69 replies to this topic

[AlNipper49]

First off - make sure you read my announcement http://sonsofsamhorn...n...p;f=5&id=46

Secondly, here is a post that we had in our feedback forum as it applies to a few things, but with the lurker system a central theme. I'd like to hear your comments on this.

I didn't edit it at all, I'm not the type to tip toe around stuff.

We've learned a lot since we closed off membership a few years back

First, a little history lesson. SoSH was originally a small subset of users who migrated from the Dickie Thon Fan Club. It grew slowly over time and received huge bumps when BSG and Schilling stopped by for visits (as well as numerous media mentions which provided bumps along the road). It was typically during these media bumps that we had the biggest problems with letting new users in. Lots of crap got through and, in the case of Schilling, stuff that he was saying (and we liked that we were being held in confidence) was being reported outside of the confines of this site. Whatever... all along the way the only thing that has been consistent is our evolving membership policies.

I want to talk about the lurker system and, in short, one thing has been nagging at our minds for some time. While we have gotten a lot of good posters out of the lurker system, one recent astute observation that I heard was that a lot of our top posters would have never made it through the lurker system in the first place.

Our current system has a few problems:

• The Lurker System: It rewards folks who REALLY want to get in, but desire and skill are two different things (although it's obvious we've gotten some of our best posters through the Sandbox)
• The Lurker System: It rewards folks with Red Sox skills, but let's face it, we're not just a Red Sox site, we're a community of folks with common interests who like to bullshit on the internet but at the same time hold ourselves to a high standard. If you want to snap one-liners back and forth there are plenty of places to do that on the internet: we're not for everyone.
• The Lurker System: It heavily incents those with higher post counts. Frankly it's near-to-impossible to pick someone out after 3 posts, but those 3 posts could be very thoughtful and done to further conversation. I htink we can all agree what we don't want to let in are people with 1 good post and 100 posts of noise.
• SoSH: We do have users atrophy over time. Shit happens. It's generally good replacing those users for the health of the site.
• SoSH: In a closed system we all tend to fall for groupthink and incest over time (Weebs, don't get excited). Being challenged, even by someone perhaps a tad myopic, is healthy and ultimately fun. I mean it's wonderful and all trashing Lugo on the main board but some of the most interesting threads on the main board is when someone defends him. (ed: this was written before we thankfully got rid of that vile piece of shit)
• The Lurker System: Let's face it, the system is somewhat insulting. I doubt many of our best users would have gotten through on the lurker system. It's a pain, it's confusing and ultimately I think it's long-past served it's purpose.

The downsides of being more liberal with our acceptance policy:

• Members will have to learn to be more patient with new users. This doesn't mean we're going to have to lower our standards, but there may be a stupid question or two at first.
• While we're letting in new users in a new way, it doesn't mean the floodgates are opening. I think it will result in more members, but that doesn't mean we should let in everyone.... I think of this as more of the process changing, the end result of having quality members will be the same. I just think the current process hamstrings that effort.
• We're also not sure what to do about memberships. The server can handle the new users, we are in the black but that the same time it's nice to build up a nest egg and also ask people to kind of pay their own way. This is probably the area where we have no clue what to do.

We brought on some additional mods, which will make moderating these new users easier. Nobody is a schmuck, we realize the occasional masqueraded troll or Imgran will slip through. If nothing else we'll let them call us eggs and send them on their merry way.

Again, we're not proposing letting in the masses, we are more looking for comments on how to better select new users. For example, one suggestion that is on the table is to have an introduction forum, so we can check out who is applying and let them in or not let them in. I personally like this suggestion in that it will stop 99% of the trolls, allow us to find good users easier and streamline the system. The downsides are the acceptance policy but I have a feeling that we'll be able to tell quickly if someone is a dumbass or looking for trouble. And speaking for myself, I think that most folks realize that we won't be gunshy getting rid of people to retain the integrity of the board. The "Sandbox" under this scenario would likely need to evolve, or devolve if you will.

This is not a proposal to "open up the floodgates... check out any other site... especially Sox site and you'll see how our selection process makes all of our lives here more enjoyable

[bradcote]

I agree with a lot of the comments listed above. I visited this site for years reading posts before I finally got up the stones to participate both in general posts and the RealFantasy baseball draft on the MLB Discussion page.

I have wondered what the criteria was for becoming a member (if there were any hard and fast rules for membership, etc.). I had read many amazing and thought provoking posts from lurkers who have impressed me more than some full SoSH members.

I think there is significant value to opening up membership to some additional new blood. It would allow these new members to contribute to all aspects of SoSH and help keep it the great resource that it is.

With that being said, I don't think it should be a free-for-all either. Adding new members would make for much more interesting discussions and would prevent things from becoming stale.

[crow216]

I think that you guys have a pretty good system in place already. I think at heart this is a red sox forum and if you start letting in more people more easily, you'll let in the really ridiculous and absurd part of the Yankee fan base (yes, worse than myself). On the flipside though, you probably should have enough faith in your user base that any ridiculous trolls that make it through will immediately be embarrassed.

A suggestion is maybe have people pay $10 for a membership. $5 gets donated and $5 goes to the site. User still agrees to terms and conditions of not being a tool and you get cash + a few lightning in a bottle members.

[AlNipper49]

I think that you guys have a pretty good system in place already. I think at heart this is a red sox forum and if you start letting in more people more easily, you'll let in the really ridiculous and absurd part of the Yankee fan base (yes, worse than myself). On the flipside though, you probably should have enough faith in your user base that any ridiculous trolls that make it through will immediately be embarrassed.

