Is the DeflateGate forum still a thing?

shmessy said:

Help me to understand why you have to click "Ignore Thread" instead of simply just not choosing to click on 3 of 28 threads on the page. Doesn't seem like difficult navigation to me, but perhaps you're seeing something different on your computer. Not trying to be sarcastic, just honestly trying to find out what the issue is.

Click to expand...

I ignore a thread if I have no interest in the contents and would prefer to not even be bothered with the sight of it. I don't think I use it any differently than anyone else, the issue appears to be that some threads were moved since I clicked ignore.

RobAllan said:

All the deflate gate stuff should be in the sub-forum and it never should've spilled out into here, in my opinion. There is literally no point to the sub-forum if that's now how it's handled. You either want to keep up with deflategate and now have to keep your eye peeled on two places, or you don't want to keep up and the threads are intruding in the main forum.

It probably doesn't matter what's decided- but some consistency would definitely be good. I like reading up on it, but it certainly doesn't need to be in two places. Just leaves people confused where information belongs. Just from a data management perspective it's far less than ideal.

Click to expand...

I fully agree with your point about the consistency issue, and that is what is currently being discussed in the Admin forum. Hopefully, we'll have some clarity on it soon once enough chime in there.

The Winston thread isn't Patriot related, this thread isn't Patriot related, the CFL thread isn't Patriot related, others are more or less draft related. It's the off season, so there's no actual Patriots football to discuss. IMO even the draft is relevant in the offseason.

To me sub forums should be to keep the topics people want to discuss, but so few people discuss them they dissapear. Some people want to discuss the draft in November, but if they start a thread it will be on page 2 in a few hours because very few people want to discuss it. So if I want to talk draft in November I can go to the draft forum. But if threads are being commented on and then are just moved that's ham handed moderation IMO.

If I ask 100 people what they want on the forum I get 100 answers. People vote with their comments, you can't make everyone happy. If I click on the main forum I expect I'm going to find any big Patriots news. The last Shefter report was big news to really any Patriot fan. The idea that it should be buried in a place where nobody would see it is crazy. People are just going to go elsewhere to find consolidated Patriot news to discuss if that's the decision.

I get it, it was taking over the forum pre SB, it was taking over the news itself, it was everywhere. So the main forum was like 70% "Deflategate" but now that's not the case. Here in the offseason nearly every thread is basically not literally Patriot football related, and IMO they deserve to be in the main forum if they are both Patriot related, and people show interest in discussing them.

Bobsyouruncle said:

But you've been commenting in them.

Click to expand...

But.....he's been ignoring his own comments.

I don't see any,problem with keeping things as they are. We are looking at free agency hitting around the same time as the Wells Report is issued and I would rather see the football discussions on the main page than dozens of threads about KensilGate.

All it takes is a click, I'm not sure why it's such a big deal?

Ivan said:

I don't see any,problem with keeping things as they are. We are looking at free agency hitting around the same time as the Wells Report is issued and I would rather see the football discussions on the main page than dozens of threads about KensilGate.

All it takes is a click, I'm not sure why it's such a big deal?

Click to expand...

That argument goes both ways, all it takes is for you to click on the things you want to discuss so I don't see what the big deal is.

Maybe you don't want to discuss it, maybe some other guy doesn't want to discuss Jamie Winston, and someone else doesn't want to see a thread about Joker's birthday. It's impossible for moderators to tailor the page to meet what everyone wants to talk about. But the page itself already tailors itself to what people want to discuss, those things people comment on move to the top. If the things you don't like are at the top it just means people generally don't agree with you on what to discuss.

But now we're basically saying should the minority of people that don't want to see it be able to dictate that it get moved off the main page so the main page meets their own desires? IMO, no they should not on Patriot related topics. There's plenty of topics I think are stupid and are far less Patriot related than Deflategate that people discuss but I don't think its my business to tell them to discuss it on a sub forum so I don't have to see it.

Bobsyouruncle said:

That argument goes both ways, all it takes is for you to click on the things you want to discuss so I don't see what the big deal is.

Maybe you don't want to discuss it, maybe some other guy doesn't want to discuss Jamie Winston, and someone else doesn't want to see a thread about Joker's birthday. It's impossible for moderators to tailor the page to meet what everyone wants to talk about. But the page itself already tailors itself to what people want to discuss, those things people comment on move to the top. If the things you don't like are at the top it just means people generally don't agree with you on what to discuss.

But now we're basically saying should the minority of people that don't want to see it be able to dictate that it get moved off the main page so the main page meets their own desires? IMO, no they should not on Patriot related topics. There's plenty of topics I think are stupid and are far less Patriot related than Deflategate that people discuss but I don't think its my business to tell them to discuss it on a sub forum so I don't have to see it.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

I couldn't give a crap about Jamie Winston or who runs a 4.5 at the combine either.

If there are 3 threads out of 28 on that subject.......I just don't click on them.

