that is the Duke post player, well, that's what a mirror is for. Please respect this board by not allowing yourself or your opinions to be associated here.

Both myself and my other half are '90s Duke alums. This board embarrasses both of us with its better than thou attitude which pretty much serves as an extension of what all other fans think they hate about our program.

I'm terribly sorry you feel that way. I can't understand why anyone needs a bulletin board to just spout off, and why the standard of supporting an argument is too difficult to handle. If you truly hate the DBR, there are plenty of other places to post. So, either there is something worthwhile that keeps you here, or you just like punishing yourself. But Julio, Boswell and hundreds of posters aren't going to apologize for picking this place because we prefer a different type of conversation than what is offered at other websites.

[RelativeWays]

Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant. That's DBR. You follow the party line or you go somewhere else. It's really not a place for people who are just fans and want to talk about their team. Everything that is Duke basketball has already been established, and it's really annoying for the "old-timers" to have to correct every erroneous statement made and opinion held. This of course must be done because allowing such posts to exist would further misinform all the lambs, eventually destroying the reputation of DBR, the basketball program, and likely the university. If you only played high-school ball and have never coached a collegiate program then you know you have nothing to offer, so please remain quiet. Read what the almighty have ordained to be true, and be happy for what little you get. If you just want to talk because you're excited for the new season, or because your favorite player isn't playing, or because you can't see the dominance that is the Duke post player, well, that's what a mirror is for. Please respect this board by not allowing yourself or your opinions to be associated here.

Both myself and my other half are '90s Duke alums. This board embarrasses both of us with its better than thou attitude which pretty much serves as an extension of what all other fans think they hate about our program.

FIGHT THE POWER! DISPEL THE MYTH OF DBR! WHAT GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO CONTROL THE BLUE DEVIL ZEITGEIST!?!??! PROPAGANDISTS ALL OF THEM!!!! I'M MAD HAS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE! RARRRRRRRRRGHHH!

[captmojo]

This is turning cynical.:(

[Lord Ash]

Don't mistake a little honesty and some heartfelt venting for cynicism! Everyone who has posted certainly seems to like this place and LOVE Duke, so in the end it all works out.

[Lulu]

I'm terribly sorry you feel that way. I can't understand why anyone needs a bulletin board to just spout off, and why the standard of supporting an argument is too difficult to handle. If you truly hate the DBR, there are plenty of other places to post. So, either there is something worthwhile that keeps you here, or you just like punishing yourself. But Julio, Boswell and hundreds of posters aren't going to apologize for picking this place because we prefer a different type of conversation than what is offered at other websites.

The news and updates on the front page are worth the trip to DBR. In fact, the first few years I visited this site I'm not even sure I realized there was a message board. For the absolute latest in news and updates though the message board is a must. That much is appreciated.

I have visited this site daily for many years, and will continue to do so. I will also continue to cringe every time the aforementioned attitude presents itself. I hate being confrontational but this has just bothered me for so long now I thought I'd finally speak up. I do see I'm not alone.

As far as other sites... I think DBR has pretty much cornered the Duke market. It's sad though when I find myself visiting a place such as insidecarolina just to find some discussion of the Duke game, due to the dearth of it here (which I attribute to same attitude).

[Jumbo]

The news and updates on the front page are worth the trip to DBR. In fact, the first few years I visited this site I'm not even sure I realized there was a message board. For the absolute latest in news and updates though the message board is a must. That much is appreciated.

I have visited this site daily for many years, and will continue to do so. I will also continue to cringe every time the aforementioned attitude presents itself. I hate being confrontational but this has just bothered me for so long now I thought I'd finally speak up. I do see I'm not alone.

As far as other sites... I think DBR has pretty much cornered the Duke market. It's sad though when I find myself visiting a place such as insidecarolina just to find some discussion of the Duke game, due to the dearth of it here (which I attribute to same attitude).

I'm fairly certain TDD has more posters than DBR. There's also a lot more noise. Again, you have to decide what's best for you.

[RepoMan]

Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant. That's DBR. . . . This board embarrasses both of us with its better than thou attitude which pretty much serves as an extension of what all other fans think they hate about our program.

Are you serious?

Why bother posting here? There are other options.

[mapei]

I'd just like to say that I think this thread is a good discussion to have. I tend to lean in the Lord Ash direction, myself, and lately I've even caught myself in Lulu's point of view, stripped of the insulting hyperbole, a couple of times.

But I realize the mods are humans, too, and make mistakes like the rest of us. This is definitely the best sports board I've been around, and obviously the founders/owners, mods and longtime posters have a lot to do with that.

Where I think I disagree is that the quality of discourse here has declined. I've been a reader for about 6-7 years and a regular poster for maybe half that time, and I think the quality remains as good as it was when I started reading. Some people are great at insightful analysis, others at more informal banter. I'm here because I like both. I find the POV of newbies to be refreshing most of the time. I hope we can err on the side of permissiveness rather than restriction, because the cost of the former is less than the cost of the latter. But either way I appreciate the care and effort.

[feldspar]

Where I think I disagree is that the quality of discourse here has declined. I've been a reader for about 6-7 years and a regular poster for maybe half that time, and I think the quality remains as good as it was when I started reading. Some people are great at insightful analysis, others at more informal banter. I'm here because I like both. I find the POV of newbies to be refreshing most of the time. I hope we can err on the side of permissiveness rather than restriction, because the cost of the former is less than the cost of the latter. But either way I appreciate the care and effort.


Agreed.***

[throatybeard]

It has become clear that Feldspar thinks the fact that the mods have a private board is some sort of travesty. He's mentioned it several times, with all sorts of insulting rhetoric.

I know it's impossible to have a good-faith conversation with Feldspar at this point, but I want to assure the community that the purpose of that board is for us to act as checks and balances on each other. The conversations go like this usually.

Mod A: Hey guys, I just gave X a warning/infraction, am I out of line, or is that cool?
Mod B: No, I think not because Y and Z. X has been acting out of line for a while anyway.

Once in a while this is what happens.

Mods: Are we being too harsh, collectively?
Site owners: No, you guys are being too lenient.

And that's the truth.

[throatybeard]

As far as other sites... I think DBR has pretty much cornered the Duke market.

That's far from the case. For news, you've got TwoDukies, DukeUpdate, and Watzone's site, and the Rivals board and TDD have huge numbers of posters.

[feldspar]

It has become clear that Feldspar thinks the fact that the mods have a private board is some sort of travesty. He's mentioned it several times, with all sorts of insulting rhetoric.

I know it's impossible to have a good-faith conversation with Feldspar at this point, but I want to assure the community that the purpose of that board is for us to act as checks and balances on each other. The conversations go like this usually.

Mod A: Hey guys, I just gave X a warning/infraction, am I out of line, or is that cool?
Mod B: No, I think not because Y and Z. X has been acting out of line for a while anyway.

Once in a while this is what happens.

Mods: Are we being too harsh, collectively?
Site owners: No, you guys are being too lenient.

And that's the truth.

I don't appreciate your insinuations, throaty, and I think they're mean spirited. I've spoken my mind in this thread, from the only perspective I can come from, that of a regular poster, and I've added that caveat.

I'd appreciate you not acting like you have a clue what goes on inside my head, because you really don't.

I never said anything about a travesty. Jumbo brought it up, I responded. Why do you have such a problem with that?

In other words, "Don't tase me, bro."

[DukeCO2009]

FIGHT THE POWER! DISPEL THE MYTH OF DBR! WHAT GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO CONTROL THE BLUE DEVIL ZEITGEIST!?!??! PROPAGANDISTS ALL OF THEM!!!! I'M MAD HAS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE! RARRRRRRRRRGHHH!

Was that really necessary to say, RelativeWays? This is the kind of attitude that lulu is trying to articulate, although his post was a bit harsher than it probably should have been. What's the problem with a little criticism? I really appreciate the mods being a bit more open in this particular thread--yes, even you Jumbo ;)--but the general feel of this place is very "my way or the highway". A lot of people I know visit the site daily because it's clearly the best Duke resource on the net--the creators of the DBR should be very proud of their work. When I ask if they ever post on the board, though, the general response is either a) "I read it, but I'd never post there because it's too strict and elitist or b) "I posted there a couple times, but was run off by stir-crazy regulars who would disagree with you if you called the sky blue."

[Jumbo]

When I ask if they ever post on the board, though, the general response is either a) "I read it, but I'd never post there because it's too strict and elitist or b) "I posted there a couple times, but was run off by stir-crazy regulars who would disagree with you if you called the sky blue."

But that's the point. It's their choice. The DBR board isn't for everyone. And you'd get the same thing if you asked some people here about TDD -- a lot of people are turned off by all the noise and the uninforme speculation/harping. To each his/her own, but I don't understand how insisting that people support arguments (especially when they are ripping 20-year-old kids) is "elitist."

[Bob Green]

The only thing we Moderators are asking is for posters not to be cyberbullys. A rule of thumb I try to adhere to is to not write anything I wouldn't say in front of the person I'm discussing. Constructive criticism is welcome and encouraged but please support your position.

I am not a Duke grad but a lifelong Duke fan. I do not agree with the accusations that DBR is elitist. IMO, it is untrue. When I first started posting on DBR I started slowly and proceeded cautiously until I was accepted as a member of the community. This was back in the days of codes and after a period of time I was whitelisted. I would encourage new members of DBR to employ the same strategy.

[hughgs]

The only thing we Moderators are asking is for posters not to be cyberbullys. A rule of thumb I try to adhere to is to not write anything I wouldn't say in front of the person I'm discussing. Constructive criticism is welcome and encouraged but please support your position.

I would add that along with writing as if you were in a face-to-face conversation, that making statements, of any kind, with supporting arguments is the key to this bulletin board. I don't think that most new posters understand how to write out a fact-based, opinionated article. And noone is looking for a research article or a print media article. Those of us who long for the days of codes want a little thought, and presentation of the facts in the posts.

I think the stall-ball thread is a perfect example. A couple of newer posters decide that we're playing stall-ball because it doesn't appear that Duke is attacking the basket (or whatever unknown reason they see). Rather, than take the time to objectively analyze the numbers they shoot-off a post that they hate stall-ball and that Duke, who promised to run, is already in the "basketball doldrums". No supporting arguments, no appearance of critical thinking.


I am not a Duke grad but a lifelong Duke fan. I do not agree with the accusations that DBR is elitist. IMO, it is untrue. When I first started posting on DBR I started slowly and proceeded cautiously until I was accepted as a member of the community. This was back in the days of codes and after a period of time I was whitelisted. I would encourage new members of DBR to employ the same strategy.

I agree. If asking for critical thinking on the part of posters is considered elitist, then I would prefer that moniker to one in which we have to read the "noise" of this board to get to something of substance. I let my posts stew for a couple of minutes, and I also ask if I'm adding a new opinion to the conversation or whether I'm rehashing a previously stated opinion. There are plenty of posts that I've written and deleted because I couldn't make a proper argument.

[Carlos]

Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant.

I was traveling yesterday (although the refs from the NMSU game only called 4 of the 8 traveling violations I committed) and didn't get a chance to participate in all the moderating fun that popped up.

Lulu, I just wanted to tell you that I saw your message and, even though I usually find such discussions of elitism and stuck-up or snobby behavior beneath my station in life, I simply have to comment. It would be wrong to allow your misleading charge of righteousness to stand unchallenged without letting the world know the truth.

Let me also add, I will not put up with any further allegations of intolerance.

***********

Lighten up everybody... it's just basketball and this is supposed to be the fun part.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Well said Jumbo, Stray and LordAsh. Bravo!

Now, to Lulu quoted below. I think Jumbo was far to gracious in his reply.


Let's call a spade a spade. This board is incredibly righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby, and intolerant. That's DBR.

Both myself and my other half are '90s Duke alums. This board embarrasses both of us with its better than thou attitude which pretty much serves as an extension of what all other fans think they hate about our program.