A suggestion is maybe have people pay $10 for a membership. $5 gets donated and $5 goes to the site. User still agrees to terms and conditions of not being a tool and you get cash + a few lightning in a bottle members.

Truer words have never been spoken. It's like throwing a pack of cooked bacon into a cage of rats

[BucketOBalls]

Truer words have never been spoken. It's like throwing a pack of cooked bacon into a cage of rats

Well, it's that's the case....

As I've noticed that people don't seem to be demoted much. (Probably due to lack of need). Perhaps a probational membership(that still cost something), would help get new blood(and a bit of funding), while preventing problems. Also, people would know this and would be on their best behavior.

You still would not want to "open the floodgates", but one could open them a little if it's easy to get rid of excess water.

[C4CRVT]

Being a lurker has changed how I post and do research all for the better. I'm not sure that the system doesn't need a tweak instead of an overhaul (unless there's a way to have it lead to higher quality, be less confusing and less work for moderators).

But I don't know how I'd improve the system given that I don't know how the system currently works. Is it possible to give us some additional insight into how this happens? Nomination by a member followed by review of posts (including or not including game threads)?

It would seem that adding members requires significant time reviewing posts.

I'd also be OK w/ paying for probational membership.

Edit- You're about to experience XP in your gamethread. He's fantastic.

Edited by C4CRVT, 28 July 2009 - 01:15 PM.

[absintheofmalaise]

Being a lurker has changed how I post and do research all for the better. I'm not sure that the system doesn't need a tweak instead of an overhaul (unless there's a way to have it lead to higher quality, be less confusing and less work for moderators).

But I don't know how I'd improve the system given that I don't know how the system currently works. Is it possible to give us some additional insight into how this happens? Nomination by a member followed by review of posts (including or not including game threads)?

It would seem that adding members requires significant time reviewing posts.

I'd also be OK w/ paying for probational membership.

In a nutshell, y'all get nominated, for lack of a better term, by members and dopes/mods for posts you make mainly in the forums where you interact with members. Mainly baseball, but some new members have come from the other sports forums. You also get nominated from posts made in the Sandbox and occassionally from the game threads. The most recent example of this is from the ASG game thread. The members usually post a few examples of quality posts. Many times other members chime in and second and third the nomination.

[God's Cop]

This is an interesting development. How long have you guys been discussing something like this? I think the current system works quite well, being that Lurkers who aspire to become members are careful with posts resulting in dedicating time and effort using thoughtful analysis when posting (which is a good thing, after all thats what this board is about). It's pretty clear what not to do as a Lurker if you want to become a member. That being said, I think an introductory forum for us to rub shoulders with Members and possibly form friendships and value one another could be a useful tool. There's been many situations where while following the Member game threads simultaneously with the lurker game threads I've wanted to contribute, but I understand that's the name of the game. While being able to communicate with the members (in the baseball discussion) in all other forums, aside from the Red Sox Forum, gives you a lot of area to interact with members. The downside to that is a lot of us Lurkers want to contribute to Red Sox discussions and support or rebut, or even to add humor to Members' posts, but again that's the name of the game. You have to pay your dues.
I've also PM'd Members to discuss some of their posts, or to ask questions on non-baseball terms as well. I find that to be a really useful tool on getting to know Members and find that to be extremely beneficial. I'm curious to see how this will work.

Edited by CuntyBollocks, 28 July 2009 - 09:37 PM.

[Warning Track Power]

I really like the ideas of the introduction forum and the shared game threads, for the same reason. As a lurker in the current system, I feel like each post I make needs to be well-articulated and aimed-to-please before I post it. The former consequence is a good one, the latter not so much.

SoSH values intelligent discussion above all, but it's not the only thing that makes this site great. It's a fun read because there are funny people and clever people and apathetic people and ornery people and assholes and illiterate people and.... Personality matters here. But I find myself holding back on that front, lest my posts seem like I'm not taking the board seriously. It'd be nice to have more informal settings to just get to chat with other members without first putting together a treatise on the merits of JD Drew. As long as you continue booting people who don't contribute, I love the idea of a more open gateway.

[pockmeister]

This is a very interesting discussion for sure. I've lurked here for about 4 years now, and I'm generally fairly happy with my lot. I read the main Red Sox board obsessively and generally treat it as my prime source of Sox news and information, but know that my knowledge and opinions would add very little to the mix, and so I'm happy not to be able to post there. I generally hang around in the General Sports and Soccer forums, and enjoy being able to have decent discussions with people who have similar interests and are capable of more than the usual mindless posts that exist on most message boards. I venture into the Sandbox every now and then, but find the quality of discussion very hit and miss.

I just wonder whether it would be possible to protect the quality of the Red Sox forum (the crown jewel of this board) whilst opening up other parts of the "Hidden" areas of SoSH to some of the more established Lurkers who might enjoy using them - I hope I would fall into this category. I have no idea how this would work from an admin perspective, but perhaps there could be a new category of member created - something like a "General Sports" member. This would give people in this category all the same rights as the current members (including the current "Hidden" stuff), but excluding the ability to post in the Red Sox forum until promoted to "Full" member status, to protect the quality of this part of the board. The Sandbox could remain for "General Sports" members who want to talk Sox. I wouldn't suggest that all Lurkers would get this new level of membership immediately, but perhaps it could be awarded through a formal application process (and the payment of some funds), which the Lurker could instigate themselves, rather than waiting on recommendation from existing members.

