Golden-Road.net
Front Office => The Front Office => Topic started by: DarkShockBro on December 08, 2012, 09:12:41 PM
-
Alright, guys. This is something that's been annoying me for awhile, and I really need it to get off my chest.
*Ranting time.*
This site is driving everyone, especially me, nuts. I'm not kidding, EVERYTHING is during into a giant fight. Why? I'm not entirely sure, but I'll list why I think this is the case. No one can just drop things, and instead choose to chastise EVERY SINGLE thing that's posted on the site. Is anyone wondering why there aren't many contributing members on this site? I'll tell you why, because no one wants to get yelled at by people on the internet for their opinions or statements.
I could go on for HOURS listing all of the hateful bulls*** I've seen on this site in response to people listing their opinions and statements. And to be honest, I'm sick of it. I'm not going to give any examples, because it's too f***ing prominent for me to cover in one thread. Has this site truly developed into a battlefield where no one wins and everyone lobs grenades at each other? I think it has. Does this sound like a good site to you? No, it doesn't.
My message: think about how YOU look before you post your message about someone else, because if you don't, you'll contribute to this war. Swallow your pride, and let people be content about posting opinions or information, no matter how s***ty you think they are. I'm literally begging you; I'm starting a THREAD to express how I feel. That's how pissed off I am. I have TRIED to let this behavior go, but I just can't do it anymore. Please stop the war.
*Ranting over.*
(takes a deep breath)
Think on that, please. Goodbye.
-
I think we all need to take this on board.
-
This site is driving everyone, especially me, nuts. I'm not kidding, EVERYTHING is during into a giant fight. Why? I'm not entirely sure, but I'll list why I think this is the case. No one can just drop things, and instead choose to chastise EVERY SINGLE thing that's posted on the site. Is anyone wondering why there aren't many contributing members on this site? I'll tell you why, because no one wants to get yelled at by people on the internet for their opinions or statements.
Interesting. I partly agree, but not in full. I tend to think the reverse order of you, but I respect your opinion; which is to say, you have a multitude of contributors leading to site decorum, rather than site decorum leading to site contributors. I actually post quite a bit less here these days because the member quality (no names, it's the site as a majority) is nowhere close to what it was.
My opinion is based from other pages, I've been on/run. When you have instability, members who don't have central enough of a focus tend to argue. On the most basic of levels, the question becomes what the future of the site is. Here, it's (sadly) become: "Do we want to be a game or discussion site?" This also turns to, in TTiR: "Are what Drew, Mike, etc. doing a positive thing for the show?" I personally don't think so, but this means nothing, in the scheme of things. The problem is having weak arguments for most of them, due to the collective intelligence of the site decreasing. So, what's the easy form of insult? The potshot, the insult, of the person. Ultimately, the insult should be of the opinion, not the person, with substantial evidence. When you lack the intelligence to do so, it devolves, and becomes primitive.
I look at my site, where not everyone totally agrees, but, you know what? We present our arguments logically, with precision, and jokes to keep it loose. It's why a site like Invision still works, it's why my site works. You must have intelligence to run a competent site, to have solid discussion, and less of these ad hominem attacks.
This needs to stop. But the way we get to doing this is maintaining the very high quality of standards of posting by its members the site had years ago. Our biggest arguments in 2006 were about Dom friggin' Casual appearing all over the pricing games. A amen font! To do this, what do we have to do? Get rid of the forum games, all of them. Out in Left Field is a discussion place, of other game shows, brief sports mentions, and RELEVANT obits. Not this junk about the best boy in Casablanca passing away, or a page full of forum games that wouldn't have lived a day under the old system. It's total BS. If your opinion isn't good, you don't contribute, you are out. That simple! Quality always comes prior to quantity, and this site held that for a good 6 years. Go back to that.
My message: think about how YOU look before you post your message about someone else, because if you don't, you'll contribute to this war. Swallow your pride, and let people be content about posting opinions or information, no matter how s***ty you think they are.
Again, I partly agree, but not in full. This goes beyond someone else. Look at your potential post about the show, your opinion, etc. Look at your post. Is it supported by evidence, history, etc.? If it looks stupid, don't post it. If you can't tell the difference, or continue to post this garbage, from attacking people, this isn't the site for you, just go away and/or be banned, as this isn't the site for you.
If your opinion (not stuff like the FPG stuff on sideshow, unacceptable on all counts) sucks, I'm going to call it, the opinion out. Attacking the person helps nobody and nothing. This site has and will be better than that. Unfounded or unsourced info is unacceptable. That's asking for lower quality, and why any of us would want this is beyond me. The opinions sucking needs to be with a change in site majority from bad users to good ones. That simple; less to call out.
There's a reason Steve Gavazzi has to belittle people more now, because they just don't get it. I agree about 99.9% of these callings out, because they are necessary. I feel I can safely speak for Steve here when I say that the forum would be much better if we had the types of users we did just 4 years ago.
For those of you who don't speak with proper grammar on a regular basis, throw out random shiite as fact, don't bother to make your point well, contribute nothing, can't run your own show (more than one person here, by the way), go away. That's cold, but I mean it at my core. Here's to a better 2013...though I have no hope of it happening.
-
Jon's post needs to be read a thousand times over by practically everyone who still comes to this site, because he has freaking nailed it.
I joined this site almost two years ago, well after the site went past its prime...even then, despite crap starting to flood the forums, the site was still a better place, namely because you could post 95% of the time without having the fear of getting jumped on with every last thing you say. Now the site is just a dump, with its members taking the junk and throwing at each other. It's like a third world country; nearly an anarchy.
This site can do better. It has done better. But the site is resting on its laurels and its past, and it's sickening. The site needs better expectations, simple as that.
Some of you may have realized the stop signs that are in my avatar, Jon's, and cu2010's, which say "Stop the Madness" in various languages. This is not only aimed at the severe low quality of the show itself, but the site and its members as well. Some of you need to think. If you can't do that competently, then do us all a favor and leave; good riddance.
I know I'm probably putting myself at risk of a ban for this, and you know what? I really don't care. If I get ignored and banned, the site continues on its bad streak, and I wouldn't want to come back anyway. I've said my peace on this. Thank you for reading.
-
Look at your potential post about the show, your opinion, etc. Look at your post. Is it supported by evidence, history, etc.? If it looks stupid, don't post it. If you can't tell the difference, or continue to post this garbage, from attacking people, this isn't the site for you, just go away and/or be banned, as this isn't the site for you.
I think this is a good description. Opinions leading to evidence leading to conclusions makes for coherant postings backed up by facts.
Somebody who I respect in the internet community recently alerted me that Craig Ferguson has three questions you should ask yourself before getting involved in a discussion.
It's also three things you should ask yourself before hitting that "Post" button:
Does this need to be said?
Does this need to be said by me?
Does this need to be said by me, now?
Anything else just clutters forums and takes up bandwidth.
-
I just want to highlight a portion of what prizes22 said:
To do this, what do we have to do? Get rid of the forum games, all of them. Out in Left Field is a discussion place, of other game shows, brief sports mentions, and RELEVANT obits. Not this junk about the best boy in Casablanca passing away, or a page full of forum games that wouldn't have lived a day under the old system. It's total BS.
This. I'm not one to stifle creativity or discussion, but looking in OILF and trying to pick out the actual topics from all the games is a chore. Looking at the OILF forum now, I see: Millionaire Game, Plinko Meets Chain Reaction, Switch Meets Chain Reaction, The Person Below Me, Final Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, and three obits for people I've never heard of. And that's just the first page! Out of 20 topics, over half of them (11) are way past left field. Several Whose Line games have already been banned, and there are a few others (like The Random Game) that I'd be happy to never see again.