I suggest that you both burn your Duke diplomas, go get another degree at some other school so you can hang it on your wall, and then root for them and post on their boards. That is my righteous, elitist, stuck-up, snobby and intolerant opinion, and I'm darn proud of it. Please note this is not a personal attack on you, but a highly indignant, better than thou response to your post.

[rockymtn devil]

But that's the point. It's their choice. The DBR board isn't for everyone. And you'd get the same thing if you asked some people here about TDD -- a lot of people are turned off by all the noise and the uninforme speculation/harping. To each his/her own, but I don't understand how insisting that people support arguments (especially when they are ripping 20-year-old kids) is "elitist."

From the "Slow Down" Thread, First Response, Throatybeard: "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."

Is this elitist? I don't think so, although I can see someone seeing it as such. It is, however, a smug, unfriendly remark made by an old-time poster (and moderator) that absolutely gives the impression that the thread-starter (a newbie) was unwelcome. Is Throatybeard's response really adding something to the discourse that the mods are constantly talking about upholding? If the point of the discourse is to chase people away, then yes, it is. Otherwise, no. How hard would it have been to politely inform the poster that his/her topic of choice has been discussed at length and that DBR doesn't appreciate it being talked about on this board?

You (old-time posters/mods) do realize that the criticism isn't just about people having to "support arguments", right? As the first post in this thread stated, it's about an attitude that some believe is directed towards newer posters, and the quote I started with is support for that.

[Indoor66]

From the "Slow Down" Thread, First Response, Throatybeard: "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."

Is this elitist? I don't think so, although I can see someone seeing it as such. It is, however, a smug, unfriendly remark made by an old-time poster (and moderator) that absolutely gives the impression that the thread-starter (a newbie) was unwelcome. Is Throatybeard's response really adding something to the discourse that the mods are constantly talking about upholding? If the point of the discourse is to chase people away, then yes, it is. Otherwise, no. How hard would it have been to politely inform the poster that his/her topic of choice has been discussed at length and that DBR doesn't appreciate it being talked about on this board?

You (old-time posters/mods) do realize that the criticism isn't just about people having to "support arguments", right? As the first post in this thread stated, it's about an attitude that some believe is directed towards newer posters, and the quote I started with is support for that.

What I consider ironic is that I have received a citation for a remark about as pointed as Throaty's for being aimed at a poster and not adding to the general discourse of the thread!

[hughgs]

From the "Slow Down" Thread, First Response, Throatybeard: "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."

Is this elitist? I don't think so, although I can see someone seeing it as such. It is, however, a smug, unfriendly remark made by an old-time poster (and moderator) that absolutely gives the impression that the thread-starter (a newbie) was unwelcome. Is Throatybeard's response really adding something to the discourse that the mods are constantly talking about upholding? If the point of the discourse is to chase people away, then yes, it is. Otherwise, no. How hard would it have been to politely inform the poster that his/her topic of choice has been discussed at length and that DBR doesn't appreciate it being talked about on this board?

But, what about the converse of that argument? How hard would it have been to understand the dynamics of the board and its history before posting on a topic and including some critical thinking? I think that's the argument being made. It's a package deal. Understand the dynamics of the board, then post. Don't just come into the house and put your feet on the coffee table without asking. If that chases people away then I think that says something about the mis-match between the people who frequent the board and the people who are chased away. And, I think the owners of the board would find that a good thing in trying to foster a community.

[Jeffrey]

Hi,

Here's an example of "The Culture of DBR" from my vantage point:

http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=61908&postcount=68

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[DukeCO2009]

But, what about the converse of that argument? How hard would it have been to understand the dynamics of the board and its history before posting on a topic and including some critical thinking? I think that's the argument being made. It's a package deal. Understand the dynamics of the board, then post. Don't just come into the house and put your feet on the coffee table without asking. If that chases people away then I think that says something about the mis-match between the people who frequent the board and the people who are chased away. And, I think the owners of the board would find that a good thing in trying to foster a community.

I started the thread, and I understand the dynamics of the board quite well, thank you. I understand where you're coming from--I really do--but the whole "don't talk about subject X because we've discussed it before" attitude is silly. I would even contend that my argument was not something that had explicitly been covered before; I was taking an old matter and talking about it in the context of Duke's most recent game. Throaty's initial response, as well as Jumbo's later description of my post as "nutty" were pretty out of line, in my humble opinion. Way to make a long-time lurker wish he had stayed a long-time lurker.

The attitude I get from this thread is that if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. I see no problem with that; what I take issue with is that "the heat" turned on by people who then turn around and preach community, togetherness, and the like. I'm all for an intelligent, rational debate--I just think this place ought to decide whether it truly wants to be accepting or if it is content with its current image as an unwelcoming board. Someone mentioned that TDD has more posters despite the fact that DBR clearly has the better site. I don't think the reason is any secret. A lot of stuff over there is crap, yes, but a lot of the regulars over there simply don't respond to crap threads; the regulars over here, for whatever reason, feel it there duty to enter a supposed crappy thread and tell the new guy it's crap. What gives?

[merry]

Where I think I disagree is that the quality of discourse here has declined. I've been a reader for about 6-7 years and a regular poster for maybe half that time, and I think the quality remains as good as it was when I started reading. Some people are great at insightful analysis, others at more informal banter. I'm here because I like both. I find the POV of newbies to be refreshing most of the time. I hope we can err on the side of permissiveness rather than restriction, because the cost of the former is less than the cost of the latter. But either way I appreciate the care and effort.

I agree with mapei ;)

Incidentally this also means I agree with feldspar (is this really happening?)

[throatybeard]

Normally, I crumble before criticism of me, but I stand by my original comment in the back to the ol slowdown thread. I think that was a fairly mild, humorous reaction to the following:

1) We beat a 2007 NCAAT team by 25 in the second game of the year.
2) The first new thread on the board after the game is a complaint about one of the 5-most-complained-about Duke MBB phenomena when said phenomenon didn't even happen.

It's not like the 2002 @Virginia game just happened. We as a fanbase have become unbelievably spoiled and will find anything to complain about no matter the weather.

[hughgs]

I started the thread, and I understand the dynamics of the board quite well, thank you. I understand where you're coming from--I really do--but the whole "don't talk about subject X because we've discussed it before" attitude is silly. I would even contend that my argument was not something that had explicitly been covered before; I was taking an old matter and talking about it in the context of Duke's most recent game. Throaty's initial response, as well as Jumbo's later description of my post as "nutty" were pretty out of line, in my humble opinion. Way to make a long-time lurker wish he had stayed a long-time lurker.

The attitude I get from this thread is that if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. I see no problem with that; what I take issue with is that "the heat" turned on by people who then turn around and preach community, togetherness, and the like. I'm all for an intelligent, rational debate--I just think this place ought to decide whether it truly wants to be accepting or if it is content with its current image as an unwelcoming board. Someone mentioned that TDD has more posters despite the fact that DBR clearly has the better site. I don't think the reason is any secret. A lot of stuff over there is crap, yes, but a lot of the regulars over there simply don't respond to crap threads; the regulars over here, for whatever reason, feel it there duty to enter a supposed crappy thread and tell the new guy it's crap. What gives?

I think the problem with your original post was that you didn't back up your hypothesis with any facts. So, in that sense, I didn't see where the comment had any rationality to it. And because of that people jumped all over you. The regular posters are diligent about this type of behavior because of the simple fact that the existing community doesn't want to see a bunch of "noise". They, myself included, want to see comments or arguments that have some backing.

If accepting means that the board becomes inundated with a bunch of people making comments without backing them up then I would rather the board seem to be unwelcoming.

I think people need to decide what they want from this board. Are they looking for a place to rationally discuss Duke basketball without a lot of "noise"? Or, are they looking for a place to discuss and comment on Duke basketball? If it's the latter, then I think they should post somewhere else.

[rockymtn devil]

Normally, I crumble before criticism of me, but I stand by my original comment in the back to the ol slowdown thread. I think that was a fairly mild, humorous reaction to the following:

1) We beat a 2007 NCAAT team by 25 in the second game of the year.
2) The first new thread on the board after the game is a complaint about one of the 5-most-complained-about Duke MBB phenomena when said phenomenon didn't even happen.

It's not like the 2002 @Virginia game just happened. We as a fanbase have become unbelievably spoiled and will find anything to complain about no matter the weather.

But it added nothing to the oh-so cherished "discourse". It had no substance other than to tell the poster that his post isn't worthy because it was discussed a few years ago by the old-timers. If the key is substance and added something new, your post failed to do so. Your response quoted above, had posted it then, would've added to the "discourse" because it gives the perfect response to the slow-down question.


I guess I'm confused about what is and is not acceptable on these boards, and the guidelines don't clear it up. From what I gather, "noise" is not okay when posted by a newbie, but if an old-timer/mod does it, then it's just fine (perhaps more so when it's the latter). IMO, Throaty's response in the slow down thread was much more "noise" than the original post, and someone in this thread noted that they were given infraction points for a post similar to Throaty's. Are we to assume that the mods considered reprimanding Throaty for a post that added nothing to the "discourse"? My gut tells me it never crossed their mind--but that's just my gut.

[hughgs]

But it added nothing to the oh-so cherished "discourse". It had no substance other than to tell the poster that his post isn't worthy because it was discussed a few years ago by the old-timers. If the key is substance and added something new, your post failed to do so. Your response quoted above, had posted it then, would've added to the "discourse" because it gives the perfect response to the slow-down question.


I guess I'm confused about what is and is not acceptable on these boards, and the guidelines don't clear it up. From what I gather, "noise" is not okay when posted by a newbie, but if an old-timer/mod does it, then it's just fine (perhaps more so when it's the latter). IMO, Throaty's response in the slow down thread was much more "noise" than the original post, and someone in this thread noted that they were given infraction points for a post similar to Throaty's. Are we to assume that the mods considered reprimanding Throaty for a post that added nothing to the "discourse"? My gut tells me it never crossed their mind--but that's just my gut.

What throaty's post added to the culture was a reminder, in his subtle manner, of the community standards and was a chastising of the original poster for violating those standards. Your correct that it added nothing to the discourse of "stall-ball" was I think it was meant to reinforce the standards that this board, and its owners expect out of posters.

[rockymtn devil]

What throaty's post added to the culture was a reminder, in his subtle manner, of the community standards and was a chastising of the original poster for violating those standards. Your correct that it added nothing to the discourse of "stall-ball" was I think it was meant to reinforce the standards that this board, and its owners expect out of posters.

I agree, but my point is that the standards aren't enforced equally because some charged with enforcing them apparently see no problem in violating them themselves. If the standards require constant discourse of value, and a mod's response adds no value, then they are in violation of the standards. You even use the word "chastising" (which I agree with), but isn't that a violation of the standards? Again, this "culture" comes of as very uneven. I'm done posting about the standards and whatnot, but I do hope that the mods will understand that it's tough to take them serious sometimes when they violate the very standards they so aggressively enforce. It doesn't foster a sense of community.

[hughgs]

I agree, but my point is that the standards aren't enforced equally because some charged with enforcing them apparently see no problem in violating them themselves. If the standards require constant discourse of value, and a mod's response adds no value, then they are in violation of the standards. You even use the word "chastising" (which I agree with), but isn't that a violation of the standards? Again, this "culture" comes of as very uneven. I'm done posting about the standards and whatnot, but I do hope that the mods will understand that it's tough to take them serious sometimes when they violate the very standards they so aggressively enforce. It doesn't foster a sense of community.

How did throaty's post violate the standards? The standards as I see them are to post comments and thoughts and to back them up with facts. He addressed the points that the poster made with facts. The idea that he can't lampoon those facts as being stupid is very different than calling the poster stupid. And that's the difference as I see it.

And the idea that you don't want to discuss the standards of the community will certainly not help you understand how the standards apply.

[rockymtn devil]

How did throaty's post violate the standards? The standards as I see them are to post comments and thoughts and to back them up with facts. He addressed the points that the poster made with facts. The idea that he can't lampoon those facts as being stupid is very different than calling the poster stupid. And that's the difference as I see it.

And the idea that you don't want to discuss the standards of the community will certainly not help you understand how the standards apply.