I guess what I'm suggesting here is a 3 tier system. To put it in English soccer terms, the current full members would remain the Premier League with all the associated glory, the new "General Sports" members would form The Championship, and the Lurkers who come into the site form the Football League. Over time, there can be movement between these through groups to reward quality, and ensure a flow of new blood into the site.

Of course, this might be totally unworkable, but I just wanted to put my thinking out there.

[since67]

I found you guys when the Schilling news broke......and have been lurking here off & on ever since. Speaking for myself the lurking system works well for me. I don't post much, and most likely never will, but once in a while I like to add my 2cents. I don't think there is any way possible to keep the quality of the site high if you let in a lot of new people; especially to the main Red Sox area, or the private boards.

If anything, I think you have opened up the place a little too much over the past several years. It's difficult to find a balance, but like someone mentioned earlier the mods are really going to find themselves busy with any large influx. I suspect there are hundreds & hundreds of lurkers like myself who enjoy reading the site, posting here and there, and in general, like that SoSH is selective. Can't say that I would be happy to see any drastic changes. But that's just me.....I hate change,

Edited by since67, 28 July 2009 - 07:11 PM.

[AlNipper49]

I really like the ideas of the introduction forum and the shared game threads, for the same reason. As a lurker in the current system, I feel like each post I make needs to be well-articulated and aimed-to-please before I post it. The former consequence is a good one, the latter not so much.

SoSH values intelligent discussion above all, but it's not the only thing that makes this site great. It's a fun read because there are funny people and clever people and apathetic people and ornery people and assholes and illiterate people and.... Personality matters here. But I find myself holding back on that front, lest my posts seem like I'm not taking the board seriously. It'd be nice to have more informal settings to just get to chat with other members without first putting together a treatise on the merits of JD Drew. As long as you continue booting people who don't contribute, I love the idea of a more open gateway.

As most folks who are members can attest we're pretty fair here... and 99% of the posters really are model citizens. Fortunately the need to boot folks almost never happens, which is likely in part due to our membership process. This will not change - ever. There simply is too much to lose.

A vast VAST majority of our lurkers don't participate in the sandbox or other 'open' forums. I attribute this to a lot of reasons - the process is confusing, the process probably doesn't seem like it's worth it enough to folks, etc. Basically I don't think that we've properly aligned our process to ensure that we're admitting the brightest, best, most eager of us to the upper ranks. I guess I look at the server stats every day and have more of a gut feel that we're missing out here that's hard to articulate.

Someone else mentioned that it would be nice to see lurkers in off-topics. It's a strong consensus that we'll never open these up - a consensus that I agree with fully (for one we'd need to get rid of the porn!) - but take my word that some of the off-topics can be stronger than the main forum at time. They really round out the community here very well. They're something to be proud of and ideally we'll find new members who can contribute there as well, since it's pretty obvious that we're a community first.

Whatever... we think it's appropriate to create an introduction forum and clarify the rules a bit. Expect to see the game threads streamlined as well, and hopefully we'll work out some sort of quasi-off-topic game thread forum whereby lurkers can let their proverbial hair down a bit. We'll also likely send out an email.

[Warning Track Power]

As most folks who are members can attest we're pretty fair here... and 99% of the posters really are model citizens. Fortunately the need to boot folks almost never happens, which is likely in part due to our membership process. This will not change - ever. There simply is too much to lose.

Absolutely, I haven't seen anything to make me think otherwise. But on those rare occasions, make sure you continue to boot, and do so publicly. If nothing else, lurkers can learn from other lurkers' mistakes and refine their own posting style to better meet the SoSH standards.

A vast VAST majority of our lurkers don't participate in the sandbox or other 'open' forums. I attribute this to a lot of reasons - the process is confusing, the process probably doesn't seem like it's worth it enough to folks, etc. Basically I don't think that we've properly aligned our process to ensure that we're admitting the brightest, best, most eager of us to the upper ranks. I guess I look at the server stats every day and have more of a gut feel that we're missing out here that's hard to articulate.

Well for starters, I think lots of lurkers are here to do just that, lurk. This board is so full of timely and unique information that it can be a valuable resource to a baseball fan even if they don't post here a single time. Furthermore, although I don't personally feel this way at all, there does seem to be a sense among some lurkers that the system is... hmm... maybe demeaning in a way? I think some people feel entitled to blatantly (and often stupidly) post their opinions on the Internet, and may feel a bit put out when told that they can only play in the "sandbox" with the "kids" when they get here. Again, I don't really agree, but I've certainly heard others here say similar things.

Someone else mentioned that it would be nice to see lurkers in off-topics. It's a strong consensus that we'll never open these up - a consensus that I agree with fully (for one we'd need to get rid of the porn!) - but take my word that some of the off-topics can be stronger than the main forum at time. They really round out the community here very well. They're something to be proud of and ideally we'll find new members who can contribute there as well, since it's pretty obvious that we're a community first.

You know, as a lurker I'd love to have access to P&G and some of the other 'hidden' forums here. But reading this piece of your post left me in full agreement, it'd be a terrible idea to open them up to lurkers. Not only might the quality be diluted, but you'd be removing one of the incentives for lurkers to work hard on their posts and contribute meaningfully.

[swingin val]

I just want to be able to read weeb's posts, like I used to.

Edited by swingin val, 28 July 2009 - 11:34 PM.