Clean up OILF and get rid of these games, PLEASE.
(And Seth, if you're out there, maybe we should seriously look at adding an auto-lock function so that when threads reach the 30-day mark, they automatically lock to prevent random bumps like the ones in the First Run section just today.)
-
Well...this is all sort of true but the cursing and yelling isn't quite necessary.
It's why a site like Invision still works
Some would disagree :D (Not necessarily me, though.)
You must have intelligence to run a competent site
Is that a potshot at John/Marc/Seth?
For those of you who don't speak with proper grammar on a regular basis, throw out random shiite as fact, don't bother to make your point well, contribute nothing, can't run your own show (more than one person here, by the way), go away. That's cold, but I mean it at my core. Here's to a better 2013...though I have no hope of it happening.
I agree with most of this, but the "go away" I don't fully agree with, but that's probably neither here nor there.
I think one of the problems here is that everyone thinks they are better than someone else or some others. (This thread for example, everyone thinks they're better than some members elsewhere, etc, heck, I'm guilty too)
I think another problem is that when someone corrects someone else for saying or doing something wrong, they take it as a personal attack and do their damnedest to retaliate. It's like Marc said.
1. Do not flame or belittle someone for his or her opinions. We all think differently and may not agree with other's opinions. With that said, tasteful debate is encouraged! If you disagree with someone, please disagree with a little bit of “class”. DO NOT get personal with someone regarding an opinion that you may not agree with.
Tasteful debate is encouraged, tasteful being the key word.
Then there are the numerous forum games....this is a tough topic. Some are good and fun and get some participation, but some turn into places for 3 members to constantly post nonstop back and forth and raise their post-count exponentially each day. There's a reason "The Random Game" was Locked. Each OILF Game should be looked at to see if there are a good number of members posting regularly or if it is just 1 2 or 3 of the exact same people posting back and forth back and forth.
I think everyone just needs to calm down and realize that not everyone who quotes your post and says something contrary to your opinion is out to get you / personally attack you and if you think they are the best thing to do is report the post - not reply back with an attack of your own. Also, when one member is out of line, it is not the time to gang up on them in subsequent threads (See DJTorgo as a recent example, yes, his Signature was horrid, yes, the first post was pretty bad, and yes, the second post was really bad, but the discussion was supposed to be over.)
Taking potshots at members after they are banned in other threads or in the thread itself is of no use and serves no purpose whatsoever.
In summary, I think a lot of members are full of themselves (myself included, don't get me wrong here...) and need to rethink some posts (again myself included) in the future.
There's a huge difference between tasteful debates over TPiR related things and pissing contests over who did or said what.
Edit: Holy crap, Flerbert hit the nail on the head!
It's also three things you should ask yourself before hitting that "Post" button:
Does this need to be said?
Does this need to be said by me?
Does this need to be said by me, now?
Anything else just clutters forums and takes up bandwidth.
-
(And Seth, if you're out there, maybe we should seriously look at adding an auto-lock function so that when threads reach the 30-day mark, they automatically lock to prevent random bumps like the ones in the First Run section just today.)
The problem with this, though, is when people actually do have relevant information to post...I'll admit, though, I prefer the recaps all in the same area, so I can easily access ones near each other when I need to.
I will admit, since the topic was brought up, it seems like some members post simply to get their post count up....I don't think at all that this function should be disabled, but we do need to remember that quality, not quantity, should determine a person's posting status.
-
I do know marc posted in a thread before the 4th of july that he has no intentions of steering this site back to what it used to be and did say that if it had not been for what has gone into developing this site, it would have been gone a long time ago.
-
@Punchboard: I agree with you about the recaps, but the key phrase is "relevant information." The last few times I've seen a recap thread bumped past the 30-day mark, it was for something like "Rerun today!" or "Happy Halloween," or for something equally pointless. I lurked around here for several years before joining up, and offhand I can't think of any recap bump past the 30-day mark that was relevant, and a whole mess of them that were so far past "irrelevant" it was sad.
GRN's problems aren't going to go away overnight. But it looks like Seth himself is starting to take a firmer hand when it comes to the disruptive elements around here, and I think that's a good thing. Invision really doesn't work because their moderation is a joke, and the same can be said for the official PiR boards.
And I want to get this off my chest as long as the floor is open. I know this is an Internet forum and not everyone is going to express themselves like they're writing a college essay. I don't think we should demand that from everyone who posts here. But at the same time, there are some users here That Randomly capitalize their Posts, use "IM lingo" ("u" instead of "you," for example, or throw in "lol" to everything), or never use any kind of punctuation, making their posts basically long run-on sentences. I can't be the only one that finds this kind of thing irritating. Whatever the middle ground is between people being allowed to post like that, and the rest of us using the Ignore feature (I've got quite a few people on my Ignore list for precisely this reason, their posts are atrocious and VERY difficult to read), I think we should come up with some typographical standards. I'm not saying ban anyone who says "lol" or uses a period instead of a question mark, since anyone can make a mistake, but at the same time there's no reason for some of the atrocious writing styles we have around here.
EDIT: @RRF: just because Marc doesn't want to reclaim past glory doesn't mean this site should wind up an intellectual wasteland like ATGS or Invision or the official boards. Those are sites that just lost the will to moderate and whose members don't really moderate themselves, and we see where that can lead. I have a hard time believing Marc wants this site to go down that road, and I also have a hard time accepting that anyone here does either.
-
Just FWIW, I've been reading the thread and am noting and reflecting on what everyone is saying. I may have some comments of my own later on. In the interest of having a sincere discussion on this issue - as it's been bubbling under the surface for a while now - as far as I go I'm OK with leaving this thread (and this thread only) as a relatively open floor. Because, at least at the moment, this seems to be a discussion a lot of folks want/need to have.
All I ask is that you guys still be respectful towards each other. Behind each and every username on this site is an actual real live human being, with their own thoughts, and needs, and emotions, and feelings. One of the things I think that's hurt the quality of discussion over the last few years is that a lot of folks - myself even included once or twice - forget that. People become so obsessed with being *right* that somewhere along the way, they forget that they really should also endeavor to not be an ass about it.
-
There are two main reasons I don't frequent the site as much as I used to several years ago.
1) I have lost interest in the show itself. I haven't watched an entire episode in over a year. It has lost that magic that made me a loyal viewer for over thirty years.
2) Everything gets turned into a giant urinating contest. Several strong personalities have taken over and have driven away many of the old timers, so to speak. I won't name names but I'm sure everyone knows with out me saying (and no, I'm not referring to Steve. I like Steve's opinionated style even if I may not always agree with him).
The site just isn't what it once was. The show just isn't what it once was. The site is more about OILF and less about the show. I still check in from time to time to see what is going on, but the thrill is gone.
-
You want to know what I think?
I think we have too many kids (13 and under specifically, but I'd go up to 16 or even 18) on here who don't understand the repercussions of posting random garbage on the Internet. When I was 13 and I joined my first board I thought I was haughty taughty hot s***. I learned that mistake FAST. Just far too many people think they can trample all over something that a lot of people here hold to be very sacred.
Bottom line: If you're under 13 we're not putting up with your s***. If you're over 13 act like it.
-
dh027 just made me realize something else by hitting the nail on the head.
The site changed a ton when Bob left and Drew took over and Roger left and Mike took over. Lots of the old members here do not care for the new direction the show has taken and therefore have also not cared for posting on this site as much. Another big thing is that Marc & John had more of an insider aspect to the show and knew Roger and visited the show and took pictures and gave everyone knowledge they would have never gotten before from the show. Since Mike and Drew and the rest of the new regime took over it seems like neither Marc & John or Drew & Mike want to extend any olive branch and that's fine and also expected, but that also takes away from one of the great qualities the site used to have and also made some members stop frequenting as much.