DBR Posting Guidelines Prohibit: "Snarky and semi-insulting comments mainly to get under the skin of posters."

I'd say that Throaty's post was the definition of this. It added nothing, was snarky, and was done, in your own words, to chastise another poster. Indeed, another posted stated that he/she was reprimanded for providing a similar post. So, why is it okay for a mod to do it but not a non-mod? Ultimately, it goes to larger problem of the "culture", which is what the criticism in this thread has addressed.

Further, where exactly are the "facts" in "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."?

[throatybeard]

I'm done quibbling about one post, but I want to make it very clear that the mods don't "aggressively enforce" anything. The site owners have reminded us on multiple occasions that we're too lenient for the standards that they've set forth.

[Jarhead]

I suppose that I am one of the old timers that some posters are complaining about. I do some times get annoyed with folks bringing up topics already thoroughly discussed, but I now do not get involved if it bothers me. As for today's stall ball thread, I thought it was mostly centered on the NMSU game. Deja vu, though, we had discussed stall ball before, haven't we? Ok, lets fix it. Perhaps Julio and Boswell could come up with a way for new threads to be automatically linked to old threads covering the same or similar issues. As moderators review new threads, they could just hit a button that puts a side bar up that gives links to related threads. The archives are available, but most of us don't know about them, or know how to get to them. So, let's make it easy. I like my side bar idea.

[hughgs]

DBR Posting Guidelines Prohibit: "Snarky and semi-insulting comments mainly to get under the skin of posters."

I'd say that Throaty's post was the definition of this. It added nothing, was snarky, and was done, in your own words, to chastise another poster. Indeed, another posted stated that he/she was reprimanded for providing a similar post. So, why is it okay for a mod to do it but not a non-mod? Ultimately, it goes to larger problem of the "culture", which is what the criticism in this thread has addressed.

Further, where exactly are the "facts" in "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."?

You're correct that that post was probably over the line. I had thought you were referring to a different post. My bad.

So, did you report him? Remember, the moderators don't actively look for bad posts. Our job in this community is to report questionable posts.

[DevilAlumna]

I think the pub is a great analogy to DBR. I'd say the Main Forum is the bar and the mods and old-timers have their favorite bar stools; and the other boards are other tables scattered about the room. Depending on the night and the crowd, there is more or less mingling amongst the tables.

If a new poster is going to belly up to the bar, he or she needs to be prepared to expect some flack (usually good-natured) from those who have been around for awhile. I saw Throaty's response as something that would have made the regulars laugh out loud, even if it was slightly at the expense of the new poster.

What I'm also hearing, to stretch the analogy, is that new posters may want to have an area (a new table? or in the boards, a new thread) where they can talk about new-to-them topics, a little more free from the sometimes-mocking oversight of the regulars. As long as those tables don't get too rowdy or rude, it seems like the pub could accomodate them.

This could mean that hey, if a bunch of folks want to discuss stall ball or floor burns, the regulars don't have to turn around from the bar and shout, "oh, not again!" It is possible to not read every thread, I swear.

Conversely, newbies who venture up to the main bar and try to influence the ongoing conversation (say, midway through a thread) should expect to get some pushback, like they would in person. And may need a slightly thicker skin until they too become a welcome regular (something that's much easier to do with the new forum format.)

Lastly, if you don't like the pub or the regulars or the rules of the house, no one is making anyone stay and drink the koolaid. No sense busting up the joint before you make your exit; it just makes the guys at the bar more wary of the next newby who ventures in.

[throatybeard]

As for today's stall ball thread, I thought it was mostly centered on the NMSU game. Deja vu, though, we had discussed stall ball before, haven't we? Ok, lets fix it. Perhaps Julio and Boswell could come up with a way for new threads to be automatically linked to old threads covering the same or similar issues. As moderators review new threads, they could just hit a button that puts a side bar up that gives links to related threads.

We basically do that already. Several things make it difficult to stay on top of things: (a) the sheer volume, (b) the propensity of certain posters to keep beating the same ten horses and (c) the community's general unwillingness to check the first 2 or 3 pages of threads before starting a new thread on the exact same thing.

During the height of the PP recruitment saga, people were starting up to 3 new PP threads daily, often adjacent to the existing thread. This created a great deal of board clutter, so we merged new PP recruitment threads into the old one. (Of course, then people complained about that thread being long, so you can't please people no matter what you do).

We've been merging starting-5 discussions into the starting-5 thread for months. We'll continue to merge semi-weekly caterwauling about student attendance into the Cameron attendance thread. But sometimes we miss something due to the volume and other factors.

[JasonEvans]

I want to add one more thing to the oft-used pub analogy...

If you walked into a bar and immediately began talking about what a lousy bar it was, you'd probably get kicked out. If you started talking about how poor the service was in a loud voice, you certainly would not be a welcome customer. If the bar was a "free" place where they were not cocnerned with the loss of business, I think you can rest assured that you would be kicked out.

I bring this up to tell the folks who are railing against the mods and the attitude on this board something that they have heard over and over again... if you do not like it, you are welcome to go somewhere else. I can tell you that the mods are sick and tired of seeing this place and its policies trashed.

--Jason "maybe I'm just feeling angry today, but I am really getting sick of some of the attidues around here" Evans

[throatybeard]

I'd also like to add that complaining about stall-ball when it didn't even happen, after a 25-point victory, is akin to walking into the tavern and relieving yourself on the bar.

[Indoor66]

Our job in this community is to report questionable posts.

Clarification, please.

I have heard of reporting questionable posts. How does one do that? I have heard that there is a button or such to report posts. I have not been able to find that place. Additionally, what do the mods want in such a report? An explanation of what we think is improper or offensive or just notification of the post so that the mod can make a determination?

[dyedwab]

For me, that is the key point. A critically-framed premise, that was proven false was the first non-game thread to appear after a 25 point victory. Someone earlier in thread talked about the stereotype of of Duke fans - this is a different won. Sometimes, we expect perfection, not only winning, but looking good doing it.

That, for me, was why I thought the post received the mockery it did.

[DukeCO2009]

For me, that is the key point. A critically-framed premise, that was proven false was the first non-game thread to appear after a 25 point victory. Someone earlier in thread talked about the stereotype of of Duke fans - this is a different won. Sometimes, we expect perfection, not only winning, but looking good doing it.

That, for me, was why I thought the post received the mockery it did.

I appreciate your objective analysis of my post. I'm totally willing to take my lumps. I guess my point is that I don't think any post should receive mockery, especially from mods.

[JBDuke]

What I consider ironic is that I have received a citation for a remark about as pointed as Throaty's for being aimed at a poster and not adding to the general discourse of the thread!

Sorry, but I can't let this one stand unchallenged.

The only citation on your record is when you responded to a poster with the following:

What did you do to your cat when you were younger?
which is very different from what throaty posted. Yours was a personal attack. Throaty's was an expression of disgust at the reappearance of a topic that has repeatedly been discussed on these boards.

[watzone]

DBR Posting Guidelines Prohibit: "Snarky and semi-insulting comments mainly to get under the skin of posters."

I'd say that Throaty's post was the definition of this. It added nothing, was snarky, and was done, in your own words, to chastise another poster. Indeed, another posted stated that he/she was reprimanded for providing a similar post. So, why is it okay for a mod to do it but not a non-mod? Ultimately, it goes to larger problem of the "culture", which is what the criticism in this thread has addressed.

Further, where exactly are the "facts" in "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."?

Like it or not, the responsibility of a moderator is to be professional. So, that means you may have to hold back a little from the way you acted as a poster. Most of you done this and are certainly good representatives, but we all need to check ourselves every now and then.

I think a mod should be careful not to devulge information which is not meant for public knowledge or causes threads to be closed too. ... major hint

I still feel this board is a work in progress from the days of codes and being a mod isn't an easy job. I have faith that this thread will help the DBR to adjust and continue to be the best place for discussion of Duke basketball.

[JBDuke]

Clarification, please.

I have heard of reporting questionable posts. How does one do that? I have heard that there is a button or such to report posts. I have not been able to find that place. Additionally, what do the mods want in such a report? An explanation of what we think is improper or offensive or just notification of the post so that the mod can make a determination?

Up in the top right corner of every post, you'll see the post number in the thread, and then a couple of icons. One looks like a warning sign - white triangle with a red border and a black line in the middle. Clicking on that will send a message to all the mods that you have reported the particular post for some reason. You will have the opportunity to add a message as well. Use this message to explain why you are reporting the post.

[JBDuke]

DBR Posting Guidelines Prohibit: "Snarky and semi-insulting comments mainly to get under the skin of posters."

I'd say that Throaty's post was the definition of this. It added nothing, was snarky, and was done, in your own words, to chastise another poster. Indeed, another posted stated that he/she was reprimanded for providing a similar post. So, why is it okay for a mod to do it but not a non-mod? Ultimately, it goes to larger problem of the "culture", which is what the criticism in this thread has addressed.

Further, where exactly are the "facts" in "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."?

Throaty's post was not "semi-insulting", nor was it done "mainly to get under the skin of posters". It didn't add anything to the discussion, because that was not its purpose - its purpose was to forestall another lengthy discussion of a topic that had been discussed ad nauseum.

And your argument about poster vs. mod standards is based on a red herring. As I pointed out to Indoor66, the citation he received was for something that was clearly in violation of the board's standards and was not at all similar to Throaty's post.

[Jumbo]

Way to make a long-time lurker wish he had stayed a long-time lurker.
I'm curious by what you define as "long-time." I assume that DukeCO2009 means you are Class of 2009. If so, how long have you been lurking, then. Pre-Duke? If not, I apologize.


Someone mentioned that TDD has more posters despite the fact that DBR clearly has the better site. I don't think the reason is any secret. A lot of stuff over there is crap, yes, but a lot of the regulars over there simply don't respond to crap threads; the regulars over here, for whatever reason, feel it there duty to enter a supposed crappy thread and tell the new guy it's crap. What gives?

It has never been the DBR's goal to have the "most" posters. This is a straw man.

[DukeCO2009]

I'm curious by what you define as "long-time." I assume that DukeCO2009 means you are Class of 2009. If so, how long have you been lurking, then. Pre-Duke? If not, I apologize.



It has never been the DBR's goal to have the "most" posters. This is a straw man.

I've been lurking here for probably 5+ years and have been reading the site since I was a kid. Never said it was DBR's goal to have the most posters--was just making an observation.

[willywoody]

Throaty's post was not "semi-insulting", nor was it done "mainly to get under the skin of posters". It didn't add anything to the discussion, because that was not its purpose - its purpose was to forestall another lengthy discussion of a topic that had been discussed ad nauseum.

And your argument about poster vs. mod standards is based on a red herring. As I pointed out to Indoor66, the citation he received was for something that was clearly in violation of the board's standards and was not at all similar to Throaty's post.

quickly reading through this thread, but throaty's post comes across as insulting and could have been better handled. y'all, the moderators, are really coming across poorly by defending that post, imo. if he had just told the newbie that stall ball has been discussed ad nauseum after every single game the past few years and is not considered a useful subject, it would have been more professional. just my two cents from a seldom poster and 6 plus year reader.

not to come across too negative towards the moderators as y'all have a pretty thankless task. i appreciate what y'all do. ww

[monkey]

If I may;

I appreciate what you are saying Jumbo, and thank GOD for DBR; when I read some of the absolute, total nonsense that people post on other forums I just feel sick. DBR is a fantastic resource for great info, analysis, and discussion of everyone's favorite team.

However, while I do laugh a lot reading the Pocket Guide, I also sometimes wonder if it sometimes does some harm, in that once a topic makes The Guide, it somehow feels like it becomes taboo to talk about. I certainly don't think that is beneficial. And I think that this is a feeling more and more potentially valuable DBR members are feeling.



I agree with everything Lord Ash wrote above - including the very mixed feelings with respect to the Pocket Guide. While I think it has some funny points, and I laughed a lot when it was first posted on the old board, is it really necessary to have it permanently stuck to the top of the board? While serving a somewhat valuable function in indicating a lot of topics aren't exactly uncharted territory, in my opinion it's in some ways somwhat insulting ("oh, everything you are going to say is covered in 5A"), and leads to less discussion on the board.