[The Smart Dope]

I like the current system; as it allows me to be a better person. It also makes me want to make better posts (which I've tried a little harder on these days), meaning get more research done, more sabermetrics (and more varities, possibly including some ones I've created; including one for hockey), more things unexpected, yet noteworthy.

While I hope to be a member (or some other high rank), I realize I must earn it. I love the motivation. I'll like it that much more when I get there. I'm just so thankful I even have the opportunity, to even have the chance, of being a member. That is my dream. Unlike some lurkers, however, my purpose here is not to lurk; but, post, and post well and frequently.


I realize good things take time, but, I have noticed I am not eligible to post in the new, supposedly all-rank Red Sox gamethreads. This was done merely as a test, not to post something stupid.

I noticed something else odd. Why were all the people posting in RMPS last year upgraded to members/higher ranks? Seemingly everyone (goyang, BSF, TC, etc.). I don't mind not being moved up, but it feels like I was the only one not bumped. I understand and respect the great minds of all you here, but, it just feels awkward.

EDIT: I found this place in an odd way. I found out about it from the real Sam Horn (GodSamGod), in person, in 2007. Pretty odd; I don't think anyone else found SoSH this way.

Edited by The Smart Dope, 28 July 2009 - 11:46 PM.

[barbed wire Bob]

A vast VAST majority of our lurkers don't participate in the sandbox or other 'open' forums. I attribute this to a lot of reasons - the process is confusing, the process probably doesn't seem like it's worth it enough to folks, etc. Basically I don't think that we've properly aligned our process to ensure that we're admitting the brightest, best, most eager of us to the upper ranks. I guess I look at the server stats every day and have more of a gut feel that we're missing out here that's hard to articulate.

I don't participate in the sandbox forums because the quality of posts are not as good as those in the main forum. As a suggestion, maybe you could encourage some of the more established members to post in the sandbox (I know some do already). It would improve the quality of posting and, hopefully, encourage a greater interaction between the established members and the lurkers.

Whatever... we think it's appropriate to create an introduction forum and clarify the rules a bit. Expect to see the game threads streamlined as well, and hopefully we'll work out some sort of quasi-off-topic game thread forum whereby lurkers can let their proverbial hair down a bit. We'll also likely send out an email

.

Good ideas although for some reason I envision the introduction forum being like an AL-Anon meeting ("Hi, I'm Bob and I've been a Red Sox fan since 1986! "Hi Bob.")

Back to the shadows I go.

[Dollar]

I noticed something else odd. Why were all the people posting in RMPS last year upgraded to members/higher ranks? Seemingly everyone (goyang, BSF, TC, etc.). I don't mind not being moved up, but it feels like I was the only one not bumped. I understand and respect the great minds of all you here, but, it just feels awkward.

You're not alone, TSD, don't worry.

I've been lurking at SoSH for quite a while (since well before the move to these "new" forums,) and loved it when the Lurker system was introduced so that people like me could do a little bit more than just read posts. Opening up the General Sports forums to lurkers was a great idea. I'm a huge fan of the current system, with the Red Sox forum and P&G being for members only, and I would be completely happy if the system stayed this way. Maybe I just fear change, who knows. But I have noticed that a lot of the "better" lurkers have been promoted, and that's the way it should be. I also did like the idea above of a "probationary membership" in which a lurker would pay a donation towards server costs, etc, and maybe gains access to some of the off-topic forums, as well as posting privileges in the Red Sox forum. Or even if nothing at all changed, I'd still be happy with it personally. I'll just keep enjoying myself here and hope to one day be called up to the bigs.

Edited by Dollar, 29 July 2009 - 12:50 AM.

[Yaz1967]

You know, it is pretty funny. Even though this is a discussion board I pretty much come here for one reason: to read the Red Sox forum- something I do for probably 20-25 hours a week. I keep tabs open in firefox all the time for the game thread, Halladay discussion, trade discussion, etc. The first reason for this is that the Red Sox forum is the best part of the forum. I came here for good Red Sox insights and that is all I'm really interested in. Second is that the Sandbox just really isn't worth reading when you compare it to the Red Sox forum and the quality stuff that gets posted there most of the time.

One of the reasons I don't post in addition to reading is the separation of the Sandbox the Red Sox forum. In the Sandbox all posts, or as I see it, have to prove something or please someone like big brother is watching. Am I intimidated? No, but I think it turns a lot of people off that they are not on par with others when they are on the internet in a community where everyone is there for the same obsession. Plus, even though I don't read it a ton, it seems that the quality of discussion in the Sandbox isn't worth continuing that much as many topics only reach single digit replies. I'd probably be more likely to post if there were more people posting interesting stuff.

I should go to sleep. later

[AlNipper49]

Coo, it sounds like everyone is more or less in agreement.

And to the RMPSers who weren't promoted, don't hold it against yourselves, we have a thread in our internal feedback forum where lurkers are suggested for membership. For whatever reason you weren't nominated. Rest assured if you keep at it you will be. It also highlights one of my main issues with the lurker system is that that forum was kicking for awhile and a person with one or two extremely astute posts could have been overlooked by a more prolific poster. It's not ideal but the purpose of this thread is finding a system which helps fix the problem, not create new ones (as opening this up to the masses would be)

[BellhornsBiatch]

I have been waiting on my SoSH membership since high school (now 25). Would I have liked to have been able to post in the main forum during my college years? of course, but the rules are in place for a reason, and upon reflection, some of the things I would have posted at age 22 would have severely crippled the intellectual image of this board. I do however think it's time for shared game threads. This gives main board members an opportunity to converse with fellow up-and-coming SoSHers, and for those of us with supreme baseball IQ and an inordinate amount of economics knowledge (but without the time necessary to run regressions of empirical data and pitch f/x sequence), an opportunity to have much more intelligent discourse during the games. In fairness, I will say however that some of the funniest comments I've ever read in a game thread have come from the Sandbox.