Just my two cents.
-
1) I have lost interest in the show itself. I haven't watched an entire episode in over a year. It has lost that magic that made me a loyal viewer for over thirty years.
I think this is something that can get easily overlooked. Back during the Barker years and Carey's first year, there was plenty of substance to talk about, and most everyone agreed on the fundamentals (i.e. the show works as is, we like it, it's classic, it's familiar, and so on). I'm going to be careful how I phrase this, but if we're honest with ourselves, the way things have worked at Studio 33 for the last couple of years have created some significant and fundamental differences of opinion. The same arguments keep playing themselves out in TTiR--the second anyone says they dislike something about the show, it seems like someone else immediately jumps in and accuses them of Drew-bashing, and the whole thing quickly degenerates from there. Many otherwise worthwhile threads have gotten derailed by people shouting "Drew bashing!", and I think that's something that needs to stop as well.
Some of us are Barker loyalists (count me as one). Others of us prefer Drew. Some of us liked Roger's way of doing things, others prefer the Mike Richards approach. What needs to happen is for everyone to realize that all sides of that discussion have a point, and if I say I prefer the Barker years, it's not automatically a slam against Drew and Mike, no more than saying I prefer the Dawson Feud is a slam against Ray Combs or Richard Karn or any of the other modern-day hosts. The hardliners like what they like, and they're probably never going to agree with each other--but that's still no reason to shout "BASHING!" as soon as someone criticizes Drew or Mike for something, or comments that something the show does now is better than the Barker days.
Something else that bugs me...there have been several users that made grand "I'm leaving" topics, a number of whom showed back up not long afterwards. I've been to other boards where posting an "I'm leaving" topic is grounds for an immediate and permanent ban, I've seen it suggested several times here that we do the same and I think that's a good idea as well. (Exceptions obviously for mods or those who run CSS or FPG, since their absences might impact routine operations.)
-
If you're under 13 we're not putting up with your s***. If you're over 13 act like it.
I'm addressing this one immediately: When you register for this site, you're required to enter a date of birth. If the date of birth entered is under the age of 13, registration is automatically rejected - as required by current US law. Is it possible some users lie about their age? Sure. And If anyone has concrete proof (such as a direct admission of age), by all means let me know as I'd rather the site not be running afoul of federal legal requirements.
-
I've come to accept the way things are here as normal. That's why I stay. I like normal.
-
Also, here's a suggestion from another site that I frequent. Not sure how practical this is with the software we have, but it's worth considering:
If you go to Bolt.cd or FFShrine.org, they have strict rules (like software-driven rules) in place regarding who can post what, and where. I'm not sure what the exact stats are, but you have to have a certain number of posts in a specific part of the forums before you can post in others. You also have to have a certain number of global posts before you can use the PM system.
Around here, I really think we need something like that in place--no restrictions on the PM system, but maybe something like "Upon joining you may read all sections but may only post in The Talk is Right, Make Your Mark, and First Run; when you reach 15 posts in The Talk is Right and the First Run sections, you may post in Out in Left Field." Then after that, "After 25 posts on all of GRN you may start your own topics." It can be frustrating for new registrants, but in my experience it's a terrific way for new users to learn the ropes.
-
Also, here's a suggestion from another site that I frequent. Not sure how practical this is with the software we have, but it's worth considering:
If you go to Bolt.cd or FFShrine.org, they have strict rules (like software-driven rules) in place regarding who can post what, and where. I'm not sure what the exact stats are, but you have to have a certain number of posts in a specific part of the forums before you can post in others. You also have to have a certain number of global posts before you can use the PM system.
Around here, I really think we need something like that in place--no restrictions on the PM system, but maybe something like "Upon joining you may read all sections but may only post in The Talk is Right, Make Your Mark, and First Run; when you reach 15 posts in The Talk is Right and the First Run sections, you may post in Out in Left Field." Then after that, "After 25 posts on all of GRN you may start your own topics." It can be frustrating for new registrants, but in my experience it's a terrific way for new users to learn the ropes.
That's a good idea! Have a chain of sub-forums where you need to "earn" access to.
-
That's a terrible idea and I'll tell you why. You'll get newbs spamming The Talk is Right with garbage posts and Seth will get bombarded with PMs "WHY CANT I ACCESS OUT IN LEFT FIELDS??????" and we'll end up with nothing but a sea of trolls.
-
That's a terrible idea and I'll tell you why. You'll get newbs spamming The Talk is Right with garbage posts and Seth will get bombarded with PMs "WHY CANT I ACCESS OUT IN LEFT FIELDS??????" and we'll end up with nothing but a sea of trolls.
It would have to be clearly defined in the rules that everyone agrees to abide by when signing up.
-
We already have a clearly defined set of rules and they still get broken.
-
I'm genuinely against the idea of minimum post-for-access thresholds, and here's why: I am a FIRM believer in quality over quantity. A user with seven or eight quality posts contributes more positively to discussion of the site than someone with 2,000 posts that are all substantively worthless. (Being general here, I do NOT have anyone in mind, before anyone starts to wander. I'm just generalizing for argument purposes.), and I don't believe for one second someone contributing sporadic quality discussion should be more restricted than someone frequently posting derp.
-
That's a terrible idea and I'll tell you why. You'll get newbs spamming The Talk is Right with garbage posts and Seth will get bombarded with PMs "WHY CANT I ACCESS OUT IN LEFT FIELDS??????" and we'll end up with nothing but a sea of trolls.
There's a risk of that, certainly, but maybe that's an argument in favor of having a very visible rules thread and a post requirement for using the PM system. I'm part of another site, 3DGladiators.com, that requires a certain number of posts before users are allowed access to the Downloads area. So you do have some users making posts that are off-the-wall in order to meet the requirement and gain access.
I would counter, however, that this is a much better idea than, say, allowing Duffnation to keep coming back time after time after time and posting the same drivel every time.
EDIT: Seth's reply popped up while I was typing, I get what you're saying (Nanny, KenCrane, RBDP all spring to mind as infrequent posters that should have no restrictions at all), I'm just proposing what I see working on other sites.
-
I'm genuinely against the idea of minimum post-for-access thresholds, and here's why: I am a FIRM believer in quality over quantity. A user with seven or eight quality posts contributes more positively to discussion of the site than someone with 2,000 posts that are all substantively worthless. (Being general here, I do NOT have anyone in mind, before anyone starts to wander. I'm just generalizing for argument purposes.), and I don't believe for one second someone contributing sporadic quality discussion should be more restricted than someone frequently posting derp.
Well, yeah, that's a great point. Maybe there could be a member-by-member thing, so like. If a new member wants to gain access to a certain board, they send a PM to someone and apply, and if the person thinks they've "earned" access, they get it.
Then again, there's also the option of just going by post count to make it easier. Then, however, if a member gets out of line and starts spamming everywhere with nonsense or low-quality posts to raise their post count, the other members here would be more than willing to report their post as such I'm sure and then they could be dealt with.
-
For what it's worth, I don't think anything needs to be changed about this site. What needs to be changed is the behavior of the individual members who feel the need to flame and belittle others. I can include myself in that because I've been guilty of that in the past. I've tried to take a more rational approach when dealing with those who I disagree with. It doesn't always work but I try. Recently I had a couple of debates with another member of the site. I don't hate him, it just seems we have strongly differing opinions and handle things differently and I fully acknowledge that. I've taken issues to private discussion with him and we've reached understandings. That's what people need to do. When things start to get ugly, take it off the boards.