One other thing though - just my two cents, and not to get the powers that be made at me - I'm not sure it's entirely reasonable for DBR to complain about people not learning the "DBR way" and/or complain about people complaining about the way the board is moderated (and claiming exclusive editorial prerogative as a private site) ... and then at the same time support the site through assorted fundraisers (disclaimer: I missed the most recent one accidentally after having given to every prior one, including signing up for the ill-fated premium recruiting membership) from the same readers. It seems to me that this is, in some ways, similar to a private company going public (the analogy isn't perfect) - there is - and in my opinion should be - a certain loss of control. Treating the DBR like it was still a completely private entity (as was argued during the recent "first amendment" thread - which I agree was not implicated) as it was when Julio and Boswell (and James) paid all the bills is not, to me, completely appropriate. Just my $0.02 as a long time reader and occassional poster.

Having said the above, I also want to thank Jumbo, Jason and the other moderators for (a) putting in the work they do and (b) addressing the issues raised in this thread. Thanks also to the folks who make the main site my favorite on the web.

[Jumbo]

DBR Posting Guidelines Prohibit: "Snarky and semi-insulting comments mainly to get under the skin of posters."

I'd say that Throaty's post was the definition of this. It added nothing, was snarky, and was done, in your own words, to chastise another poster. Indeed, another posted stated that he/she was reprimanded for providing a similar post. So, why is it okay for a mod to do it but not a non-mod? Ultimately, it goes to larger problem of the "culture", which is what the criticism in this thread has addressed.

Further, where exactly are the "facts" in "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."?

There's a difference. Witty one-liners, tongue-in-cheek posts, humor are all part of DBR. I see your point, but I don't believe Throaty's post violated the spirit of the board.

[dw0827]

I've read this thread with great interest. I see both sides. I, too, was (am) a newbie who lurked for several years. Finally had a few things to say, said them rather inartfully and ineloquently, and got creamed. By moderators, no less.

Had a few PM's with a moderator, got the benefit of his thinking, and went about my business. My feeling is that the "older" posters or rather long-time posters feel a sense of ownership of this site and new people need to prove themselves to be worthy. Some would call this elitist. I did. However, there is much merit to what they say. They want to uphold a level of discourse on this website that is second to none. So when some new guy (me) posts some unadulterated crap without an ounce of substantiation, then these long-time posters (including moderators) call me on it. Fair enough.

So the new guy (me) has two options. Punt. Or get better. What is NOT an option is to whine about it.

So I've tried to be more thoughtful when I post. And I figure if I never start a post with "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..." then I'm safe.

[feldspar]

Throaty's post was not "semi-insulting", nor was it done "mainly to get under the skin of posters". It didn't add anything to the discussion, because that was not its purpose - its purpose was to forestall another lengthy discussion of a topic that had been discussed ad nauseum.

And your argument about poster vs. mod standards is based on a red herring. As I pointed out to Indoor66, the citation he received was for something that was clearly in violation of the board's standards and was not at all similar to Throaty's post.

But, JB, we just had a discussion a few weeks ago in which I was told that posts that add no value to the discussion (the *** rule) didn't have a place on these boards.

I have had multiple posts deleted which were not violations of board standards, but were just harmless jokes (funny or not) but that did not add to the discussion.

Therein lies the confusion. We are told one thing by one moderator, only to see another moderator do that very thing we're asked not to do.

Do you see how that could be highly confusing to us?

[feldspar]

There's a difference. Witty one-liners, tongue-in-cheek posts, humor are all part of DBR. I see your point, but I don't believe Throaty's post violated the spirit of the board.

My experience has been different. My experience has been that if a moderator doesn't think your joke is funny, it gets deleted.

So now, the mods, in effect, have also become the funny police.

[dukestheheat]

Jumbo and Throaty...

Hey, I just read Throaty's Pocket Guide. There is just an incredible amount of information included there in that work.

To me, what distinguishes DBR from several other sites is that we don't allow flaming or personal attacks on other posters. And, I totally enjoy the informed discussion of the game I really do love (and from our perspective).

In terms of discussion, then, what happens if a Duke Fan has a point of emphasis that in some way may be different from that put forth in a discussion last month, last year or three years ago? Are we not to listen to that poster, to read their opinion, to consider what they offer?

I choose to be patient with my children. I have a boy I named Cameron; sometimes, he talks about things we've talked about many times before but he may put up a new angle, bring in a fresh perspective, make his point in a way that challenges my thinking and I need that, I respect that. Also, it builds him when I let him know that I care about what he thinks (even though he may frustrate at times).

I kiteboard in the ocean, and while I'm on the beach waiting to get into the water, I have several people come up and ask me many questions that I've answered many, many times before. But, each person is curious and they want to talk, to enjoin, to belong in some way. I take all of this into consideration when I interact with other people on that beach, even at that vulnerable and yes, dangerous time when I'm trying to get the kite into the water and off the beach.

So, I ask for patience, for consideration, and most of all for an open mind to discussing (already discussed) topics on the DBR.

Each professor looked at each of us with all of this in mind. We should all do the same, in my opinion, I'm just sayin'.

Thanks guys for the board, the DBR, and for being part of this great Duke community,

dth.

[dukerev]

I've lurked on DBR for a long time and on the board(s) for a few years and just began posting before the switch to this new system. One of the things I thought was really cool about this new board system was the number of posts "earned" a poster a new category, moving up from "Hoop Dreams" to various other honors. However, I also noticed that my competitive nature led me to post when I should have stayed silent, if only to boost my post number and move up that ladder to "Shane Battier" status (or whatever).

This adds to the "culture" of the DBR board, for better or worse. It is made clear from the moment you enter the board who is an insider and who is an outsider. Most folks want to be insiders. Most folks want to be part of the "in" crowd. The accusations of elitism *DO* have merit, if only because there is a built-in system that determines who the elite are and are not. Your status on the board (at least as determined by your title) is based on how often one posts, not the quality of said posts.

As a lurker, I've learned who I prefer to listen to and who to ignore or at best give a passing glance. But if someone were new to the boards this is not as evident. If DBR is about "community" and if we don't want to be elitist as we (by that I mean Duke University, Duke basketball, Duke basketball fans, Duke alumni and pretty much all things Duke) then shouldn't we want to make new fans feel welcome?

I'm not saying that the titles should be eliminated; only that because these titles are there, an "in" and "out" group is established. I like the idea of a pub as well, but let's not think that said pub can't be elitist. Let's make the pub a place where new folks can be welcomed to the club with less stringent entrance requirements than *seem to be* (or at least have been perceived to have been by some, which in this case is the same) here at "DBR board Pub."

As an aside, thanks to the moderators for their work. It is a thankless job, and even when done less than perfectly, it is appreciated.

[Highlander]

Jumbo and Throaty...

Hey, I just read Throaty's Pocket Guide. There is just an incredible amount of information included there in that work.

To me, what distinguishes DBR from several other sites is that we don't allow flaming or personal attacks on other posters. And, I totally enjoy the informed discussion of the game I really do love (and from our perspective).

In terms of discussion, then, what happens if a Duke Fan has a point of emphasis that in some way may be different from that put forth in a discussion last month, last year or three years ago? Are we not to listen to that poster, to read their opinion, to consider what they offer?

I choose to be patient with my children. I have a boy I named Cameron; sometimes, he talks about things we've talked about many times before but he may put up a new angle, bring in a fresh perspective, make his point in a way that challenges my thinking and I need that, I respect that. Also, it builds him when I let him know that I care about what he thinks (even though he may frustrate at times).

I kiteboard in the ocean, and while I'm on the beach waiting to get into the water, I have several people come up and ask me many questions that I've answered many, many times before. But, each person is curious and they want to talk, to enjoin, to belong in some way. I take all of this into consideration when I interact with other people on that beach, even at that vulnerable and yes, dangerous time when I'm trying to get the kite into the water and off the beach.

So, I ask for patience, for consideration, and most of all for an open mind to discussing (already discussed) topics on the DBR.

Each professor looked at each of us with all of this in mind. We should all do the same, in my opinion, I'm just sayin'.

Thanks guys for the board, the DBR, and for being part of this great Duke community,

dth.

Well said dth. Thank you.

[Jumbo]

My experience has been different. My experience has been that if a moderator doesn't think your joke is funny, it gets deleted.

So now, the mods, in effect, have also become the funny police.

That's not called for. We've been having a productive discussion over PM. Please don't ruin it.

[Jumbo]

Jumbo and Throaty...

Hey, I just read Throaty's Pocket Guide. There is just an incredible amount of information included there in that work.

To me, what distinguishes DBR from several other sites is that we don't allow flaming or personal attacks on other posters. And, I totally enjoy the informed discussion of the game I really do love (and from our perspective).

In terms of discussion, then, what happens if a Duke Fan has a point of emphasis that in some way may be different from that put forth in a discussion last month, last year or three years ago? Are we not to listen to that poster, to read their opinion, to consider what they offer?

I choose to be patient with my children. I have a boy I named Cameron; sometimes, he talks about things we've talked about many times before but he may put up a new angle, bring in a fresh perspective, make his point in a way that challenges my thinking and I need that, I respect that. Also, it builds him when I let him know that I care about what he thinks (even though he may frustrate at times).

I kiteboard in the ocean, and while I'm on the beach waiting to get into the water, I have several people come up and ask me many questions that I've answered many, many times before. But, each person is curious and they want to talk, to enjoin, to belong in some way. I take all of this into consideration when I interact with other people on that beach, even at that vulnerable and yes, dangerous time when I'm trying to get the kite into the water and off the beach.

So, I ask for patience, for consideration, and most of all for an open mind to discussing (already discussed) topics on the DBR.

Each professor looked at each of us with all of this in mind. We should all do the same, in my opinion, I'm just sayin'.

Thanks guys for the board, the DBR, and for being part of this great Duke community,

dth.


Look, as moderators go, we're not going to be perfect. A lot of it is the proverbial "definition of pornography" approach. Inconsistency will happen. It's unfortunate, but inevitable.

And I totally agree with you that subjects shouldn't become taboo just because they've been mentioned before. The key, though, is how they are mentioned. Is someone ranting and raving without presenting any information, a friendly tone or a desire to learn? If so, most humans won't tolerate it the same way they would someone asking questions, posting thoughtful analysis and showing respect. I guess that's the best explanation I can offer at this point.

[dkbaseball]

One other thing though - just my two cents, and not to get the powers that be made at me - I'm not sure it's entirely reasonable for DBR to complain about people not learning the "DBR way" and/or complain about people complaining about the way the board is moderated (and claiming exclusive editorial prerogative as a private site) ... and then at the same time support the site through assorted fundraisers (disclaimer: I missed the most recent one accidentally after having given to every prior one, including signing up for the ill-fated premium recruiting membership) from the same readers. It seems to me that this is, in some ways, similar to a private company going public (the analogy isn't perfect) - there is - and in my opinion should be - a certain loss of control. Treating the DBR like it was still a completely private entity (as was argued during the recent "first amendment" thread - which I agree was not implicated) as it was when Julio and Boswell (and James) paid all the bills is not, to me, completely appropriate. Just my $0.02 as a long time reader and occassional poster.

Very interesting and compelling point. I think the comparison ultimately fails, though, by virtue of the fact that contributing is voluntary and not doing so doesn't entail the loss of any privileges. Everyone is free to check in and post at any time, whether they have contributed or not. I don't think anybody who does contribute understands themselves to be demanding voting rights, as it were. But your point does buttress the egalitarian side of this discussion.

[throatybeard]

Like it or not, the responsibility of a moderator is to be professional. So, that means you may have to hold back a little from the way you acted as a poster. Most of you done this and are certainly good representatives, but we all need to check ourselves every now and then.

