ANNOUNCEMENT New Thread Prefix: Content Post

[Ian]

For the people who start a thread and take the time to put together a long-form post with commentary, information, etc., these will now be tagged with this prefix here in this forum. The suggestion was made by a few people in another thread and the idea behind it is to make these longer-style posts easier to reference since you can just click on the tag and it will show you all the other threads that are tagged with this.

I'm going to implement a system to allow people to nominate a thread for this category to make it easier for myself and the mods to make sure they're tagged, but hopefully, this will also allow the people who take the time to write and put together a lengthy and thoughtful post a better way to also help make sure they get seen.

 

[Bill Lee]

For balance, we now need a SH!TPOST tag.

 

[fnordcircle]

For balance, we now need a SH!TPOST tag.

Can you autotag all of my posts with this?

TIA

 

[Sicilian]

Two questions: 1) How much do we get paid if our posts are tagged as "content"? and 2) Does the content have to be GOOD?

 

[venecol]

@Ian I think the request for "content threads" included a moderation adjustment to avoid those threads from being derailed by "haters" repeating things or "homers" calling out every "objective" critical analysis.

Not sure how you do that. Maybe @BaconGrundleCandy can clarify if I misunderstood.

 

[Ian]

@Ian I think the request for "content threads" included a moderation adjustment to avoid those threads from being derailed by "haters" repeating things or "homers" calling out every "objective" critical analysis.

Not sure how you do that. Maybe @BaconGrundleCandy can clarify if I misunderstood.

I'm aware of that. Obviously, constructive criticism is welcomed because we're not here to censor people, however, at the same time, I will be watching and will notify those who fall into that category of repeating the same things or derailing a thread to either stop or be removed. But the idea behind this is to highlight the threads within the main board in an effort to not dilute things. This should be helpful since it essentially creates a page that will list them all separately, which was/is also the goal.

 

[fnordcircle]

@Ian I think the request for "content threads" included a moderation adjustment to avoid those threads from being derailed by "haters" repeating things or "homers" calling out every "objective" critical analysis.

Not sure how you do that. Maybe @BaconGrundleCandy can clarify if I misunderstood.

"You" sure like to "surround" words with "quotes"

I am "just" playing, Veinycawk, you "know" I "love" "you".

 

[fnordcircle]

Does the content have to be GOOD?

First time for everything, I guess.

 

[BTTA]

Two questions: 1) How much do we get paid if our posts are tagged as "content"? and 2) Does the content have to be GOOD?

In an ideal world, those two things would be related. But, as we all know...

 

[borg]

So in other words, initiate post game, personal reflections and receive elevated status.

I mention this based on the threads that have received this designated status.

Eight of the nine so far fall in this category .....and the 9th.... "Jets Suck"..... is a classic Ian troll job

Question: Did Ken happen to acquire a piece of this site recently?

Can't wait till Sunday night

 

[Ian]

So in other words, initiate post game, personal reflections and receive elevated status.

I mention this based on the threads that have received this designated status.

Eight of the nine so far fall in this category .....and the 9th.... "Jets Suck"..... is a classic Ian troll job

Question: Did Ken happen to acquire a piece of this site recently?

Can't wait till Sunday night
View attachment 36512

@Tunescribe puts a ton of effort into the fact-finding to back up any uncertainty about whether or not the Jets do indeed, suck. Anyone who puts in that much effort, or takes the time to write lengthy opinions like the others that I've tagged so far that contain facts, observations, etc. is sort of what we're going for and what will be tagged. So we'll see how it goes, but that's what the goal is

 

[Ian]

Also, there will be a button to nominate those types of threads that will send myself and the mods a notification for a review to add it in case we don't immediately spot it to help speed up the process. But again, there are a lot of posts that are really well done that get lost on here and the goal is to try and make them easier to access moving forward.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

@Ian I think the request for "content threads" included a moderation adjustment to avoid those threads from being derailed by "haters" repeating things or "homers" calling out every "objective" critical analysis.

Not sure how you do that. Maybe @BaconGrundleCandy can clarify if I misunderstood.

I really don't want to bother @Ian but yes to your post. I'm just going to post or not.

The main should be the place for this but for obvious reasons another poster suggested another place.