-
We already have a clearly defined set of rules and they still get broken.
Therein lies the Catch-22. We have a good moderating staff here, no one questions that. But even the best of us only has so much time to devote to this site, and so not every breach of the rules can get addressed the same way. The big stuff usually gets handled quickly and efficiently, but the more minor stuff by necessity tends to get less attention. (That's in no way a slam against anyone, it's just a recognition that we're all human and we all have lives away from GRN.) To ensure the rules are properly observed, we'd need a much larger moderation staff than we have--but then you run the risk of coming across the wrong way to new members when they see a lot of mods for every forum.
So there's no easy answer to this one. I of all people despise "one size fits all" answers in favor of dealing with things on a case-by-case basis, but at some point you have to recognize the limitations in time and manpower you have available.
-
Lots of the old members here do not care for the new direction the show has taken and therefore have also not cared for posting on this site as much. Another big thing is that Marc & John had more of an insider aspect to the show and knew Roger and visited the show and took pictures and gave everyone knowledge they would have never gotten before from the show. Since Mike and Drew and the rest of the new regime took over it seems like neither Marc & John or Drew & Mike want to extend any olive branch and that's fine and also expected, but that also takes away from one of the great qualities the site used to have and also made some members stop frequenting as much.
Just my two cents.
You're hitting on something I think has genuine merit as a discussion point. I can, at least from where I sit, pinpoint the removal of Roger Dobkowitz as *the* day that I think this site really started to have issues with discussions going over the cliff. While a lot of people were very vocal about Bob's departure (occasionally to the point of overwrought hyperbole), in general, the site accepted it and moved on. Because it was ultimately Bob's choice, I assume.
Roger is a different case altogether. Because of Roger's clearly very evident love for the show, and his connection with the site, a lot of people reacted very, VERY strongly to his departure from the show what were far from ideal circumstances. Roger gave Golden-Road.net a level of access to the production of the show that's actually relatively rare in the business, and it speaks very highly of the kind of person Roger is. That connection, however, served to poison the well when he departed. The goodwill and personal investment that people had made in Roger-produced Price guaranteed a bad reaction when Roger's departure occurred. A lot of people were VERY angry, and hurt, and when people are angry and hurt they get vocal about it - and they also get hyper-critical of whoever replaces the person they had made an emotional investment in.
Meanwhile, you had folks who thought at least some of the vitriol being thrown Mike's way was undeserved. While Mike has made decisions of a questionable nature while producing the show, so did Roger, whether anyone wants to admit it or not. But an awful lot of people were SO vocally anti-Richards and anti-Drew (Any willingness to cut Drew slack went right out the window when Roger departed) that mountains of criticism emerged. And those who thought some of that criticism was undeserved began arguing with those who were critical.
It's been constant arguments ever since among the fandom. It started with the passionate pro/anti-Mike Richards arguments, and that passion has spread to virtually every other discussable facet since. Because there was such an emotional attachment in the original arguments, there was a stronger-than-usual need among those arguing to be right. And that obsession with proving one's own side of an argument has persisted to this day. Adding to the problem, new members see the "I need to be right at all costs" debate style, think that's how they need to behave, and join the fray themselves.
-
My stance on Mike is this: I think he's genuinely trying to bring us a great show. He falls flat on many things but he's also brought us some good. He also responds to our complaints. I think that says a lot. Love him or hate him, he's not some evil force trying to ruin the show. He's doing things his way. He didn't fire Roger. He wasn't even in the picture yet when that happened. I miss Roger just as much as anybody, and I've had my fair share of complaints, but in the end, I watch the show because I like it. If I still like it, then somebody is doing something right.
-
My stance on Mike is this: I think he's genuinely trying to bring us a great show. He falls flat on many things but he's also brought us some good. He also responds to our complaints. I think that says a lot. Love him or hate him, he's not some evil force trying to ruin the show. He's doing things his way. He didn't fire Roger. He wasn't even in the picture yet when that happened. I miss Roger just as much as anybody, and I've had my fair share of complaints, but in the end, I watch the show because I like it. If I still like it, then somebody is doing something right.
With all due respect, I think this should be split off into its own thread so we don't lose focus here. This is a discussion we should have, certainly, but I don't think this is quite the place.
-
I think you're right.
-
I actually got a phone call about this thread...and not many members have my phone number anymore...so I figured I should have a look and throw in my 2 cents.
Look folks, I make no secret about the fact that this site is no longer as big a part of my life as it used to be. This is for a couple of reasons that should be obvious to those that know me: my life has changed personally, and my fondness for the "new direction" just ain't there. That said though, I have always maintained that I keep this site's lights on because of you guys, because of the friends that this show has brought me over the years, and because of what this show had meant to me in the past.
I don't read the site every day, and I also make no secret about the fact the levels of moderation service provided by John and me are not at the levels they used to be. I do not see this changing. Seth stepped up a couple of years ago, and he has been doing an awesome job. Our other moderators of the main boards are long-standing friends of the site, and their continued work is appreciated. The same is true with the folks who have done work on their own specific area of the site. Thank you all.
There is a great deal discussed in this thread. The one point I want to address is that of belittlement. It has never had a place on this site, and it appears that many feel it has gotten out of hand. I can neither confirm or deny...I'm simply not around enough. But what I can tell you is that I won't tolerate it on a site where we are to discuss game shows. Here's what's going to happen:
If any of you feel that an existing member has exhibited a pattern on belittling others, send me a PM (not an email) with the member's name, and at least 5 direct links to different offending posts. If I am in agreement, I will deactivate said users account for 180 days. I will commit to reviewing each of these submissions received through this new week. I do reserve the right to consult with the folks I trust (ie Seth or Gavazzi) before making any final decision.
I will also be taking applications for two new day-to-day moderators of our main boards. Our existing mods all have lives outside this site, and it sounds like we are at the point where additional help would be beneficial. If you believe in the long standing rule set that we have established and are interested in playing your role in enforcing these rules, send me a PM. I don't know many of our members who may have joined us post season 36, but all are welcome to apply. I will consult with John and the previously mentioned members before making a decision...but my primary decision will be made on post quality and post tone.
One all this is done, my lurker & financier caps go back on. Also, I have no intention of removing sections of this site. If you don't like the games or the off topic stuff...just stay out of those areas. If somebody would like to sticky this thread for greater visibility...feel free.
Goodnight,
Marc
-
I think we have too many kids (13 and under specifically, but I'd go up to 16 or even 18) on here who don't understand the repercussions of posting random garbage on the Internet. When I was 13 and I joined my first board I thought I was haughty taughty hot s***. I learned that mistake FAST. Just far too many people think they can trample all over something that a lot of people here hold to be very sacred.
I agree with this a lot. I was 14 when I registered here and I did NOT read the rules when I signed up. I'm assuming that they were automatically displayed on the registration screen like they are now, but I don't remember ever even seeing them. I only wanted to register then to be able to access the Golden Gallery. I really had no desire to post.
Then I discovered the magic of posting and how it makes you part of the group (or so it seemed), and I constantly posted. My post quality then was at most a C+. 80% was me running my autistic mouth.
Since I didn't read the rules offhand, I broke rule #10 about a month after registering... got banned for 60 days... and thought it was the end of the world.
The DAY that my ban was lifted I posted some bull**** story about having unaired master tapes from 1972 (which I thought I would never bring up again hoping that those who saw that forgot about it). I didn't know that Steve had all of the early episode records and knew that I was lying. I thought I would get a permenant ban, but Steve simply told me to act more mature...