I think a mod should be careful not to devulge information which is not meant for public knowledge or causes threads to be closed too. ... major hint

I still feel this board is a work in progress from the days of codes and being a mod isn't an easy job. I have faith that this thread will help the DBR to adjust and continue to be the best place for discussion of Duke basketball.

Ah, Watzone has a problem with me. What a surprising development.

What really amazes me is that the board has gotten so nasty this early. usually all the flame wars take place much later in the season.

[Lord Ash]

Now now, this is HARDLY a flame war; in fact, I think Watzone's post was rather polite and respectful. Let's try not to make this a personal thing. Yeah some people might be upset, but lets not stoke the fire by making it sound worse than it is.

Maybe we could go for a sort of compromise;

New posters will be extra conscious about learning from veteran posters and aware that the general tone of this forum is not the same as many others in that the people we discuss are often within "earshot"...

...and at the same time the more veteran folks will take it a bit easier on new folks, even when they are ranting, and try to stick to educating in a thoughtful way and avoiding a little of the more edgy insider quips?

I would be happy to try to remind myself more often to be extra-aware when I am posting.

I think that is the best way to try to make newcomers feel welcome and give them the cushion to make mistakes while also maybe saving vets from having to address the same points over and over. Plus, and I think this cannot be emphasized enough, just as you do not have to post at DBR if you don't like it, likewise you don't have to contribute to a thread if you don't want to.

[throatybeard]

By "flame war," I was referring to the general atmosphere of the board right now.

I was not referring to the personal history between me and Watzone, or his bringing up my "divulging" what has been completely public info for months in a completely unrelated thread.

[watzone]

Ah, Watzone has a problem with me. What a surprising development.

What really amazes me is that the board has gotten so nasty this early. usually all the flame wars take place much later in the season.

With all due respect, I've always seen it the other way around. Do we need to dig up old posts? What I'm perturbed about is how your snipes persist while not being provoked.

Please elaborate on the personal history for I have never understood where you are coming from or how any supposed jousting started. Oh wait! I was once called the board police. Imagine that;)

[throatybeard]

With all due respect, I've always seen it the other way around. Do we need to dig up old posts? What I'm perturbed about is how your snipes persist while not being provoked.

You're the one who just brought up the Coach G thing again, in a completely unrelated thread.

[watzone]

You're the one who just brought up the Coach G thing again, in a completely unrelated thread.

This is the first time I have mentioned Coach G in a post since said thread was removed. Since it was removed while I was attending the weekly football press conference and other duties, I have no way of knowing of any denegration that took place or was related to the thread. My point was that we all have to watch our words or stand back and think before we post. I have yet to see anything that implied it was public knowledge. So, yes I expected more constraint from someone with moderator status. This probably not the time nor place for this but you've never taken your problems with me (whatever they are) to PM.

[throatybeard]

This probably not the time nor place for this

Finally we agree on something.

[Duke4Ever32]

Jumbo and Throaty...

Hey, I just read Throaty's Pocket Guide. There is just an incredible amount of information included there in that work.

To me, what distinguishes DBR from several other sites is that we don't allow flaming or personal attacks on other posters. And, I totally enjoy the informed discussion of the game I really do love (and from our perspective).

In terms of discussion, then, what happens if a Duke Fan has a point of emphasis that in some way may be different from that put forth in a discussion last month, last year or three years ago? Are we not to listen to that poster, to read their opinion, to consider what they offer?

I choose to be patient with my children. I have a boy I named Cameron; sometimes, he talks about things we've talked about many times before but he may put up a new angle, bring in a fresh perspective, make his point in a way that challenges my thinking and I need that, I respect that. Also, it builds him when I let him know that I care about what he thinks (even though he may frustrate at times).

I kiteboard in the ocean, and while I'm on the beach waiting to get into the water, I have several people come up and ask me many questions that I've answered many, many times before. But, each person is curious and they want to talk, to enjoin, to belong in some way. I take all of this into consideration when I interact with other people on that beach, even at that vulnerable and yes, dangerous time when I'm trying to get the kite into the water and off the beach.

So, I ask for patience, for consideration, and most of all for an open mind to discussing (already discussed) topics on the DBR.

Each professor looked at each of us with all of this in mind. We should all do the same, in my opinion, I'm just sayin'.

Thanks guys for the board, the DBR, and for being part of this great Duke community,

dth.

I read this whole thread waiting to see if someone would address this issue - thanks for doing so and doing it eloquently, dth.

My question - which I'm not sure has been specifically put forth and answered - is exactly HOW are new people to know what has been discussed before?? I've been reading these boards multiple times every day for about 10 years now - I've probably read every word Stray Gator has posted and have learned much from him - so I know what has been discussed before. But how is a new person to gain that information?? I can understand going over the topics from the past week or two, but are we really attempting to charge a new person with knowledge of everything that's been discussed over months and years?? I don't think it's reasonable to ask a new person to somehow acquire that knowledge - and I can't see how they would even be able to do so. Is it really that difficult to ignore a thread that brings up things that have previously been discussed?? And if we keep eliminating topics of discussion, will we all be just typing 9F to each other 5 or 10 years down the road??

I do love this site - if I could only access one site for the rest of my life this would be it. Thanks to all of the mods and J&B for such outstanding work.

[Exiled_Devil]

I've read this thread with great interest. I see both sides. I, too, was (am) a newbie who lurked for several years. Finally had a few things to say, said them rather inartfully and ineloquently, and got creamed. By moderators, no less.

Had a few PM's with a moderator, got the benefit of his thinking, and went about my business. My feeling is that the "older" posters or rather long-time posters feel a sense of ownership of this site and new people need to prove themselves to be worthy. Some would call this elitist. I did. However, there is much merit to what they say. They want to uphold a level of discourse on this website that is second to none. So when some new guy (me) posts some unadulterated crap without an ounce of substantiation, then these long-time posters (including moderators) call me on it. Fair enough.

So the new guy (me) has two options. Punt. Or get better. What is NOT an option is to whine about it.

So I've tried to be more thoughtful when I post. And I figure if I never start a post with "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..." then I'm safe.

I'm working my way through this conversation, and I have to say, up to this point, I haven't heard anyone else write your reaction to newbie criticism - i.e. improve your 'game'. I'm impressed, and wish more people would think of that option. Usually it is Punt or try to make the board change for my benefit. Well thought out.

Exiled

[Exiled_Devil]

I was traveling yesterday (although the refs from the NMSU game only called 4 of the 8 traveling violations I committed) and didn't get a chance to participate in all the moderating fun that popped up.

Lulu, I just wanted to tell you that I saw your message and, even though I usually find such discussions of elitism and stuck-up or snobby behavior beneath my station in life, I simply have to comment. It would be wrong to allow your misleading charge of righteousness to stand unchallenged without letting the world know the truth.

Let me also add, I will not put up with any further allegations of intolerance.

***********

Lighten up everybody... it's just basketball and this is supposed to be the fun part.

Whew. I had to read that twice. The irony was so thick I wasn't sure if it was on purpose at first, but I see it now.

Golf clap for you , sir. I sit with a grin. Well played.


Exiled

[Jumbo]

With all due respect, I've always seen it the other way around. Do we need to dig up old posts? What I'm perturbed about is how your snipes persist while not being provoked.

Please elaborate on the personal history for I have never understood where you are coming from or how any supposed jousting started. Oh wait! I was once called the board police. Imagine that;)

That is not germane to what has been a good discussion from all sorts of parties. If you want to rehash old battles, or separate arguments. Do it over PM, okay?

[jipops]

I think the fact that this thread even exists distinguishes this board from most other sports message boards. Lulu made the accusation/assumption of the culture of this board advocating some level of elitism. I think it's a big mistake to confuse a demand for intelligence and well thought out discussion with that of elitism. These are entirely different components that have nothing to do with the other.

Message boards, sports especially, have largely become cliche'. This board does an excellent job of not falling into that trap.

[Jumbo]

I read this whole thread waiting to see if someone would address this issue - thanks for doing so and doing it eloquently, dth.

My question - which I'm not sure has been specifically put forth and answered - is exactly HOW are new people to know what has been discussed before?? I've been reading these boards multiple times every day for about 10 years now - I've probably read every word Stray Gator has posted and have learned much from him - so I know what has been discussed before. But how is a new person to gain that information?? I can understand going over the topics from the past week or two, but are we really attempting to charge a new person with knowledge of everything that's been discussed over months and years?? I don't think it's reasonable to ask a new person to somehow acquire that knowledge - and I can't see how they would even be able to do so. Is it really that difficult to ignore a thread that brings up things that have previously been discussed?? And if we keep eliminating topics of discussion, will we all be just typing 9F to each other 5 or 10 years down the road??

I do love this site - if I could only access one site for the rest of my life this would be it. Thanks to all of the mods and J&B for such outstanding work.

Folks,
I think some of you have a wrong perception about something. No one is saying that certain topics should never be discussed, just because they've been beaten to death all the years. They just need to be presented in a thoughtful way. That's all.
Simply put:
What we want -- Thoughtful, fact-based debate.
What we don't want -- Mindless opinion that aren't based in fact/rants/venting.

Is that easier? And I'll echo what was said earlier -- the fact that we are having this discussion at all is a) good for the board and b) evidence of the fact that we are all trying to make this a better place.

[JBDuke]

Jumbo and Throaty...

Hey, I just read Throaty's Pocket Guide. There is just an incredible amount of information included there in that work.

To me, what distinguishes DBR from several other sites is that we don't allow flaming or personal attacks on other posters. And, I totally enjoy the informed discussion of the game I really do love (and from our perspective).

In terms of discussion, then, what happens if a Duke Fan has a point of emphasis that in some way may be different from that put forth in a discussion last month, last year or three years ago? Are we not to listen to that poster, to read their opinion, to consider what they offer?

I choose to be patient with my children. I have a boy I named Cameron; sometimes, he talks about things we've talked about many times before but he may put up a new angle, bring in a fresh perspective, make his point in a way that challenges my thinking and I need that, I respect that. Also, it builds him when I let him know that I care about what he thinks (even though he may frustrate at times).

I kiteboard in the ocean, and while I'm on the beach waiting to get into the water, I have several people come up and ask me many questions that I've answered many, many times before. But, each person is curious and they want to talk, to enjoin, to belong in some way. I take all of this into consideration when I interact with other people on that beach, even at that vulnerable and yes, dangerous time when I'm trying to get the kite into the water and off the beach.

So, I ask for patience, for consideration, and most of all for an open mind to discussing (already discussed) topics on the DBR.

Each professor looked at each of us with all of this in mind. We should all do the same, in my opinion, I'm just sayin'.

Thanks guys for the board, the DBR, and for being part of this great Duke community,

dth.


A couple of points of clarification that may help:

1. If you believe you have something NEW to add to a topic that is otherwise considered passé – say stall ball – then by all means, you should feel free to post it. For example, as a mod, I think this would be an entirely appropriate post:

I was watching the UVA-Arizona game over the weekend, and I noticed that UVA went into their version of stall ball with a 20 point lead and 5 mins to go at Tuscon. (Way to go, Hoos, on the big early season win!) I noticed a big difference between how they executed stall ball and how we did it in our 30-point win over Princeton tonight. UVA brought a big man – in this case, Adrien Joseph – out to the top of the key to serve as a relief valve if the guards got into trouble as they kept the ball out above the top of the key. But in our game, I noticed that neither Kyle nor Lance came up top – they just stayed down in the post.

Now, can anybody explain this to me? Do you think this was a mistake by the players, or is it K’s stall ball strategy to keep the big men as far from the ball as possible?

2. If you’re a newbie to DBR, first of all, I recommend following dw0827’s advice earlier in this thread, or that of several of the mods that have posted – lurk for a while, get familiar with the board, and read the sticky threads. Try PMing a moderator if you’re confused about a thread or a post or why a moderator took a specific action. And when you feel ready to post and have something to say, be polite, back up your assertions with observations, other facts, or citations when possible, and be prepared to accept the criticism (hopefully constructive) that may come your way. For example, if a newbie wanted to post about stall ball, but didn’t see the references to it in the Reference Guide or other posts, this would be an acceptable post:

I’m new here, and I have a question. While watching us play in the Maui Invitational this week, I noticed that at the end of each game, when we had big leads, we backed off of our running offense to try and take time off the clock. But we didn’t score much out of this offense, and the passive approach on offense seemed to carry over to our defense, too. So, while we won all three games, the opponents were able to really cut into the victory margins because we weren’t scoring, and we weren’t preventing them from scoring. Can someone explain how this strategy is really supposed to work? If this has been discussed before, can you point me to where I can read it? Thanks!