Edited by BellhornsBiatch, 29 July 2009 - 08:51 AM.

[jimc]

A vast VAST majority of our lurkers don't participate in the sandbox or other 'open' forums. I attribute this to a lot of reasons - the process is confusing, the process probably doesn't seem like it's worth it enough to folks, etc. Basically I don't think that we've properly aligned our process to ensure that we're admitting the brightest, best, most eager of us to the upper ranks. I guess I look at the server stats every day and have more of a gut feel that we're missing out here that's hard to articulate.

I don't really post much in the sandbox because it's just not good fun. It being an "audition" stage, there's little back-and-forth between posts and very little personality. I agree with Yaz1967: the sandbox is not worth reading of itself. Perhaps my misperception rather than reality, but there it is.

[bob burda]

I still have a draft of an email I wanted to send to a dope as an "application" above and beyond the lurker system. It explained what I thought a dope would want to know...a person's history as a fan and the source of his/her interest in the team and baseball. If that's the purpose of the proposed "introduction" forum/thread then it's a good idea.

That said....I've become a rather apathetic lurker. It is still great to be able to be heard and to converse with members and lurkers in some of the non Red Sox threads. At one time it seemed like full membership would be a badge of honor, but now I'm relatively indifferent to it - I just don't want to lose my current status. I wonder how many other lurkers feel the same way after a number of years.

It has been astounding to me what two world championships did to change my entire perception of everything Red Sox - I truly have become a "normal fan" as a result. The years of stress until the 2004 title were a time when I think SoSH had to limit membership. We were all so crazy, and a more liberal policy on admission would have diminished the discussion. At this point you could open it up more, but the energy level and intensity of the discussion of that earlier time were unique. I'm not complaining, the level here is still high and I'd rather have the two world titles than an opportunity to participate in the earlier discussion level. Those who were full members during those years were very lucky to have been a part of that.

[BostonJack42]

I woke up this morning, crawled downstairs to my PC, opened my email and wham the first subject line in my inbox...

"This is Nip from SoSH re: becoming a member. ( Sons of Sam Horn )"

I thought I was in.

I could finally see what John Henry posts in the P&G threads. I would be able to spend the long cold winter reading the archives so long hidden behind a membership password that I did not have. In game threads I would be able to offer my quick retorts to an asinine member's post - instead of just yelling it aloud in my office at the computer screen - revealing once again to all my co-workers that I was in fact not doing my TPS reports.

But it was not to be. I have to go learn UZR percentages, memorize the top 25 prospects in our farm system during the late 1970's and then wait to find the appropriate occasion to post such knowledge in the Lurker farm. Then hope against hope that some member - bored at their day job - wanders through the lurker plantation and happens upon my pearl of wisdom. Sees it, ponders it and decides to touch my star.

Dramatics aside - you guys have a great site and you shouldn't let in anyone without a basic understanding of defensive stats or a cursory knowledge of our farm system's history. Keep up the great work and I'll see you in the lurker fields.

Thank you,
- Jack

[AlNipper49]

I doubt we'll change the standards to get in, but at the same time it's in everyone's best interests if we make the membership process itself as easy as possible. The amount of stories we get from now-members about just how confusing it is makes it apparent that if we want to continue to attract the best, brightest and most engaging Boston sports fans that sitting on our asses isn't going to help.

[wee 162]

Would it possibly be a good idea to democratise the process of getting new members in? Do a weekly poll for the existing members to vote on any nominations the dopes have received that week with a link to the nominees posting history. Set a bar for becoming a member of a certain percentage of the total number of voters (50%+1 maybe, or two thirds) with multiple voting allowed. I would imagine that one of the things which causes the dopes problems is the volume of applications, and this would save them from having to do what is presumably a time consuming excercise. It may also engage the membership in having an occasional look at what is being said outwith the group think on the main board, which is alluded to in the quote in Nips first post in this thread, if they are invested in it.

For what it's worth, SOSH is the only forum I read which hasn't seen a huge drop off in the quality of posting over the last few years. That is purely down to the vetting process in my opinion.

I would be able to add very little to the discussion in terms of the Red Sox, or baseball in general, so I shouldn't be considered for membership. But as long as I'm still able to lurk and educate myself I'm fine with that.

[WestMassExpat]

I'm less concerned about getting in and much more interested in what the Weeb's method is.

[Fishy1]

So I've been lurking for a long time - I only recently started posting, however, and I have kept my post count fairly low. This is mainly because I hate the fucking Sandbox. Sorry to all those who post here and enjoy it, but to me it seems like SOSH's needy little brother. The threads are often carbon copies of what I can read in the regular Red Sox forum, and many of the posts to me seemed almost designed to attract the attention of members for purposes of getting invited in. I felt as though there were few honest opinions and many, many that were simply stated to attract Dope approval, like "let me see how many completely esoteric baseball statistics I can fit in to this thread." No thanks, not for me.