...and I did. It was really from then on did I only post when it was necessary. Something I still do today, and I haven't had one incident since.
Bottom line, it just goes to show that when people follow these guidelines:
Does this need to be said?
Does this need to be said by me?
Does this need to be said by me, now?
Nothing can go wrong. In 5 1/2 years, only one person has ever "ignored" me. Seth said it the best: quality over quantity.
-
If somebody would like to sticky this thread for greater visibility...feel free.
I've moved the thread to the Front Office to ensure it's at the top of the site, for maximum visibility, and the thread has been stickied.
As a reminder, especially if you're seeing this post first, open discussion is welcome. Please read Marc's post a few posts earlier, and scan the rest of the thread. Comments are welcome.
-
The DAY that my ban was lifted I posted some bull**** story about having unaired master tapes from 1972 (which I thought I would never bring up again hoping that those who saw that forgot about it). I didn't know that Steve had all of the early episode records and knew that I was lying. I thought I would get a permenant ban, but Steve simply told me to act more mature...
...and I did. It was really from then on did I only post when it was necessary. Something I still do today, and I haven't had one incident since.
And I have only the very vaguest memories of this, so I would have to say you're doing something right.
-
My, my, I seemed to have missed a lot while I was at work.
I have to agree that some of the discussions between others have gotten a bit too face to face, but I think this site still has meaningful discussions.
I agreed with most of what Prizes said and I think this site still has a future. To be honest, I've grown disinterested in most of the back-and-forth that goes on. I still like to post, but I, at times, don't feel the need to inject in some arguments. I believe that Golden Road has maintained the same level of meaningfulness that Invision has. Just like this site, Invision went through the same rough patch of discussion from Season 37-38, but I think that since I've joined, most of the ruckus has calmed down. There have been flare ups at times, but I still think this site has seen its worst days and passed them. As the show has found stable ground again, so has this site.
When it comes to the three recent obits (Jovan Belcher, Rick Majerus, and Dave Brubeck), I don't think it is fair to use those as a point that the obits in OILF are pointless (I know no one has used that word. It's my own). One was a news story that should've just been placed in the NFL thread, one was a highly respected college basketball coach, and one was a legend in jazz. It is pointless to say that the person given an obit is one you've never heard of because there is probably more than one person who has never heard of one person or another. Just because you or I haven't heard of them doesn't mean someone hasn't. Granted that just opens the flood gates for my friend's grandmother's cat to get an obit, but I think for most obits they're rightly warranted. As for the OILF games, I agree with Marc. They're a nice distraction for some folks and while wadding through them is certainly a chore, it doesn't bother me that much. Heck, I've participated in some of them (granted, it has been a while though).
When it comes to posting restrictions, I don't agree with getting access to certain sections of the site by posting, but I don't fully disagree with restrictions. I didn't mind the way they did at Invision when I joined. A new member's posts are moderated for a certain amount of time and when they prove to the moderators that they'll be fine on their own, they have their moderated status lifted.
I think Vader kind of hit the head on why some of the membership left. The show changed, so the site changed. Roger's involvement was huge for this site and gave it a unique draw. With Roger's departure and the somewhat stale animosity between this site and the show, be it through the site's fault or the show's, the site changed drastically in that regard. I think that while it was partly site rhetoric that drove some away, it was more the tone of the site and the show as they both moved on post-Roger.
Again, this site has a future and I think that we're still going forward towards it. What's going on @ Golden-Road.net? Progress. Like physically growing when you're a baby or a teenager, there is pain. I see the pain here as still trying to have civil discussion and I think it is moving forward. I have the patience to work through this, and I hope others have it too.
-
Well, In the case of moderation since Steve seems to be doing such a good job on this site and posts many quality posts. Maybe he should be a mod.
-
Well, I certainly have missed quite a bit since I've sort of disappeared.
I will admit, I don't frequent the site as much as I've used to. Partly because for a while, I'd lost my passion for the show. I still do watch it every day, but the passion of the "old days" just isn't there. The show, as well as this site, has taken a back seat to life these days.
When I see a meaningful discussion with healthy debate, I may post; I may not post. When I look in OILF and I see meaningful posts, I may post; I may just read them. When I see interesting games, I don't really play them for the reasons stated above, but I follow them.
But when I see pointless games that were created for, as some users before me stated: "Just to get their post count up", or just random stupid crap (my personal opinion), I just ignore it. That's just a waste of my time. I don't call people out on it because it's their right to post it, and I respect that. I just ignore it. Same goes for belittlement of other members. I would never do that because as Seth eloquently stated, there is a person with real feelings behind each post.
I just follow the same basic guidelines that others have either posted, or quoted. I shall do the same:
It's also three things you should ask yourself before hitting that "Post" button:
Does this need to be said?
Does this need to be said by me?
Does this need to be said by me, now?
Anything else just clutters forums and takes up bandwidth.
-
I'm finding this thread to be quite entertaining, so I might as well toss in my two cents.
When I first joined the board, I wasn't making the most relevant posts. I always participated in those "stupid games," but it was simply for the joy of posting. This has gradually changed over time, and now, I hardly post at all unless I give information or an opinion that I would consider useful. That being said, I have noticed a large new wave of users who either contribute nothing helpful or endlessly start flaming other users. Given these problems, I do not know what should be the right future for the site, but there's bound to be some way to resolve the issues. Flebert said it better than I could:
It's also three things you should ask yourself before hitting that "Post" button:
Does this need to be said?
Does this need to be said by me?
Does this need to be said by me, now?
Anything else just clutters forums and takes up bandwidth.
Proofreading is also an essential implement, in my opinion.
-
Wow. Didn't know my thread would get so popular! I'm rather happy that my concerns are shared in this site, and I hope that this thread can be used to gain some ideas that will make it so that the war can end.
Now, let me make one thing clear. I'm 16. I joined this site when I was 14, and didn't start commenting until I was around 15. However, after I started commenting, I slowly noticed that there was some elitism in the site which slowly started to get on my nerves. I became more of a contributor, and attempted to stop some of these fights before they led to bans. I couldn't.
Still, I continued to play in the forum games, and I enjoyed myself again. But...then we got to the Torgo situation. Allow me to personally say I don't think Torgo should have been banned, because I feel like he was provoked to say something, and lashed at when he finally did say something. Anyway, I checked out the thread, and even initially defended sideshow, but after Torgo responded, I could somewhat understand his points. And what did he get in response? Hate and a ban. But, in the results page for the FPG, when Torgo was STILL insulted, I couldn't take it anymore, and this thread was created.
So, as you can see, I've been holding this in for a long time, and I'm glad this is getting discussed. Hopefully we can develop a good plan of action, and this site can go back to being awesome. Until then, I ask everyone to stop the madness.
-
I've been a part of these forums for seven years now and a lot has changed in my life. I started here when I was a sophomore in high school, and now I'm a prospective graduate student. I've been through this site when it had relaunches in 2006 and 2007, live shows in chat, and when one could still post comments in the Golden Gallery.
Like others have stated, because of our personal lives, and as the show evolves, the spark of passion isn't in me anymore. I still watch every day and have fun in chat, play Chatroom Showcase Showoff, but seldom do I post in a recap thread unless I really like the episode I watched and have things to say about it. vader is absolutely right in saying that when Roger was dismissed from the show, that is when a divide between the membership was formed. I don't post unless I have information to provide, and I try not to get into big squabbles with members.
Nevertheless, I still enjoy coming here to discuss things about the show I've watched for nearly 20 years now, hosting games in the Host Your Own! section, and watching old episodes and clips on YouTube.