As a moderator, I might let the post stand, or I might delete it, but either way, I'd respond to the poster indicating that this was a well-covered topic in other threads, and that more info can be found by reading certain previous posts. Then, I'd hope to be able to send them links to the posts/threads where they could learn more.

3. What all of us mods are harping about are the posts like this:

I HATE STALL BALL!!! Every game when we have even just a little bit of a lead in the last five minutes, K goes into our “stall ball” offense, and EVERY TIME, the other team makes up ground on us. We almost lost to Carolina that way! I think K should scrap the stall ball offense and we should just keep attacking. Beat ‘em by 30!!!
This is the kind of thing we get repeatedly.

And to further your metaphor, while we try to be patient, imagine a school bus full of kids on a field trip, and every 2 minutes, one of them is coming up to you, the chaperone, and saying “Are we there yet?” The trip is 6 hours long, and the first kid shows up after you’re only 15 minutes gone from the school parking lot. Any chance you might lose your patience? Now, imagine that these children are instead high schoolers, but they’re doing the same thing. Wouldn’t you expect just a little more maturity from them? And after four hours of it, any chance you might beat your head against the back of the seat in front of you and say “Auugh...make it stop...make it stop...”??

[Lord Ash]

Just some personal thoughts I wanted to share, primarily because I do love DBR and respect it as one of the VERY few bastions of maturity left on the internet, but also because I have some experience in managing large forums:

On the forum I admin, which does have a several thousand members and is rather prominent in its respective community (in fact, it is the premier site of its type and is a multiple award winner,) I instruct my mods that if they feel that a post is worthless and adds nothing to the forum, or a discussion needs to be quashed, they should do it with a clear, no frills, no editorial explanation and a swift lock. I run a TIGHT ship, and have OFTEN been accused of being a bit of a dictator, but my forum has always maintained a VERY high level of maturity; we have many older members, and I don't want them to have to put up with the often aggressive, thoughtless approach many younger folks take on the internet today.

In addition, mods are indeed held to a MUCH higher standard than regular members. They need to be clear and unambiguous for the benefit of their community, and importantly they need to ensure that no personal issues in any way, shape, or form are ever leaked into the community at large, especially if that community is one that prides itself on maturity and a noted lack of flaming or arguing. Mods must be above all personal issues, and in many ways have to approach their forum that they love so much in a totally different way than the average person. I find myself wondering if that is the case here, especially considering some of the comments aimed at some non-admins, namely Watzone and Feldspar (neither of whom I know from a hill of beans, mind you.)

This is nothing personal against Throaty or anyone else; I know nothing about the personal politics of this board, I don't know Throaty at all and cannot say that I remember any post of his other than the Guide; heck, like most folks didn't even KNOW there was a DBR board for years and years:)

I honestly think some of the more uneasy thoughts that have been shared do have some legitimacy, and the feelings behind them are worth considering when moving forward. I think that the moderate approach of DBR is TREASURED by ALL of the posters here, new and old, and of course this should remain a priority; indeed, THE priority. I think that patience with the newer folks, even when they say dumb stuff, is essential, as long as the intent behind the dumb posts isn't openly destructive or combatitive. Trolls should absolutely be slapped with a ban instantly, but the *best* way to deal with a poor argument or shallow post is usually with a thoughtful response, such as some of the ones that came early on in the "stall ball" post about WHY the game slowed down. For many people who aren't as well versed in basketball they may not have even NOTICED the aspects of the game that caused the slow down; I know I didn't notice a lot of what people said! I think that with honest, kind responses ANY conversation can be had, and can be appreciated by all of us here at DBR.

Anyway, I do appreciate the willingness to have this conversation; in the end you may have one or two people still upset, but I think sometimes a good hashing out of problems can go a long way towards making things even better!

And btw, as a cheap plug, anyone interested in the Total War video game series and some serious wargaming, please do stop by and say hi!

www.thelordz.co.uk
forum.thelordz.co.uk

(You didn't think the Lord part of my name was ego, did you? :D )

[Lord Ash]

Heh. This elementary school teacher has been on MANY a bus trip like that. I have the patience of a saint.

And when that runs out, I can scare a kid to tears in about a sentence and a half. I own a whistle, and I have never, EVER used it, no matter HOW loud that lunchroom gets. :D

[bfree]

I'm sure a few of you will find it funny.

There's a hilarious story about Aaron Sorkin visiting the Television Without Pity Forum for the West Wing and getting totally smacked around by a moderator (which would be equivalent of us telling Johnny Dawkins that his post about why Duke slows down the tempo sometimes is beating a dead horse). He got so freaked out he put the experience into the fantastic season three episode, "The US Poet Laureate,"

You can read the script at:

http://www.twiztv.com/cgi-bin/thewestwing.cgi?episode=http://dmca.free.fr/scripts/thewestwing/season3/thewestwing-316.txt

And you can read a TWOP moderator's reaction to the episode (click the next page for a first class rant/explanation of the need for forum moderators):

http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/portal/site/TelevisionWithoutPity/menuitem.766266d5c663f366b180b41045001d30/?vgnextoid=055b09140e2a2110VgnVCM1000006dc1d240RCR D&currentPage=10&ShowName=The+West+Wing

A choice quote:

JOSH
Yeah?

He turns and waits as she walks towards him.

C.J.
The Federal Page of the Washington Post just called Carol to confirm that you're the
Josh Lyman who stated on an Internet website that the White House could order a GAO
review on anything it wants.

JOSH
Without threatening the separation of powers is what I was saying.

C.J.
You posted on a web site?

Donna emerges from a door behind C.J., and they exchange a look.

JOSH
I was communicating with the people.

C.J.
Really?

Josh is momentarily distracted watching Donna walk past him into his office. Then he
steps closer to C.J. and speaks in a hushed voice.

JOSH
C.J., it's a... crazy place. It's got this dictatorial leader, who I'm sure wears a muumuu
and chain smokes Parliaments. [makes a smoking gesture with his fingers]

C.J.
What did you go there for in the first place?

JOSH
It's called LemonLyman.com.

C.J. gives him a pointed shove in the direction of his office. They walk a few paces and
stop outside the doorway.

C.J.
Let me explain something to you, this is sort of my field. The people on these sites?
They're the cast of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest."

Donna picks up her jacket inside the office and walks out between the two of them.

C.J. [cont]
The muumuu wearing Parliament smoker? That's Nurse Ratched. When Nurse Ratched is unhappy,
the patients are unhappy. You? You're McMurphy. You swoop in there with your card games
and your fishing trips...

JOSH
[shrugging defensively] I didn't swoop in, I came in exactly the same way everybody else did.

C.J.
Well, now I'm telling you to open the ward room window and climb on out before they give you
a pre-frontal lobotomy, and I have to smother you with a pillow.

Josh regards her in silence for a moment.

JOSH
You're Chief Brom-

C.J.
I'm Chief Bromden, yes, at this particular moment. I'm assigning an intern from the press
office to that web site. They're going to check it every night before they go home. If they
discover you've been there, I'm going to shove a motherboard so far up your ^$%^$%^$%...

Josh looks down at the floor.

C.J.
What?

JOSH
[with a slight shrug] Well... technically, I outrank you.

C.J.
[shouting] So far up your ^$%^$%^$%!

JOSH
[quickly] Okay.

[Stray Gator]

I agree that this has been a beneficial and timely exercise, and I'm glad Jumbo introduced the subject for discussion. Once the curtain goes up on basketball season, the crowd naturally picks up--some interested observers wandering in just to see what's going on, some past participants returning to resume conversations carried over from past seasons, and, inevitably, some newcomers wanting to join in the festivities. Everyone, including the moderators, can learn something valuable from a collective "re-orientation" to and reexamination of the DBR's "community standards." Moreover, an open exchange in which moderators and posters and lurkers alike can share their their respective perceptions about ways to improve the forum, and thereby acquire a better understanding of their respective concerns or reasons for discontent, should help to promote positive changes on all sides.

Based on what I'm seeing from the views expressed so far, I'll offer a few observations:

1. Established, longtime posters who have "been at the table" and demonstrated their willingness to maintain the standards of conduct and discourse that the site owners prefer have earned the right to enjoy a little more freedom and latitude in posting. But with those "privileges" comes a corresponding obligation--to bear the primary responsibility for setting a good example and ensuring that the "friendly neighborhood pub" atmosphere is preserved by helping newcomers who are unfamiliar with this environment learn what the DBR culture is all about. Yes, it's exasperating to see the same complaints and questions raised repeatedly, season after season, when those issues have been addressed countless times. And it's no solution to say the longtime residents should just ignore those threads when a newbie comes in looking for an explanation, because if the "residents" don't respond, then we're accused of being "unreceptive." But maybe there's a happy medium. In short, some of us oldtimers could be more hospitable and helpful to the newcomers.

2. Newcomers who have no familiarity with the prevailing atmosphere and tradition of this site need to understand when they come through the door that in the DBR forums, more so than on most other sports message boards, quality is prized above quantity, and content counts more than volume. Newcomers who share those values are welcome and are encouraged to participate; but if they truly share those values--and presumably that's why they are attracted to the site and have a desire to join--they will appreciate the need to observe carefully and tread lightly until they can absorb the customs and feel comfortable fitting in. Conversely, those who just want to barge in, jump up on the table, and vent or complain or criticize should do themselves and all of us a favor by taking it somewhere else. And there are plenty of options out there if "rough-and-tumble" is your cup of tea. In short, some of the newcomers could be more patient and respectful of the culture.

3. The main complaint lodged by posters seems to be that the moderators are inconsistent in their interpretation and enforcement of the rules. The main complaint lodged by moderators seems to be that some posters either ignore or persistently flaunt the rules. There is probably some truth to both charges. But I can assure you that none of the moderators wants to assume a stern "my way or the highway" posture, mainly because it's incompatible with the very culture we're all trying to promote and perpetuate. Having heard the feedback in this thread and resulting discussions on the moderators' board, I think the moderators will endeavoir to be responsive to the concerns being expressed. OTOH, I believe many posters underestimate the amount of time and attention that moderators already spend consulting on the proper interpretation of the rules in a sincere effort to ensure that those rules are applied as fairly and evenhandedly as humanly possible. In my experience, only those posters with repeated serious infractions or obvious interlopers need worry about suspension or revocation of posting privileges. But all posters should remain mindful of this fact: When someone like that is expelled, it's for the benefit of the whole community--i.e., to maintain the level of civility and mutual respect that the site owners and regular guests prefer--not because the moderators enjoy imposing punitive measures.

4. Many of the problems about which people on both sides are complaining could be substantially alleviated if everyone--posters and moderators alike--would simply pause before acting and ask themselves whether what they're about to do is appropriate to this forum, is likely to result in a positive contribution of which they will be proud, and is something that will seem justified in retrospect.

[JasonEvans]

Damn, I was gonna post exactly the same thing Stray said before he beat me to it ;)

There are a couple points I want to add to his elloquent words--

Firstly, this thread has been quite useful to the mods in terms of letting us know what the community was thinking. Sure there have been a few folks who took it as a chance to be snarky and mean, but there haev also been a number of valuable posters with sterling reputations who have spoken up to let us know areas where the moderators could act/post differently... and that is very useful. Trust me, the mods have been discussing this and we are prepared to make changes to our habits in an effort to repsond to the wishes of the community.

Secondly, we are all only human. Goodness knows, with my posting volume, there are a number of posts I have written over the years that I look back upon and say, "what was I thinking!?!?!" Heck, there are posts like that from just the past few days for me. What is my point? Well, I just want to say that the mods are human. We make mistakes just like the rest of ya'll. I can safely say though, that without exception every single mod wants the DBR to be a better place and we do not want it to be some small exclusive playground for only us and our best friends.