In the same vein... I posted in the Sandbox for a while but instead of carrying on and having intelligent baseball discussions, I was unable to stop myself from ripping that large portion of the sandbox who wanted to start Alex Cora over Pedroia after one fucking month and who have since put something stupid about how Pedroia proves the little man can succeed in their signature, or from creating new profanities to curse those who seemed to still think Nancy Drew was in anyway clever, at all. Fuck those people. The sandbox brings out the worst, most vitriolic part of my personality; it sparks such terrible rage that it brings me shame. For people who lack self-control like myself, it is terrible for existing and for giving me an outlet for my rage.

I'm not damning its existence, just saying I can't handle that shit yo. It weeds out the people who obviously need to go back to 9th grade and those who might be capable of intelligent posting but tend to argue rather than discuss like myself and instead lets the calm fuckers really shine. To me the posters who graduate from it at least produce good content and intelligent analysis, but more importantly are level-headed. Its nearly impossible for me to read a sandbox thread without wanting to kill because so many of the people are so dumb. To be able to read that stuff, not start raging, and then post something intelligent is a feat. The sandbox is not at all a place where you can find intelligent discussion then, but if someone can post there intelligently and manage to keep their cool, then they should be more than capable of posting on the main board.

Other than the sandbox, I mostly just find myself perusing the rest of the forums. Game threads are a great deal of fun to read and so are the majority of the threads. The fact of the matter Nip is that most opinions are pretty well represented. In each and every given thread I can find someone who presents an opinion, backed up with evidence and well-argued, that I agree with. In that same thread I can usually also find someone who presents data, especially sweet stuff like the pitch fx business, or something more qualitative, like an article, that makes me reevaluate my position. I think what you're seeing when you see all those lurkers and anonymous users browsing isn't untapped potential, but really just people who are enjoying the content being produced by the members you already have and who know that they really don't have all that much to add because someones already saying what they're thinking.

[Mike Greenwall]

I think what you're seeing when you see all those lurkers and anonymous users browsing isn't untapped potential, but really just people who are enjoying the content being produced by the members you already have and who know that they really don't have all that much to add because someones already saying what they're thinking.

Well said. My low post count (I know that does not mean a lot) is mostly due that a member has already represented my view or opinion on something, and one thing I don't want to do is to just add noise. I still feel bad that I started a thread already posted.
That's why I read SOSH everyday. Little noise in analysis, and people who have opinions backed with logic, stats and sometimes even wit. Sometimes!

Due to the fact that I live in Edmonton, my opportunities to discuss baseball with others who actually care about the game is usually limited to Joe Carter, and Larry Walker. I only get maybe 20 Red Sox games on TV a year (excluding play-offs ) so SOSH is the only place where I can relate to a community of not only baseball fans, but Red Sox fans as well. I'm sure Rice4HOF knows of what I speak of.
Thanks for the efforts. It's nice to be thought of.

[guido57]

I think one reason some lurkers don't post often is the intimidation factor. Some folks, myself included, hark back to Mr. Soares tenth grade math class when numbers, percentages, metrics, and what rookie pitcher's inner ear canal is better suited to pitch at Wrigley is discussed. I respect other members interest in such things, but I'm, if I may use this worn out phrase, "Old School", I honestly have no interest in numbers, numbers, and more numbers. Does this make someone like me unattractive as a member? I think not, but I can't make this decision.

I do think some of us that have found joy following our beloved Sox since '67 have something to offer though, be it in a more casual but just as heartfelt way just the same.

[absintheofmalaise]

I think one reason some lurkers don't post often is the intimidation factor. Some folks, myself included, hark back to Mr. Soares tenth grade math class when numbers, percentages, metrics, and what rookie pitcher's inner ear canal is better suited to pitch at Wrigley is discussed. I respect other members interest in such things, but I'm, if I may use this worn out phrase, "Old School", I honestly have no interest in numbers, numbers, and more numbers. Does this make someone like me unattractive as a member? I think not, but I can't make this decision.

I do think some of us that have found joy following our beloved Sox since '67 have something to offer though, be it in a more casual but just as heartfelt way just the same.

We do too. It's posted in one of these threads in here, but again, some of our best threads did not have a single stat in them. We welcome posts that are not stat driven. all we ask is that the posts are well thought out and well written.

[Igosplut]

Most of the points I would have made have been covered in this thread, but I'll put a few in. Any of my statements are not knocks at the board, just my observations. I agree with the fact most lurkers don't use the sandbox. Most will agree that any interesting topic is pretty well thrashed out on the main board by the time it's four or five hours old. And being able to read the main board, I not only usually get the info I'm looking for but to then go down and post about it is somewhat like an open-book test, if you get what I mean.

I was led to believe that fanboy/humor was frowned upon everywhere but the game threads. Same with asking questions, as the impression is that you should know these things (and I'm not talking about uninformed opinions, just general questions). If you are not a stat person (as many are not and I know this has been covered) that really does not leave much interaction to be had. I find if I'm watching a game say, in a bar, I find that I am generally better informed than many watching. This is all to the credit of this site. But coming here, there is very little that I can add that hasn't either been said, or seems to be discouaged. That is not a complaint, simply an observation.

The Admin has set the bar very high here (not a bad thing in the least). So you pickings are going to be slim. I believe many lurkers are like me. People that enjoy the game, but do not have what you are looking for in the upper echelon member.

Edited by Igosplut, 02 August 2009 - 12:08 PM.