A good chunk of my site activity is in the Video Vault, and I'm surprised that it doesn't get more traffic than it currently does-it's an outlet to view and discuss episodes from when Bob was still host, Roger was still the producer and we notice things from a hindsight perspective that we otherwise would not have noticed when seeing them first-run.
In the times I've seen any offensive post or a topic was unnecessary bumped, I used the "Report to Moderator" function on the bottom of each post and let Seth or one of the moderators take care of things. I had scant participation in the Out in Left Field games, but I understand they serve a purpose for those who want a change of pace from normal TPIR discussion, but I do agree with others who said that because this is a website devoted to The Price is Right, discussion of that show should be paramount for all members on here.
I think another stumbling block here is that after we've found out when a certain set change occurred, when certain contestants appeared, what else is there to discuss? It becomes a point when the most frequent questions about what happened on the show are answered and one wonders what the next path is to fuel more healthy and interesting discussion.
-
Is anyone wondering why there aren't many contributing members on this site? I'll tell you why, because no one wants to get yelled at by people on the internet for their opinions or statements.
Very, very true. I admit, I am a very curious person. I'm that kid in the back of the class who will ask questions like there's no tommorow if I don't know something. And it is no different when I'm here.
I know for a fact that most of the members on this site know more about the show than I do. I also know that a question I might ask will seem obvious and stupid to others and the possibility of ridicule stop me from asking my questions 9 out of 10 times.
Just thought I'd put that in
-
I have always liked coming here in the almost 9 years I've been a member, in my opinion the changes at TPIR, for good or bad, just make for healthy debate, which is the point of any discussion board, as long as it remains civilized and respectful.
I'd also just like to say that I think our moderators have done and are doing a good job, and I have confidence that when trolls come around, or discussions go off the rails, they will take care of things in due time.
-
I didn't want to offer my opinion until it was safe to do so but I think the mood around here has always encouraged letting off steam, even while Bob and the Dob were still with the show. While I don't catch the The Price is Right anymore due to a busy work schedule, I still come here out of habit, mainly the OiLF section. I know I and many others have berated people for speaking out what's on their minds when a lot of the time we don't really mean anything we say. My perspective of the show has changed a lot through YouTube virtually letting me catch at least one episode from every season in existence. I was able to follow along with the changes, most of it at the time necessary. I find that because the show is still on the air, it's still proclaiming itself to be an American icon. While I don't agree 100% with the way things are run, it's still been a part of my life all these years and this site just lets me be a part of it to share with many others. I'm thankful that this site is in existence and the mods have done a great job keeping it alive all these years.
-
One of my biggest regrets since being here at Golden-Road.net is when I commented on a thread entitled "Was Drew Spiting Roger in Season 37" and that way I sounded, it made a ton of people here very angry and I found myself in hot water. I even went as far as to caliing Drew an idiot but believe me when I say this, there have been tons of people who called Drew FAR worser names than idiot.
I remember one member even went as far as to ask how to put people on their "Ignore" list and I know that it was probably directed at me and I really didn't care that much because I don't really care who likes me and who dosen't but I have to say I felt really bad for the way I commented on that particular thread but I later commented saying I was sorry for the way I responsed the first time.
I let my anger get the better of me and I should not have done that.
Not one of my best moments.
Another thing I want to comment on is I know that a few members (myself included) have created threads announcing their Birthdays.
I personally see nothing wrong w/ that, SAW nothing wrong w/ that when I did it. I'll admit that some members were nice enough to come foward to wish me a happy b-day while others were not so nice, the very first reply on that thread was "How Vain" and I was very insulted by that reply and then came a couple more not-so-nice replies and it felt like some sort of an attack on me and I kinda drifted away from the site for several months, I did the B-Day thread on myself that one time but I just won't do it anymore.
B-Day's are always special because it's a celebration of the day you were born.
The only I can do is be myself and not care about what others around me may say or think because I don't care what people think about me, that's always been my motto and always will be my motto.
-
I think I first signed up around season 33 and thought this was the greatest place ever. It was so cool seeing all of the background stuff you never see on the show. I also remember the relaunch for season 36. It seemed to me that's when this place changed. I like the new direction better than the old direction, but I lost interest in the site. A couple months ago I decided to start coming back, but mainly just as a 'listener'. I usually come around once a day or once every other day and it just depresses me that everyone seems to hate everyone else. I realize that maybe the person who posted might try to be rude, but it comes off as rude, and that's why I still don't post. I would love to see the humanity level raise again so new and different people can come in and have some fun, but at this point I don't see that happening. I don't know how or even what to change here. But I do see potential, and I would love to see this place become more open
-
I apologize, but I'd like to request that the title of this thread be changed; as in I'd like the Going and On to be in lowercase, and I'd like the @ replaced with the word at, because I did start this thread. Thank you. :-)
Also, I'm loving these discussions. I'm really beginning to feel like the war is subsiding, and I'm so happy about that. Please, say anything and everything you want about this issue, because every voice matters. :-)
-
^Done (at least for my post), sir. :-)
I joined the site on May 27, 2011 due to having pertinent, relevant, and helpful information on a topic regarding the Hole In One "$500 sign/flag" changes, but had regularly visited for quite some time beforehand. I quickly became a regular poster, and have attempted to keep a high amount of quality posts. The only times I have ever entirely "bashed" an opinion, I do believe, are when the opinion is unjustifiable (such as thinking that lots of shoes were more exciting than a car) or when it is clear the poster in question is a troll and on their way to Banville.
While yes, there have been plenty of instances where I insert snarky comments into a thread, they were never meant to distract from the discussion and I do not believe it ever has (at least as far as my posts are concerned; I cannot, and shall not, speak for others). I would liken myself to Mr. Gavazzi in regard to pointing out idiocy.
In general, however, I have noticed that there has been considerably more fighting, arguments, and quite a few new members who come on here and think they can just ignore all laws of the English language (assuming their first language is English; obviously, you let them slide otherwise) over the eighteen months I have been a member.
In regard to other users, I have tried to be courteous (barring the aforementioned "shoes >>> car") and gently correct them if need be, one example being when I tried (but ultimately failed) to stop TheGRVOfLightning from quitting his first HYO show, then attempted to continue the show only to find that there was very little in the way of script.
For trolls and the like, my first post or two in response always goes the "diplomatic" route -- attempting to calm them down and see why they were acting as they were. Almost always, this was meant with a slew of profanity or other such terms, which generally led me to making snark-based remarks and/or a "Three Strikes" style of pointing out their idiocies (this was when I was reasonably certain they were going to Banville).
Regardless of all this, and unlike quite a few members, my Ignore list is empty as I have found no reason to use it. Inversely, I apologize if I am, or have ever been, such that I have ended up on anyone's Ignore list...although if posts from others regarding me are any indication, I have little to worry about in this regard.
And now, to respond to some other comments...
====
As for the OILF games, I agree with Marc. They're a nice distraction for some folks and while wadding through them is certainly a chore, it doesn't bother me that much. Heck, I've participated in some of them
Seconded, and so have I, as they are a good flexing of the mental muscles. They are also rather popular; looking at the current "rotation", as it were...
* "Plinko meets Chain Reaction?" is the oldest of the current group, debuting January 22, 2009. It is also by far the most popular and the largest OILF thread, with over 10,000 posts and 316,000 views.
* "Switch? Meets Chain Reaction" has been played since April 11, 2009, with over 6,900 posts and 198,000 views.
* "The Person Below Me Game" (not exactly a game) was created on April 21, 2010 so members could learn a little about each other. It has over 3,600 posts and 141,000 views.
* "Wheel of Fortune Game" has run since March 16, 2011, with over 3,100 posts and 91,000 views.