The other thing about being human and making mistakes is that we, the mods, are different. There are times I read a post and think nothing of it and then I come back to it later and see that a different mod gave an infraction to the poster. There are times I give an infraction to a post that I know other mods have read and not responded to but I think it deserves a response. I suppose that makes us inconsistent. Seeing as we are not robots and we bring different personalities to the table I fear that is just something the community is going to have to live with. That said, one infraction never got anyone in any lasting trouble. This place is intentionally deigned so that it takes multiple infractions for you to get banned and your first banning is almost always a very short-term one. Frankly, very, very few posters have ever been given even a short time-out from DBR and I don't think anyone ever has without earning infraction points from multiple mods. In other words, if you get banned, several people felt you deserved it.

On a personal note, I want to thank all the folks on DBR for helping to make this such a fabulous place to hang out. I love stopping by this neighborhood pub and think it is as fun a place to hang out as anywhere on the net. My wife hates all of ya'll but I love it here.

-Jason "I am eager for another game so we can put some of the tension of the past few days behind us" Evans

[OldPhiKap]

This is not terribly complicated.

1. All forums need boundaries. Someone has to set them. There will be friction along the gray line.

2. The owners get to set the boundaries. That's America.

3. The key principal is to be respectful and considerate to each other. For newer posters, it means respecting the fact that there are boundaries and "sore spots" that you might bump into accidentally. For older posters, it means being patient with folks who make observations that you may find tiresome.

4. There is no point in trying to belittle each other. Belittle Carolina instead.

-- OPK

[hughgs]

Clarification, please.

I have heard of reporting questionable posts. How does one do that? I have heard that there is a button or such to report posts. I have not been able to find that place. Additionally, what do the mods want in such a report? An explanation of what we think is improper or offensive or just notification of the post so that the mod can make a determination?

There's a triangle in the upper right corner of each post. I' don't know what they need, but I would assume they would want a dispassionate reason that the poster should be sanctioned.

[Indoor66]

There's a triangle in the upper right corner of each post. I' don't know what they need, but I would assume they would want a dispassionate reason that the poster should be sanctioned.

Thanks. I have looked for that and missed it until you pointed it out.

[rsvman]

From the "Slow Down" Thread, First Response, Throatybeard: "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop..."
.

Does the board have a search function? And, if so, does it reach into the days prior to this new(ish) system?

I ask this because if it does it would be relatively simple for somebody like throaty to post, "This has been discussed at great length in the past. Please do a search and read up on the prior discussions, and then come back and post if you have a new angle/wrinkle you would like to discuss. Thank you," instead of "make it stop....make it stop...", which I think is over the line, especially for a moderator.

At the very least, the moderators have to make every effort to avoid posting things that could be perceived as attacks, or very rude, dismissive responses to somebody's question/point. Otherwise, who moderates the moderators? The wisest move would've been to appoint only the most level-headed, kind-hearted people as moderators in the first place.

[billybreen]

Does the board have a search function? And, if so, does it reach into the days prior to this new(ish) system?

I ask this because if it does it would be relatively simple for somebody like throaty to post, "This has been discussed at great length in the past. Please do a search and read up on the prior discussions, and then come back and post if you have a new angle/wrinkle you would like to discuss. Thank you," instead of "make it stop....make it stop...", which I think is over the line, especially for a moderator.

At the very least, the moderators have to make every effort to avoid posting things that could be perceived as attacks, or very rude, dismissive responses to somebody's question/point. Otherwise, who moderates the moderators? The wisest move would've been to appoint only the most level-headed, kind-hearted people as moderators in the first place.

The current board has a search function, but it only covers posts made to this software. My historical archive covers things from late 2004 until early 2007 (I think).

In fact, a quick search shows a post from March 2005 where you grudgingly defended stall-ball (http://www.snrub.com:81/ArchiveMirror/Search.aspx?q=stallball) :)

[throatybeard]

That thread is really funny, actually--Karl Beem's terse "you're wrong."

Ah yes, RSV, Qui custodiet ipsos custodies? Or as Dre says, "everywhere that I go, ain't the same as befo."

Usually what we do is a thread merge.

[billybreen]

That thread is really funny, actually--Karl Beem's terse "you're wrong."

Ah yes, RSV, Qui custodiet ipsos custodies? Or as Dre says, "everywhere that I go, ain't the same as befo."

Usually what we do is a thread merge.

It's also interesting to see how many of the old threads are debating DBR culture, quality of discourse on the boards, etc. Complaints that the boards at time X are dramatically inferior to the boards at time X-1 are as old as the boards (well, at least as old as time 0+1 because the first post presumably wasn't about how much the board now sucks).

In conclusion: discussion of board culture? Auugh...make it stop...make it stop...

[throatybeard]

In conclusion: discussion of board culture? Auugh...make it stop...make it stop...

LOL. I remember at one point, circa 2001, WIDukie said "Aren't 80% of all discussions on the DBR about civility on the DBR?"

[Constantstrain 81]

Great thread. I'm just getting on. DBR is a breath of fresh air. Check out Inside Carolina's forums for just a few minutes to see utter insanity. I know on DBR that I'm going to get considered thoughts and opinions. If not, someone (or several someone's) is going the call the poster on it. Here, we can give our opinion, try to back it up, and above all - remain civil.

I like the poster earlier in this thread who wrote something along the lines of "don't post anything here that you wouldn't want to say in front of the person you are writing about." That is so true. Dignity and respect (not to mention reason) are high standards to shoot for.

Thanks DBR!

[JBDuke]

There's a triangle in the upper right corner of each post. I' don't know what they need, but I would assume they would want a dispassionate reason that the poster should be sanctioned.


Thanks. I have looked for that and missed it until you pointed it out.

Why do I bother posting (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=62119&postcount=62)if you guys aren't going to read?

[Indoor66]

Why do I bother posting (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=62119&postcount=62)if you guys aren't going to read?

Sorry - I saw the 2nd post first.

[hughgs]

Why do I bother posting (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=62119&postcount=62)if you guys aren't going to read?

I saw the question before I saw your answer. Trust me, I would rather someone else post the answer than post it myself and possibly be wrong!

[RelativeWays]

Oh, internets! Even DBR is not immune to the drama. Anyway, I've been here for maybe 7 months and I think pretty highly of it. There may be a slight air of elitism, but I think that sort of territorial pissing is endemic of internet message boards regardless of where you go. This is by far one of the better places to discuss sports, Duke sports in particular, compared to the unwashed philistines that populate other sports forums.

Unwashed philistines....hows that for elitism? I think this place is pretty forgiving to newbs.

[captmojo]

Oh, internets! Even DBR is not immune to the drama. Anyway, I've been here for maybe 7 months and I think pretty highly of it. There may be a slight air of elitism, but I think that sort of territorial pissing is endemic of internet message boards regardless of where you go. This is by far one of the better places to discuss sports, Duke sports in particular, compared to the unwashed philistines that populate other sports forums.

Unwashed philistines....hows that for elitism? I think this place is pretty forgiving to newbs.

Nothing personal but my family heritage is Philistine. I need to shower.:D

[RelativeWays]

Nothing personal but my family heritage is Philistine. I need to shower.:D

Then shouldn't it be me who says "nothing personal" since I stated your ancestral line is hygiene challenged? ;)

[captmojo]

Then shouldn't it be me who says "nothing personal" since I stated your ancestral line is hygiene challenged? ;)

I don't have that much pride. Although, Goliath was a hell of center on our team.

[feldspar]

I took some time off from the board (hey, 24 hours is a lot for me :)) and I decided that it's time for me to take Mullet's advice.

I've been too hard on the moderators, and for that I apologize. But I want them and everybody to know that, during the course of this discussion, it has only been because I want what's best for the board. In that zeal, I've gone too far on several occasions and offer my apologies.

It's time (for me at least) to move on from this discussion, be a productive--but appropriately playful and engaging--member of the board and let the moderators do their job.

Go Duke.

[greybeard]

Very useful thread. Puts in a somewhat more palatable light some of the rudeness I have seen and encountered here.

A suggestion. If a mod is a participant in the substance of a thread, he should act like it. If he thinks that a mod "intervention" is warranted, even as in a soft prodding of some sort, he should call in another mod. The other mod should be clear as to his purpose, that it is to educate and only that. Probably should be a personal e-mail.

Personally, if I express a view and someone who I am debating a point of substance with, becomes all hauty on me, I take offense, or at least have an urge to strike back in kind. I didn't get before this thread that the offender could actually be doing his "job" while at the same time playing the game. I also didn't get that old timers had an unannounced gate-keeper's prerogative to behave similarly. Useful to know.

By the way, in my view, facts, in particular statistics, do not exactly fit the world of sports. An overemphasis on them, in my view, does sports, basketball in particular, a disservice. Physical activity itself, especially in a fluid and strategic game like basketball is not mathematics. Nor is it social science.

Read Halberstams' book on the Trailblazers; to me the most interesting things about that book have nothing to do with supported theory. Halberstam's description of the importance of a player's intelligent without-the-ball movement to create space has no imperical underpinnings. Only Dr. Ramsey's perceptions about one player's value to his team.

Does putting forth such a theory become more or less useful if it sites to Halberstam's book? And, would Halberstam's book constitute a factual predicate for a poster's perspective? What if a poster had the same perspective as Dr. Frank but had never heard of him? What if Dr. Frank never even lived?

Anyway, like I said, a very worthwhile thread.

[Jumbo]

Very useful thread. Puts in a somewhat more palatable light some of the rudeness I have seen and encountered here.

A suggestion. If a mod is a participant in the substance of a thread, he should act like it. If he thinks that a mod "intervention" is warranted, even as in a soft prodding of some sort, he should call in another mod. The other mod should be clear as to his purpose, that it is to educate and only that. Probably should be a personal e-mail.

Personally, if I express a view and someone who I am debating a point of substance with, becomes all hauty on me, I take offense, or at least have an urge to strike back in kind. I didn't get before this thread that the offender could actually be doing his "job" while at the same time playing the game. I also didn't get that old timers had an unannounced gate-keeper's prerogative to behave similarly. Useful to know.

As moderators, we don't actually "moderate" threads in which we have posted.

[greybeard]

As moderators, we don't actually "moderate" threads in which we have posted.

That would be news to me. Perhaps moderators in such circumstances are only exercising the prerogatives of old-time gatekeepers. A rose by any other name . . . . My suggestion still stands, gatekeepers included. It is difficult to know whether you are being a wise sage or just a wise whatever. While I find this thread interesting and useful, I am sure I will remain unclear on that issue forever. Sorry, just the way I see it.

[Jeffrey]

As moderators, we don't actually "moderate" threads in which we have posted.

Hi Jumbo,

When the mod's post says, "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop.....", then it sure does appear like an attempt to moderate. Professionally? Not in my opinion. Attempt, by a moderator, to control the thread (i.e. moderate)? IMO, yes.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[JBDuke]

Hi Jumbo,

When the mod's post says, "Auugh...make it stop...make it stop.....", then it sure does appear like an attempt to moderate. Professionally? Not in my opinion. Attempt, by a moderator, to control the thread (i.e. moderate)? IMO, yes.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

What Jumbo is saying is that if we post in a thread and get involved in discussion, we let the other mods handle any moderating functions, like deleting posts, issuing warnings or citations, etc. Responding with a post about the inanity of rehashing an old topic isn't moderating in that sense.

And keep in mind that this is more of a guideline for us mods than a "rule". I'm sure there have been exceptions.

[Jeffrey]

What Jumbo is saying is that if we post in a thread and get involved in discussion, we let the other mods handle any moderating functions, like deleting posts, issuing warnings or citations, etc. Responding with a post about the inanity of rehashing an old topic isn't moderating in that sense.