 

[BelizePats]

I'm aware of that. Obviously, constructive criticism is welcomed because we're not here to censor people, however, at the same time, I will be watching and will notify those who fall into that category of repeating the same things or derailing a thread to either stop or be removed. But the idea behind this is to highlight the threads within the main board in an effort to not dilute things. This should be helpful since it essentially creates a page that will list them all separately, which was/is also the goal.

Please do this. There are posters on this site, who, due to their inability to refrain from repeating the same thing over and over, have made this place a much less enjoyable place to visit.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

For balance, we now need a SH!TPOST tag.

Can you autotag all of my posts with this?

TIA

Dudes, that's the default. If you're smart you don't have to say that part

 

[PScottman]

If you're smart you don't have to say that part

Using my imagination is too hard though.

____________________________________________________________________
Ian, sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[venecol]

I just went over @patfanken 's latest thread, which are his thoughts immediately after the game without the benefit of any film. The other posts are all over the place, from people questioning the intent or positivity of other posters, to talking about Bill, Brady, drafts, coaches, etc. Sure, there's a couple of tweets here and there from Lazar and others but there's mainly opinions based on "eye test" after watching the game on TV or stuff completely unrelated to the game itself.

I'm not sure that's what @BaconGrundleCandy and @One-If-By-Sea were referring to when they spoke about Content based threads. I was under the impression they were talking about analyzing the game by breaking down plays and film. That is sorely lacking on this forum, unfortunately. I have real questions about why the secondary performed so poorly against a rookie QB playing only his 4th NFL game, besides the fact that JC had a baby last week. I looked at film breakdown for the Bucs game and their WRs were open all night. Something is going on with the secondary and I'm not sure what it is but it would be nice if we spent time looking at it, just so we have a better understanding.

It would be nice to see a thread dedicated to breaking down the plays and analyzing what we think is happening (not me, not qualified) instead of having to sift through dozens of meaningless posts (as it relates to the subject matter, they're perfectly fine as opinions). I'm not sure there are enough qualified posters to get this accomplished but anyway, it is what it is.

 

[Deus Irae]

I just went over @patfanken 's latest thread, which are his thoughts immediately after the game without the benefit of any film. The other posts are all over the place, from people questioning the intent or positivity of other posters, to talking about Bill, Brady, drafts, coaches, etc. Sure, there's a couple of tweets here and there from Lazar and others but there's mainly opinions based on "eye test" after watching the game on TV or stuff completely unrelated to the game itself.

I'm not sure that's what @BaconGrundleCandy and @One-If-By-Sea were referring to when they spoke about Content based threads. I was under the impression they were talking about analyzing the game by breaking down plays and film. That is sorely lacking on this forum, unfortunately. I have real questions about why the secondary performed so poorly against a rookie QB playing only his 4th NFL game, besides the fact that JC had a baby last week. I looked at film breakdown for the Bucs game and their WRs were open all night. Something is going on with the secondary and I'm not sure what it is but it would be nice if we spent time looking at it, just so we have a better understanding.

It would be nice to see a thread dedicated to breaking down the plays and analyzing what we think is happening (not me, not qualified) instead of having to sift through dozens of meaningless posts (as it relates to the subject matter, they're perfectly fine as opinions). I'm not sure there are enough qualified posters to get this accomplished but anyway, it is what it is.

No offense to anyone, named in your post or not, but I agree with your point. Someone deciding to write a "What I thought about the game" thread isn't, or shouldn't, be what we're talking about here, IMO. I'd say that we shouldn't even be talking about threads where people are just posting Twitter/YouTube/etc... shots, comments, and postings.

To me, we're talking about threads like IIB's thread on the list of all-time QB greats, like the film breakdown threads that people like Unoriginal and BOR used to do, and that sort of thing.

 

[Biffins]

I'm aware of that. Obviously, constructive criticism is welcomed because we're not here to censor people, however, at the same time, I will be watching and will notify those who fall into that category of repeating the same things or derailing a thread to either stop or be removed. But the idea behind this is to highlight the threads within the main board in an effort to not dilute things. This should be helpful since it essentially creates a page that will list them all separately, which was/is also the goal.

Still unclear what classifies as Content.

 

[Biffins]

Oh wait, my last thread was tagged as "Content Post". What just happened.