* "Millionaire Game" debuted on June 7, 2012 yet has amassed over 600 posts and 13,000 views, becoming the fifteenth-largest OILF thread in slightly over six months.
...which all means they must be doing something right. Indeed, the nine largest OILF topics (http://www.golden-road.net/index.php/board,15.0/sort,replies/desc.html) are games -- the aforementioned are #1, 2, 4, and 6, the others being "TPIR Caption Game" (February 15, 2009 - September 9, 2012), "TPIR Mystery Pic" (March 2, 2010 - May 7, 2012), "What Song Are You Listening To?/Is It On Your iPod?" (May 4, 2008 - April 23, 2011), "Ask A Stupid Question, Get A Stupid Answer" (June 8 - October 9, 2009), and "Two Choices Game" (June 21, 2011 - May 31, 2012).
I do know marc posted in a thread before the 4th of july that he has no intentions of steering this site back to what it used to be and did say that if it had not been for what has gone into developing this site, it would have been gone a long time ago.
Perhaps I am confusing something, but I thought Marc said this in regard to having an open relationship with the Price staff after Roger was fired and the disastrous meal Marc and John had with Drew (as was remarked on an episode of Stu's Show, Drew talked at considerable length about Second Life).
Since Mike and Drew and the rest of the new regime took over it seems like neither Marc & John or Drew & Mike want to extend any olive branch and that's fine and also expected, but that also takes away from one of the great qualities the site used to have and also made some members stop frequenting as much.
See my prior response.
Because of Roger's clearly very evident love for the show, and his connection with the site, a lot of people reacted very, VERY strongly to his departure from the show what were far from ideal circumstances.
...
But an awful lot of people were SO vocally anti-Richards and anti-Drew (Any willingness to cut Drew slack went right out the window when Roger departed) that mountains of criticism emerged.
And their voices only got louder, and the cutting-of-slack essentially dropped, when the Perfect Showcase Bid happened. Drew's actions during the big moment, how the staff reacted to it, and the fallout from afterward (which remains even four years later) not only made things considerably worse but may indicate that the new regime was specifically looking for some way to sever any remaining ties with this site.
I remember reading several years ago a speculation by someone (forgot the name; apologies) that Fremantle and its predecessors, All-American and Pearson, were no more than real-life trolls with millions (AND MILLIONS!) of dollars who cackled in glee when the game show fanbase got angry at yet another botched revival or yet another nonsensical decision. Whether this is actually the case, I do not know, as (for example) not every revival was botched and Family Feud turned itself around in 2003.
I am a FIRM believer in quality over quantity.
Seconded, and very much so. Not just in general, but regarding "post-for-access" thresholds. In fairness, such a measure is far better than paying to access the forums as is the case with (I do believe) Something Awful.
-
Steve Gavazzi is a Hotel Atlante, he should be banned.
-
Please don't delete the above, it proves a point.
Steve Gavazzi is a Hotel Atlante, he should be banned.
These types of people who crop up just to stir the pot are half the problem. And the other half are the people who just post to bash everyone who doesn't like the new way of things.
-
Sorry, I should have said dago instead.
-
^Is this a repeat offender of this site? Mr. 28 is correct, however, in that this proves a point -- indeed, part of the reason this thread was made.
"duncan", why are you so racist? I am legitimately curious.
-
^Is this a repeat offender of this site?
Dunno who he is, but I'm reasonably sure this isn't a visit by Duffnation at least.
"duncan", why are you so racist? I am legitimately curious.
Don't feed the troll. The second Seth sees this he's going to be on the fast train to Banville.
I'm honest, not racist.
No, you're racist.
-
This reminds me of another problem.
When a troll comes on people feel the urge to post responses to him, for instance, this troll clearly just wants attention, and everyone is giving him it by making replies and feeding him with more stuff to use. I'm sure Seth or someone else will be along shortly to handle the situation.
-
I have to admit...DarkShockBro and multiple posters who followed really hit on a lot of things I was personally concerned about. I am not ashamed to admit I contacted a member of our moderation staff a while back with these same concerns, mostly because it seemed like they were as fed up as I was.
Most every thread around here starts out with great discussion and somehow turns into a pointless argument that goes back-and-forth between two or three members. In essence, this ends up killing what good discussion happened up to that point and ends up killing the thread. I don't like reading threads that turn into pointless bickering, and that's certainly one of the main reasons why my posting activity has been limited around here as of late.
The other major reason is a certain subset of the board likes going after someone just for the sake of calling them a Drew-basher or accusing them of Drew/Mike bashing. There are some people who don't like Drew, while there are some people who think Drew can do no wrong. I understand this. I like Drew as a person and enjoyed his run on Whose Line, but I think he has a few flaws that make him more suited for a late-night show than The Price is Right. With the proper explanation, I think that's a fair point. Unfortunately, this is considered Drew bashing on this board. Unless someone starts insulting Drew personally or wishing him bodily harm, calling someone out for Drew bashing for no good reason other than to call someone a Drew basher is not something I can say I like to read. I've even stopped sharing my opinions on this because I don't want to be caught up in one of these arguments. I think there's a real problem that I even have that feeling--whereas back in, say, 2007 or 2008, this wouldn't have crossed my mind.
I don't enjoy this "new direction", but I still try to watch the show whenever I can and give it a chance. I'd say this is only about 5% of the reason I don't post as often as in the past.
I still enjoy this site, or I would have given up posting instead of staying around in some capacity for the past six years. I would love to apply to Marc to be a mod if I had the time to do so because I enjoy being a member here enough that I could see myself devoting more time to the site. For now, though, I'll just stay a regular member and let our current mods do what they need to do. We have the best moderation staff on the Internet, and I wouldn't want to bring that down.
Well...I've already said too much. I'll get off my soapbox and drift back into obscurity. ;)
-
This reminds me of another problem.
When a troll comes on people feel the urge to post responses to him, for instance, this troll clearly just wants attention, and everyone is giving him it by making replies and feeding him with more stuff to use.
Admittedly, I was "trolling the troll" in this case. Nonetheless, I see and understand your point.
For the record, I saved copies of several threads he created or posted in, usually right before Seth (or whoever was responsible) removed said posts.
-
^Done (at least for my post), sir. :-)
I joined the site on May 27, 2011 due to having pertinent, relevant, and helpful information on a topic regarding the Hole In One "$500 sign/flag" changes, but had regularly visited for quite some time beforehand. I quickly became a regular poster, and have attempted to keep a high amount of quality posts. The only times I have ever entirely "bashed" an opinion, I do believe, are when the opinion is unjustifiable (such as thinking that lots of shoes were more exciting than a car) or when it is clear the poster in question is a troll and on their way to Banville.
While yes, there have been plenty of instances where I insert snarky comments into a thread, they were never meant to distract from the discussion and I do not believe it ever has (at least as far as my posts are concerned; I cannot, and shall not, speak for others). I would liken myself to Mr. Gavazzi in regard to pointing out idiocy.
In general, however, I have noticed that there has been considerably more fighting, arguments, and quite a few new members who come on here and think they can just ignore all laws of the English language (assuming their first language is English; obviously, you let them slide otherwise) over the eighteen months I have been a member.
In regard to other users, I have tried to be courteous (barring the aforementioned "shoes >>> car") and gently correct them if need be, one example being when I tried (but ultimately failed) to stop TheGRVOfLightning from quitting his first HYO show, then attempted to continue the show only to find that there was very little in the way of script.
For trolls and the like, my first post or two in response always goes the "diplomatic" route -- attempting to calm them down and see why they were acting as they were. Almost always, this was meant with a slew of profanity or other such terms, which generally led me to making snark-based remarks and/or a "Three Strikes" style of pointing out their idiocies (this was when I was reasonably certain they were going to Banville).