[absintheofmalaise]

Most of the points I would have made have been covered in this thread, but I'll put a few in. Any of my statements are not knocks at the board, just my observations. I agree with the fact most lurkers don't use the sandbox. Most will agree that any interesting topic is pretty well thrashed out on the main board by the time it's four or five hours old. And being able to read the main board, I not only usually get the info I'm looking for but to then go down and post about it is somewhat like an open-book test, if you get what I mean.

I was led to believe that fanboy/humor was frowned upon everywhere but the game threads. Same with asking questions, as the impression is that you should know these things (and I'm not talking about uninformed opinions, just general questions). If you are not a stat person (as many are not and I know this has been covered) that really does not leave much interaction to be had. I find if I'm watching a game say, in a bar, I find that I am generally better informed than many watching. This is all to the credit of this site. But coming here, there is very little that I can add that hasn't either been said, or seems to be discouaged. That is not a complaint, simply an observation.

The Admin has set the bar very high here (not a bad thing in the least). So you pickings are going to be slim. I believe many lurkers are like me. People that enjoy the game, but do not have what you are looking for in the upper echelon member.

Asking questions is not frowned upon here. People here are more than happy to answer questions about stats, rules etc. No one here knows everything. some of the stuff that's talked about on the board can be intimidating. You are not going to look dumb because you don't know the difference between linear weights and one of the runs created formulas. If you don't want to ask in a thread, PM the person talking about it. We've had threads on here specifically for questions about stats and other things.
I've sent out many PMs to people asking about the hows and whys of certain stats and other things.

[DustinsAdvocate]

I have been lurking for nearly four years. The Red Sox forum has been a staple of a resource, and has been my internet obsession. I have wandered upon the Sandbox, only to be turned off and away by the garbage therein. I understand the reason for its existence, however auditioning amongst some of the Sandbox posters feels a bit too much like those soccer tryouts from when we were 6. Thus, I relegated myself to full-blown lurker status. Assuming that membership was full and that my application was inadequate, I lost my will to impress and gain membership. Nip, your e-mail was a bit of a cock-tease as BostonJack insinuated - but it worked. You regained my interest and reestablished my motivation, and in so doing, SoSH has yet another eager lurker looking to rise above and become a contributor.

You were looking for feedback regarding the membership system. The reason you have me as a dedicated lurker along with thousands of others, is due to the quality of the material. Obviously, this is achieved through commitment to excellence and exclusivity. I like this. Had SoSH membership become too open or too large, invariably the quality of material and reputation of the site would suffer. This likely would have resulted in me searching for another informational gem. As much as I want membership, I value the quality of the site more. Therefore, I feel that protecting the integrity of SoSH should always come first, and that may only be attainable through maintaining current membership policies.

How big is SoSH willing to get? Honestly, I think that's the question. Efforts to explore becoming more open and inclusive are certainly appropriate, as they can't hurt. I simply caution the decision-makers to not allow those noble efforts to cloud judgment. With all that said, I think the game threads merger and the off-topic forum invitations are both good ideas. I trust that both outlets will be better and more productive media for lurkers to contribute.

[Pilgrim]

I actually think the current system is about as good as one can ask for. Maybe thats because, in my six years of lurking this place, I've generally been more interested in it as a resource for Red Sox news and analysis than actually joining. I appreciate the efforts to make this place more open and democratic, but I also think its fantastic that the people in control of this board are interested in maintaining its quality.

I think all one has to do is look at the sandbox to figure out that the system is working to some degree. What is the box? Basically, it is some quality posting mixed in with some silliness and a lot of reactionary, pointless threads. In other words, its every other fan forum I've ever seen. Thats not a bad thing, but I think it should be apparent to everyone that there is a difference in quality between the main board (closed membership) and the lurker board (open membership.) Thats a long way of saying that closed membership seems necessary to maintaining an above average main forum. It also seems like a better way than the alternatives to promote members. I guess some people think its awkward because its an audition, but consider the old way of firing off a PM to a member to get yourself attention. I'd rather post in a normal board than send off a message to some stranger like "SOOO I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT JED LOWRIE..." THAT is what I consider an awkward form of auditioning.

Having said that, I appreciate the new emphasis on making this place non-casteish as possible. The shared game threads are cool. Even if not everyone can write a good post about Papelbon's mechanics, most people are capable of bullshitting about their favorite team during a game. The minor league, other sports, MLB forums... all good. I give a general thumbs up to the way the system currently works, for whatever thats worth.

[BrazilianSoxFan]

I'm a registered lurker here since 2006. I won't be exaggerating if I say that this is the place that I go for any baseball (and others "american sports") related news. I have sportsillustrated and espn bookmarked, but in times like this last trade deadline I have much more trust in what I see here than in any other rumour site.

I love been able to see the discussions here.

"This is Nip from SoSH re: becoming a member. ( Sons of Sam Horn )"

This was a fucking tease.

[Bob R]

Getting this notice is interesting. Five years ago, I joined up (at least I thought I did) and was very frustrated because I could not post anything - at all. I'll be surprised if this goes through. I even sent messages to the admin asking how to get authority to post.

Now I see why, it's a closed society. Well, I guess I'll continue to follow game threads and post over at Royal Rooters and Patriots Planet.

How does the old joke go? "I wouldn't join any club which would have me as a member". Groucho Marks, wasn't It?

This is still a great and knowledgable group of people and I wish you good luck.

regards,

Bob

[luckysox]

I'm a registered lurker here since 2006. I won't be exaggerating if I say that this is the place that I go for any baseball (and others "american sports") related news. I have sportsillustrated and espn bookmarked, but in times like this last trade deadline I have much more trust in what I see here than in any other rumour site.