I don't understand why some here want to go Pravda on it.

Three things led me to start this thread:

1. When I did, the number of DeflateGate threads on the front page was well higher than 3.
2. People are starting those threads with unclear titles, reflective of their general outrage. It's hard to skip them without seeing what they're about.
3. If the rule has been changed, then Ian's DeflateGate sticky is inaccurate.

All that said, I'm generally anti-censorship and even on the anti- side of merging. So I'm OK if the rules have changed again.

Unclear "cute" titles are the curse of any forum regardless of topic

The "DeflateGate Forum" is still the target for alternate discussions, opinions, etc. about it. I'm not averse to having a single thread in here for breaking news updates, etc. for the sake of keeping people informed. But the vast majority of other stuff related to it I feel should still be in that forum. I know it's the offseason, but we'll have free agency shortly that will spawn discussions about potential options for players, etc. and I'd rather talk about that and things that will affect the 2015 roster than a topic that I feel is a bunch of nonsense anyway, and the latest reports more or less are beginning to confirm that notion.

In the meantime, that alternate forum is located in the sub forum area when you scroll down at the lower part of the board.

Raymond said:

But.....he's been ignoring his own comments.

Click to expand...

LOL! That's awesome.

It was really more of a, "I'll check this out... that's an intriguing comment.... alright, I'm not that interested anymore."

As Fencer pointed out, Shmessy's comment about only being three threads right now is a little disingenuous since there were more threads just yesterday. I also know for a fact that I've ignored more than three DFG threads in one sitting earlier this week.

All that said, I'm really not that bothered by it all, I just agreed with someone who already said the same thing. It's not like I was going to start a campaign or anything.

Oswlek said:

LOL!
As Fencer pointed out, Shmessy's comment about only being three threads right now is a little disingenuous since there were more threads just yesterday. I also know for a fact that I've ignored more than three DFG threads in one sitting earlier this week.

Click to expand...

I was being completely truthful, not disingenuous. I looked at the forum at the time I wrote the post to you.

But whatever, I tried my best.

shmessy said:

I was being completely truthful, not disingenuous. I looked at the forum at the time I wrote the post to you.

But whatever, I tried my best.

Click to expand...

I would have to agree. I moved the three shmessy's referring to this morning into that forum, so while there may have been more yesterday, that's, in fact, how many there were when I logged on first thing and sent them there.

shmessy said:

I was being completely truthful, not disingenuous. I looked at the forum at the time I wrote the post to you.

But whatever, I tried my best.

Click to expand...

Ian said:

I would have to agree. I moved the three shmessy's referring to this morning into that forum, so while there may have been more yesterday, that's, in fact, how many there were when I logged on first thing and sent them there.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I didn't mean that Shmessy is dishonest or anything to that effect, just that I felt characterizing things as if the three threads that were present at that time were the entire picture was misleading. It's been a cumulative issue.

And with that, I'm out.

Oswlek said:

FWIW, I didn't mean that Shmessy is dishonest or anything to that effect, just that I felt characterizing things as if the three threads that were present at that time were the entire picture was misleading. It's been a cumulative issue.

And with that, I'm out.

Click to expand...

I hear ya. It's all good, Oswlek.

@Fencer @Oswlek

I also moved a few threads to the other forum yesterday prior to Ian doing so. Since I did that without any comment, my apologies if doing so caused you to appear to be complaining about only a small number of Kensil-gate threads on the first page of the main forum; at that time there were indeed many more.

Eh, either way is fine.
Anyone complaining either way should look into growing a skin.

jmt57 said:

@Fencer @Oswlek

I also moved a few threads to the other forum yesterday prior to Ian doing so. Since I did that without any comment, my apologies if doing so caused you to appear to be complaining about only a small number of Kensil-gate threads on the first page of the main forum; at that time there were indeed many more.

Click to expand...

The problem was that you mods, despite the munificence of your $0/hour paychecks, weren't instantaneously diligent in perfectly enforcing stated policies. So I poked in a stick to get some clarification, which -- after a brief discussion confirming that there was no consensus as to what the policy SHOULD be -- turned out to be that the stated policies still stand, more or less.

No apologies needed to me, and I hope not the other way around either.

Just for the record I hate the term "DeflateGate". that is just laziness on the part of the media and it get's picked up by the rest.
If has to have a name, I prefer the term " NFL PSI Fiasco'. Because it is what it is.

Fencer said:

The problem was that you mods, despite the munificence of your $0/hour paychecks, weren't instantaneously diligent in perfectly enforcing stated policies. So I poked in a stick to get some clarification, which -- after a brief discussion confirming that there was no consensus as to what the policy SHOULD be -- turned out to be that the stated policies still stand, more or less.

No apologies needed to me, and I hope not the other way around either.

Click to expand...

The moderators can and do have different opinion as to what certain policies should or should not be. And that discussion goes on in the admin forum.
After all that input, the policy is whatever Ian finally decides it is.