Hi JB,

If that person is not serving as a mod and is just another poster (like me), then why are they allowed to be treat another member in that manner? Are all DBR members allowed, and does the site owner desire for us, to treat each other that way? And even if we are allowed to treat each other less than kind, why aren't the mod's expected to lead-by-example and raise the bar?

If I am not allowed to debate this subject with a mod, then please let me know and I will go back to the newbie table and shut the h*ll up! :) I am sincerely not trying to upset mod's and hope I am not coming across that way.

IMO, I am better than no one here, AND no one here is better than me!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[billybreen]

Hi JB,

If that person is not serving as a mod and is just another poster (like me), then why are they allowed to be treat another member in that manner? Are all DBR members allowed, and does the site owner desire for us, to treat each other that way? And even if we are allowed to treat each other less than kind, why aren't the mod's expected to lead-by-example and raise the bar?

If I am not allowed to debate this subject with a mod, then please let me know and I will go back to the newbie table and shut the h*ll up! :) I am sincerely not trying to upset mod's and hope I am not coming across that way.

IMO, I am better than no one here, AND no one here is better than me!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

There was a thorough discussion of this point elsewhere in the thread, I believe. The opinion of many, including this non-mod, is that Throaty's response was not an attack on the poster or outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. It may not have been gentle as a kiss, but it was far from cruel and unusual.

[greybeard]

There was a thorough discussion of this point elsewhere in the thread, I believe. The opinion of many, including this non-mod, is that Throaty's response was not an attack on the poster or outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. It may not have been gentle as a kiss, but it was far from cruel and unusual.

Nice, but I think the issue on the table is a different one.

The clear implication through this point in the thread, by mods and other senior posters alike, is that there is and always has been a secret, special double standard that permits such gatekeepers to get away with stuff that others would be chastized, neigh potentially banned, for. And lest we forget, I have read on this thread at least a dozen times (chosen out of the air, I actually think it was way more) flat out statements by the gatekeepers that those who don't like the double standard should go elsewhere.

On the table is the question, "Are we hearing you right, and, if so, where's the civility in that?"

[Jumbo]

Hi JB,

If that person is not serving as a mod and is just another poster (like me), then why are they allowed to be treat another member in that manner? Are all DBR members allowed, and does the site owner desire for us, to treat each other that way? And even if we are allowed to treat each other less than kind, why aren't the mod's expected to lead-by-example and raise the bar?

If I am not allowed to debate this subject with a mod, then please let me know and I will go back to the newbie table and shut the h*ll up! :) I am sincerely not trying to upset mod's and hope I am not coming across that way.

IMO, I am better than no one here, AND no one here is better than me!

Best regards,
Jeffrey


Have you read this thread? We all agreed that such responses, in general, aren't preferred, but a certain amount of humor and snark will always be ok. It's difficult to come up with a hard and fast rule, and we're all going to try to treat each other with more respect. That said, just as people believe Throatybeard overreacted to the original post, others have certainly overreacted to his quip, too.

[Jumbo]

That would be news to me. Perhaps moderators in such circumstances are only exercising the prerogatives of old-time gatekeepers. A rose by any other name . . . . My suggestion still stands, gatekeepers included. It is difficult to know whether you are being a wise sage or just a wise whatever. While I find this thread interesting and useful, I am sure I will remain unclear on that issue forever. Sorry, just the way I see it.

Greybeard,
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

[Jumbo]

The clear implication through this point in the thread, by mods and other senior posters alike, is that there is and always has been a secret, special double standard that permits such gatekeepers to get away with stuff that others would be chastized, neigh potentially banned, for.

Nope. Not even close.


And lest we forget, I have read on this thread at least a dozen times (chosen out of the air, I actually think it was way more) flat out statements by the gatekeepers that those who don't like the double standard should go elsewhere.

Nice straw man. There is no double standard. It has been said, though, that if you don't like the way DBR operates, you are free to leave an post somewhere else more to your liking. So either you play by the rules and operate as a member of this community, or you can find a community that suits you (you referring to any poster). What will not be tolerated is posters who feel they can come walk into our friendly pub and loudly demand that the other patrons comform to their way of doing things. It's really that simple.

[greybeard]

Nope. Not even close.



Nice straw man. There is no double standard. It has been said, though, that if you don't like the way DBR operates, you are free to leave an post somewhere else more to your liking. So either you play by the rules and operate as a member of this community, or you can find a community that suits you (you referring to any poster). What will not be tolerated is posters who feel they can come walk into our friendly pub and loudly demand that the other patrons comform to their way of doing things. It's really that simple.

Nothing is that simple, certainly not the issue that we speak of. Case you cannot tell, many people share the perceptions that I espoused. Are you suggesting we are "that simple."

I simply asked a straightforward question. Implicit was the question "are you the mods and gatekeepers willing to take as well as you give?" I take it by your unwillingness to give a straight answer that you are. Them rules are fine with me. Always have been. ;)

[Jumbo]

Nothing is that simple, certainly not the issue that we speak of. Case you cannot tell, many people share the perceptions that I espoused. Are you suggesting we are "that simple."

I simply asked a straightforward question. Implicit was the question "are you the mods and gatekeepers willing to take as well as you give?" I take it by your unwillingness to give a straight answer that you are. Them rules are fine with me. Always have been. ;)

I can assure you that nothing about your question was straightforward. And you have not grasped the issue at hand. This has been a very productive thread for the rest of the community, and it will be a shame if your struggle to understand the points espoused prevents you from benefiting from it.

[JasonEvans]

The clear implication through this point in the thread, by mods and other senior posters alike, is that there is and always has been a secret, special double standard that permits such gatekeepers to get away with stuff that others would be chastized, neigh potentially banned, for. And lest we forget, I have read on this thread at least a dozen times (chosen out of the air, I actually think it was way more) flat out statements by the gatekeepers that those who don't like the double standard should go elsewhere.

On the table is the question, "Are we hearing you right, and, if so, where's the civility in that?"

While Jumbo dismissed this statement with a simple "nope, not even close" I wanted to address it with a bit more clarity.

Firstly, it is possible for mods to get infractions from other mods. Everyone is asked to conform to the board's standards... period... end of story. The mods police each other the same way we police the rest of the community. We would be more likely to deal with something offensive over PM or on the moderator's board rather than give an infraction because it would be a serious situation to have a mod move into infraction territory. Still, it does happen-- there have been a couple times where I have told some other mod that I felt their conduct was perhaps a bit too strident or provocative. We are not perfect and do not pretend to be so.

I would also add that there is a small double-standard on these board. Folks who are known and have reputations are probably going to be treated better or worse as a result of those reputations. I see nothing at all wrong with that. For example, a longtime poster with a sterling reputation for intelligent conversation and civil conduct would be likely to get just a warning or a PM from a mod rather than an infraction if they posted something provocative. Essentially, we would give someone like that the benefit of the doubt on their first offense. I fail to see anything wrong with that. I think you earn your reputation here and if it is a good one you deserve a bit more slack than someone who is unknown.

I also will admit that some posters have bad reputations. There are not many of them but the mods often discuss people whose conduct we feel may be detrimental to the boards-- people who push the boards rules over and over again, almost prodding to see how far they can go without getting banned or who seem to not care if they do get banned. These people operate on a shorter leash-- no question about it. Just like the "good guys" have earned extra latitude, they have earned extra vigilance.

I am not sure if this is the double-standard that Greybeard got so worked up about. I get the feeling he may sense that it goes beyond the small degrees that I say exist. I think he is wrong. I am not going to name names, but I know for a fact that some of the most voluminous and well-known posters around here have gotten infractions in the past. Folks who are not at all known as troublemakers have crossed the line and gotten cited by a moderator. It does not happen often but I see it as proof that no one is above the standards of this forum.

I will say this-- one good thing that has come out of this thread is a realization by the mods that we must hold ourselves to an even higher standard. In conversation with other mods, I know we are going to seek to take an even higher road than we have taken in the past and -- as always -- you are encouraged to use the button to report a post even if it is from a mods. I assure you multiple mods look at every post that gets reported.

--Jason "this has been a useful thread" Evans

[Jeffrey]

Have you read this thread?

Hi Jumbo,

Be honest..... is this a sincere question or just an example of "a certain amount of humor and snark will always be ok"?

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Jeffrey]

I will say this-- one good thing that has come out of this thread is a realization by the mods that we must hold ourselves to an even higher standard. In conversation with other mods, I know we are going to seek to take an even higher road than we have taken in the past....

--Jason "this has been a useful thread" Evans

Hi Jason,

THANK YOU!

IMO, Duke has the classiest basketball program in the nation and I am thrilled to hear that the DBR mods are going to hold themselves to the same higher standard. After all, you'll are affiliated with Duke hoops.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Jumbo]

Hi Jumbo,

Be honest..... is this a sincere question or just an example of "a certain amount of humor and snark will always be ok"?

Best regards,
Jeffrey

It's a sincere question, because Greybeard's response showed little-to-no familiarity with the issues that had already been discussed at length and largely resolved. Why do you ask, Jeffrey?

[Jumbo]

Hi Jason,

THANK YOU!

IMO, Duke has the classiest basketball program in the nation and I am thrilled to hear that the DBR mods are going to hold themselves to the same higher standard. After all, you'll are affiliated with Duke hoops.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

The DBR moderators are not affiliated with Duke basketball. Nor is the Duke Basketball Report, for that matter, though I'd let the site owners speak to that.

[Lord Ash]

I am very thankful for the reactions of the various mods, and glad that the various complaints, as modest as they are, have been taken with appropriate seriousness. Thanks for keeping the riff raff out of DBR!

[Jeffrey]

It's a sincere question, because Greybeard's response showed little-to-no familiarity with the issues that had already been discussed at length and largely resolved. Why do you ask, Jeffrey?

Hi Jumbo,

Because you asked me the question, not Greybeard.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Jeffrey]

The DBR moderators are not affiliated with Duke basketball. Nor is the Duke Basketball Report, for that matter, though I'd let the site owners speak to that.

Hi Jumbo,

Sorry, I knew that.... just a bad choice of words.

The point I failed to make is that I think that DBR is by far the best Duke Basketball site, Duke has the premiere basketball program in the nation, and DBR (and its mods) should strive to match that level of professionalism, class, and integrity.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Wander]

There is definitely a little bit of a condescending attitude on these boards, aside from just sarcastic one-liners that are "tavern talk" or whatever analogy you all are making. I really don't know how anyone can deny that with a straight face.

Before anyone jumps on me for "why are here then," I'll tell you. I'm here because it's a great place for info on the team, and because I think there are a lot of posters, such as Jumbo, watzone, and feldspar to name a few, who are especially worth listening to. And as long as that's the case, I'll find this a site worth coming to, no matter how the boards are run.

That said, I think there are at least a couple easy steps to improve the condescending attitude withot lessening the quality of the board as a whole. I think guys like Jumbo are great mods, but some of the others... well, without naming names, I'll just say I honestly have absolutely no idea why some of the mods are mods given their holier than thou crap and lack of contribution to discussion. Get rid of the mods that need to be gotten rid of and I think things will improve significantly.

[Chard]

Would term limits for moderators be a useful suggestion?

[Indoor66]

Would term limits for moderators be a useful suggestion?

Maybe, maybe not, but definitely for Senators and Congressmen.

[throatybeard]

Would term limits for moderators be a useful suggestion?

It might, but I'd be surprised if sufficient numbers of new mods could be recruited on an ongoing basis. It's volunteer work. And it's a lot more fun to complain about the authorities than it is to volunteer to be a putative authority.

[billybreen]

It might, but I'd be surprised if sufficient numbers of new mods could be recruited on an ongoing basis. It's volunteer work. And it's a lot more fun to complain about the authorities than it is to volunteer to be a putative authority.

I expect voluntary attrition to occur at a more rapid rate than would be achieved by term limits. Moderating sucks.

[Chard]

It might, but I'd be surprised if sufficient numbers of new mods could be recruited on an ongoing basis. It's volunteer work. And it's a lot more fun to complain about the authorities than it is to volunteer to be a putative authority.

In that case, I'll volunteer for the next round with my own self imposed term limit.