Enough with the hyperbole

[hawkubes]

I agree. The people that act like the White Sox are the most inept organization in baseball really get on my nerves. It's one of the 10 most successful organizations over the past 20 years but some people on this site make it seem like were the f***ing Pirates or something. I'm not blind to some mistakes obviously(Pierre, Edwin, Swisher), but I don't dwell on every single mistake and still cheer for every player on the team, every night.

I'm mostly a spectator on this site, and I appreciate all the information I get, but I get sick of seeing nothing but negativity, and I agree 100% with this post.

Edited June 24, 2011 by hawkubes

[greasywheels121]

I would say that I agree with many things in this thread

 

FWIW, your sig is still the best in the history of this site.

[hogan873]

I had to read through the thread to get the gist of the rules. I saw "enough with the hyperbole", and said "huh?" But I agree. The negativity has been overwhelming this year, and it's not surprising based on how this team has played. But what baffles me the most is the negativity that comes out even after a win.

 

I've been on this board for quite a while, and I think the negativity and the fighting between posters is at an all time high.

[StrangeSox]

This is literally the worst way I've ever seen a message board managed. Next they'll be shipping us off to the gulags if we post anything that isn't blue sky and sunshine!

[southsider2k5]

That was a theory that a few guys came up with. I don't see the problem with coming up with guesses as to the deeper meaning of a statement in a thread entirely devoted to that statement. And your second part seems to be bordering on hyperbole and personal attacks. They're drunken idiots?

 

Those statements weren't the problem with that thread. The theory was a valid question. The problem was all of the posts about wishing he would go away, etc. That stuff is the hyperbole that takes a thread down the s***ter faster than Cousin Eddie.

[southsider2k5]

ugh, finally

 

Its pretty frustrating when this team wins and you try to discuss it and there's a group of douches who STILL just wanna bash the team.. Even when they have nothing to add to the conversation, its all good if you just toss in a "yeah, well Juan Pierre is terrible"

 

A perfect example here would be the second game of the Cubs series thread where something like 6 or 7 of the first 10 posts were meaningless shots at Juan Pierre, when the line up hadn't even been announced yet.

[lostfan]

Can we see some examples of the posts you don't want? Even posts of my own would be OK and I'm giving you the option to do it right now. I won't complain about being singled out and I would like a few concrete examples so that I am very clear on this.

The "Daniel Hudson bent KW over and violated him" thread, that was one

[southsider2k5]

Can't happen. We talk everything over as a group before a decision like that is made.

 

And believe me when I say this, nothing ever happens easily. Usually there is some level of debate about it. The bigger the offense the longer the debate.

[southsider2k5]

The "Daniel Hudson bent KW over and violated him" thread, that was one

 

Especially after a thread was started specifically for that purpose.

[lostfan]

This is literally the worst way I've ever seen a message board managed. Next they'll be shipping us off to the gulags if we post anything that isn't blue sky and sunshine!

Gulags are expensive to run. More like summary executions.

[Balta1701]

Gulags are expensive to run. More like summary executions.

Only if the guards are unionized.

[southsider2k5]

Gulags are expensive to run. More like summary executions.

 

Unless we start getting more donations that is...

 

Its either that or outsourcing to Gitmo.

[fathom]

A perfect example here would be the second game of the Cubs series thread where something like 6 or 7 of the first 10 posts were meaningless shots at Juan Pierre, when the line up hadn't even been announced yet.

 

I'm fine with following rules, but let me throw out some examples that I see on here for a little clarification:

 

- Adam Dunn is terrible at baseball

- Ozzie Guillen is the worst in-game manager at baseball (I believe that's sqwert's favorite line)

- Morel looks like a pitcher at the plate

 

Would those be considered "hyperboles" in this case?

[lostfan]

A conversation in the mod forum typically would go something like this:

 

Mod A: What do you think of this post by (Poster X)?

Mod B: That's clearly over the line. I say a 10-day suspension

Mod A: Well I don't know about a suspension, that wasn't what I was thinking. You really think so? Poster X usually doesn't just go posting s*** all the time but this particular post was something that needed more than a "knock it off"

Mod C: I agree, bump the warning level and send a pm, and if they don't stop after getting the warning, give them some time off

Mod A: Okay

Mod D: Sounds good to me

Mod B: I'd have suspended him personally but if you guys think so I'm fine with it

 

No mod just snatches someone off the board just because they were power tripping or something, that really doesn't happen

[lostfan]

I'm fine with following rules, but let me throw out some examples that I see on here for a little clarification:

 

- Adam Dunn is terrible at baseball

- Ozzie Guillen is the worst in-game manager at baseball (I believe that's sqwert's favorite line)

- Morel looks like a pitcher at the plate

 

Would those be considered "hyperboles" in this case?

statement 1 is a true statement as of right now but it only needs to be said so many times before it gets old.

statement 2 is an opinion

statement 3 also an opinion

[Balta1701]

I'm fine with following rules, but let me throw out some examples that I see on here for a little clarification:

 

- Adam Dunn is terrible at baseball

- Ozzie Guillen is the worst in-game manager at baseball (I believe that's sqwert's favorite line)

- Morel looks like a pitcher at the plate

 

Would those be considered "hyperboles" in this case?