Regardless of all this, and unlike quite a few members, my Ignore list is empty as I have found no reason to use it. Inversely, I apologize if I am, or have ever been, such that I have ended up on anyone's Ignore list...although if posts from others regarding me are any indication, I have little to worry about in this regard.
And now, to respond to some other comments...
====Seconded, and so have I, as they are a good flexing of the mental muscles. They are also rather popular; looking at the current "rotation", as it were...
* "Plinko meets Chain Reaction?" is the oldest of the current group, debuting January 22, 2009. It is also by far the most popular and the largest OILF thread, with over 10,000 posts and 316,000 views.
* "Switch? Meets Chain Reaction" has been played since April 11, 2009, with over 6,900 posts and 198,000 views.
* "The Person Below Me Game" (not exactly a game) was created on April 21, 2010 so members could learn a little about each other. It has over 3,600 posts and 141,000 views.
* "Wheel of Fortune Game" has run since March 16, 2011, with over 3,100 posts and 91,000 views.
* "Millionaire Game" debuted on June 7, 2012 yet has amassed over 600 posts and 13,000 views, becoming the fifteenth-largest OILF thread in slightly over six months.
...which all means they must be doing something right. Indeed, the nine largest OILF topics (http://www.golden-road.net/index.php/board,15.0/sort,replies/desc.html) are games -- the aforementioned are #1, 2, 4, and 6, the others being "TPIR Caption Game" (February 15, 2009 - September 9, 2012), "TPIR Mystery Pic" (March 2, 2010 - May 7, 2012), "What Song Are You Listening To?/Is It On Your iPod?" (May 4, 2008 - April 23, 2011), "Ask A Stupid Question, Get A Stupid Answer" (June 8 - October 9, 2009), and "Two Choices Game" (June 21, 2011 - May 31, 2012).
Perhaps I am confusing something, but I thought Marc said this in regard to having an open relationship with the Price staff after Roger was fired and the disastrous meal Marc and John had with Drew (as was remarked on an episode of Stu's Show, Drew talked at considerable length about Second Life).
See my prior response.
And their voices only got louder, and the cutting-of-slack essentially dropped, when the Perfect Showcase Bid happened. Drew's actions during the big moment, how the staff reacted to it, and the fallout from afterward (which remains even four years later) not only made things considerably worse but may indicate that the new regime was specifically looking for some way to sever any remaining ties with this site.
I remember reading several years ago a speculation by someone (forgot the name; apologies) that Fremantle and its predecessors, All-American and Pearson, were no more than real-life trolls with millions (AND MILLIONS!) of dollars who cackled in glee when the game show fanbase got angry at yet another botched revival or yet another nonsensical decision. Whether this is actually the case, I do not know, as (for example) not every revival was botched and Family Feud turned itself around in 2003.
Seconded, and very much so. Not just in general, but regarding "post-for-access" thresholds. In fairness, such a measure is far better than paying to access the forums as is the case with (I do believe) Something Awful.
Regarding what I posted. Actually right after marc and john found out that roger had been let go, they were close to shutting this site down for good. But I think after a few days, they decided to keep it going.
-
Admittedly, I was "trolling the troll" in this case. Nonetheless, I see and understand your point.
For the record, I saved copies of several threads he created or posted in, usually right before Seth (or whoever was responsible) removed said posts.
I personally think these battles are pretty funny, because when silliness like that takes place, I feel like you just have to laugh. :-D
Still, I can understand why it might annoy people, but I personally don't mind 'em all that much. Anything that gets me to crack up that much isn't bad in my book. :-)
But, then again, it does show how far the site has fallen, that we're resorting to trolling the trolls just to get our humor. And, even worse, the fact that these trolls have slipped through the cracks so many times...yeah.
I'd like to make a suggestion. Perhaps we could create a box saying 'Why do you want to be a member of this board?' like in BigJon's PC Games board. That way, you might be able to determine who's trolling, and who isn't. Granted, I wish the password system worked on that board...but that's just an individual complaint. Aside from that...we just have to be careful who we grant membership to.
PS: GuyWithFace, thanks for implementing the changes I mentioned in my last post. Again, you don't have to, as I realize I wasn't being completely truthful or accurate with those statements, but I thank you anyway. :-)
-
I'd like to make a suggestion. Perhaps we could create a box saying 'Why do you want to be a member of this board?' like in BigJon's PC Games board. That way, you might be able to determine who's trolling, and who isn't. Granted, I wish the password system worked on that board...but that's just an individual complaint. Aside from that...we just have to be careful who we grant membership to.
That would work a lot better for spammers than it would for trolls, good idea though.
-
That would work a lot better for spammers than it would for trolls, good idea though.
I suppose so. Still, it would be a nice start, and I'm glad you like the idea.
-
I've spent the better part of my day curled up in a bed feeling rather, well, not-good. I finally feel better and get online a few minutes ago, and my email is full of reported posts. That tells me two things:
#1)The report post feature works. And that's good. Wish more people would use it more often instead of bellyaching in threads or sending me a PM for problem posts.
#2)This site's forum software is terrible when it comes to options to allow trolls to be dealt with when an IP ban isn't an option. (Note: I would prefer no specific discussion of those measures available in any package). There's just not enough development in SMF, either by the original makers or by those making mods and plug-ins, to effectively deal with the situation. (I could spend a full day venting other complaints, but this is the core one.). I have given serious thought to testing out another free software package (phpBB, for example) and seeing if it might be the more viable solution going down the road.
-
rodroddyfan's post unintentionally brought up another problem with this forum in regard to quality: users who quote a very long post only to respond with one or two sentences.
Copy the [ quote ] and [ /quote ] tags (minus the spaces) to where they are necessary, should you wish to respond to more than one portion of a post. Otherwise, such as in this case, remove everything from the quoted post which is not the portion you wish to respond to. So very, very simple.
In this case, the post should have been as follows:
Perhaps I am confusing something, but I thought Marc said this in regard to having an open relationship with the Price staff after Roger was fired and the disastrous meal Marc and John had with Drew (as was remarked on an episode of Stu's Show, Drew talked at considerable length about Second Life).
Regarding what I posted. Actually right after marc and john found out that roger had been let go, they were close to shutting this site down for good. But I think after a few days, they decided to keep it going.
And in response to the post itself, I already knew that. I visited the site back then and saw all of that as it happened, sir.
But, then again, it does show how far the site has fallen, that we're resorting to trolling the trolls just to get our humor.
Better than fighting amongst ourselves, I say. Besides, it was a good challenge to my mental reflexes, and it was quite enjoyable. :-D
PS: GuyWithFace, thanks for implementing the changes I mentioned in my last post. Again, you don't have to, as I realize I wasn't being completely truthful or accurate with those statements, but I thank you anyway. :-)
Do not thank me, sir -- thank Seth.
-
rodroddyfan's post unintentionally brought up another problem with this forum in regard to quality: users who quote a very long post only to respond with one or two sentences.
This happened again today: http://www.golden-road.net/index.php/topic,20569.msg364794.html#msg364794
-
Another problem related to the above is posts like this (http://www.golden-road.net/index.php/topic,20527.msg364804.html#msg364804), which again goes back to the issue of quality -- users who do not know how to use the quote tags and put their replies within the quoted portions.
-
Last week, I asked you to provide me with examples of members who may be guilty of belittling others. As of this follow-up, I have yet to receive one such example. I am going to consider this thread closed & locked. I urge you to continue to use the site's Report To Moderator function if you notice any violation of our site rules.