You're smarter than this fathom, come on.

 

Here's the easy answer...if you're saying those things and Balta is around, will he immediately reply with 15 different statistics that the person writing them didn't bother citing?

[fathom]

You're smarter than this fathom, come on.

 

Here's the easy answer...if you're saying those things and Balta is around, will he immediately reply with 15 different statistics that the person writing them didn't bother citing?

 

Well there was an argument on here earlier this year where people called Dunn "terrible at baseball". It then got into the silly discussion of how Dunn is better than posters at baseball, so clearly he's not terrible at the game. I must be dumber than usual this morning, cause I thought I had a legitimate question.

[soxrwhite]

If forum members want to post constant hyperbole and talk in absolutes, you will face potential suspensions (up to indefinite suspensions).

 

Note: No warnings will be issued, so consider this your warning.

 

 

How many game suspension for an attack on Kenny and Ozzie? Is there an appeal process? Also, as long as Adam Dunn is under .200 there should no suspensions involving that bum. Have a nice day.

[caulfield12]

What I haven't understood the last 2-3 days is why so many people "hate" Jake Peavy because of his contract.

 

If they were posting on the Twins' message board, I can't imagine what they'd be saying about Joe Mauer this season.

 

The guy came back....arguably as early as possible and possibly too quickly...from a one-of-a-kind surgery. He could have taken the entire season to rehab it if he wanted to and there would have been nothing the White Sox could have done about it.

 

And he was actually the winning pitcher in that game. It's almost like people are upset if he doesn't throw a shutout or go 7+ innings in every start.

 

When you play the Cubs, you can throw all their stats out and window and forget about their "AAA lineup" outside of Castro, Soriano, Ramirez and Pena. Same thing when we play the Twins. Any victory against those teams is a "plus" as far as I'm concerned.

Edited June 24, 2011 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

How many game suspension for an attack on Kenny and Ozzie? Is there an appeal process? Also, as long as Adam Dunn is under .200 there should no suspensions involving that bum. Have a nice day.

 

 

I would doubt there's anybody on this board who has NEVER once said anything negative about Ozzie as a manager.

 

With KW, he has significantly fewer detractors but certainly more than any previous season...and it reached a crescendo in May.

 

 

 

 

[Balta1701]

I would doubt there's anybody on this board who has NEVER once said anything negative about Ozzie as a manager.

 

With KW, he has significantly fewer detractors but certainly more than any previous season...and it reached a crescendo in May.

The problem is not that people are saying bad, mean things about Ozzie, KW, Dunn, whatever.

 

It's that people feel the need to pile on and on and on, and that people never want to engage, discuss, or back things up...just yell louder.

[bigruss]

I think posters need to distinguish between being negative and not contributing good posts. One can be negative and be the best poster here, as long as they bring up good points, facts/stats. Some good examples are posts by Kalapse or Qwerty, they never will just say "Juan Pierre sucks sweaty balls, that is all." They will bring up just how bad Pierre has been, and will prove it by finding and posting player's with close or worse ISO's.

 

I also find that their still is good debate and discussion going on, it just gets hidden. I know that shack and I have had some great discussions in the past few months.

 

Finally, I think posters who also just blindly say "Ozzie is the greatest manager" without backing it up with any reason (usually it's just "who else would you bring in. I love him!!11!") are just as bad as the "Juan Pierre argghhh!" posts.

[Milkman delivers]

statement 1 is a true statement as of right now but it only needs to be said so many times before it gets old.

statement 2 is an opinion

statement 3 also an opinion

 

So, it's OK to say those things?

[Balta1701]

So, it's OK to say those things?

Will you be saying them 19 times consecutively or will you be pausing to actually elaborate on them?

[caulfield12]

The problem is not that people are saying bad, mean things about Ozzie, KW, Dunn, whatever.

 

It's that people feel the need to pile on and on and on, and that people never want to engage, discuss, or back things up...just yell louder.

 

 

Balta is the best moderator in the known universe!!!

 

I don't even think it's necessary to say "mean or bad" things, you can still do it in a way that's polite.

 

Something that is loathsome is when subtle (or not so subtle) racist comments are directed at Pierre. That almost makes me want to go all greg775 and defend him incessantly if for no other reason than to be contrarian or echo Rongey/Ozzie.

Edited June 24, 2011 by caulfield12