I love been able to see the discussions here.



This was a fucking tease.

Yes, this was a tough one to read for me, too.

[MttKnx]

In a nutshell, y'all get nominated, for lack of a better term, by members and dopes/mods for posts you make mainly in the forums where you interact with members. Mainly baseball, but some new members have come from the other sports forums. You also get nominated from posts made in the Sandbox and occassionally from the game threads. The most recent example of this is from the ASG game thread. The members usually post a few examples of quality posts. Many times other members chime in and second and third the nomination.

Apologies if this has already been implemented or discussed, but how about supplementing the process with a post rating data collection system? Essentially you could add a "rate this post" build-in for members (or a sub-set of them) to rate lurker posts based on a specified scale. The number of ways to utilize this data are virtually limitless, ranging from using it to automate nominations to merely having it as a resource in nomination discussions. I'm sure the bevy of stat geeks on this board could go nuts with it.

[Warning Track Power]

Apologies if this has already been implemented or discussed, but how about supplementing the process with a post rating data collection system? Essentially you could add a "rate this post" build-in for members (or a sub-set of them) to rate lurker posts based on a specified scale. The number of ways to utilize this data are virtually limitless, ranging from using it to automate nominations to merely having it as a resource in nomination discussions. I'm sure the bevy of stat geeks on this board could go nuts with it.

This is a great idea, especially if ratings are only given by people who are already members. It adds a quantifiable aspect to post evaluation, while still maintaining the subjectivity of the whole process. Not only that, but if we could see a given post's rating, it would give lurkers a more tangible type of feedback to help us shape our posts to be up to snuff.

[nored]

I appreciate the opportunity and the clarification here.

I don't envy the position that the admins of this site are in. On the one hand, you have people like me that live and die Red Sox and talk baseball constantly (who quite frankly struggle to find conversation on the same level with the fan boys out there in the real world) who would like to be able to contribute but are put off by the lurker/sandbox system that is both immature in much of its content and insulting in its premise at the same time.

But then again, just because I say that I am potentially a good user doesn't mean that I am. If you let everyone in who said that, this would, be, well, like Those Boards that Shall Not Be Named, which is of course the root of the issue here.

The system being what it is has turned me off and I haven't visited the board much. Nip's e-mail (which I agree was a great tease) brought me back to look at this thread and consider again. Since the admins seem to be making a renewed effort to clarify and improve membership, I guess that also means that as lurkers we also have to have a responsibility to contribute something as well. So for my part, I'll try to find an area to make a positive impact and see what happens.

BTW - can I change my username if I want to? Can I PM a Dope to do that? Or should I wait until after I get promoted to the big leagues?

[Cuzittt]

BTW - can I change my username if I want to? Can I PM a Dope to do that? Or should I wait until after I get promoted to the big leagues?

Considering you have only two posts and are still a lurker... you can always sign in with a new name and get started that way.

We aren't big on changing names.

[leutbneot]

Apologies if this has already been implemented or discussed, but how about supplementing the process with a post rating data collection system? Essentially you could add a "rate this post" build-in for members (or a sub-set of them) to rate lurker posts based on a specified scale. The number of ways to utilize this data are virtually limitless, ranging from using it to automate nominations to merely having it as a resource in nomination discussions. I'm sure the bevy of stat geeks on this board could go nuts with it.

I think this is a great idea also. I'm another lurker turned off by the general quality in the Sandbox. I actually haven't ever really sought a full membership here - I'm usually pretty content to read what I can as a lurker, sit back, and enjoy the fun. However, it's easy to see that someone that really wants to be a full member here and hasn't gotten "the call" could end up extremely frustrated by the relatively arbitrary nature of the nomination process. I've seen a lot of other big-name boards with this sort of "quality rating" system: Daily Kos comes to mind, as do the boards at Amazon. It seems like a way to remove a bit of the human element from the equation, in a good way. Like instant replay in MLB. Or replacing Tim McClelland's strike zone with PitchF/X data, for chrissake. God, I hate that guy.

[asection8]

I think this is a great idea also. I'm another lurker turned off by the general quality in the Sandbox. I actually haven't ever really sought a full membership here - I'm usually pretty content to read what I can as a lurker, sit back, and enjoy the fun. However, it's easy to see that someone that really wants to be a full member here and hasn't gotten "the call" could end up extremely frustrated by the relatively arbitrary nature of the nomination process. I've seen a lot of other big-name boards with this sort of "quality rating" system: Daily Kos comes to mind, as do the boards at Amazon. It seems like a way to remove a bit of the human element from the equation, in a good way. Like instant replay in MLB. Or replacing Tim McClelland's strike zone with PitchF/X data, for chrissake. God, I hate that guy.

It wouldn't remove the bias from a single member--or group of members--who might choose to negatively rate someone out of dislike. I'm not against such a system, but it is hardly infallible.

[pedroia'sboys]

Would it possibly be a good idea to democratise the process of getting new members in? Do a weekly poll for the existing members to vote on any nominations the dopes have received that week with a link to the nominees posting history. Set a bar for becoming a member of a certain percentage of the total number of voters (50%+1 maybe, or two thirds) with multiple voting allowed. I would imagine that one of the things which causes the dopes problems is the volume of applications, and this would save them from having to do what is presumably a time consuming excercise. It may also engage the membership in having an occasional look at what is being said outwith the group think on the main board, which is alluded to in the quote in Nips first post in this thread, if they are invested in it.

For what it's worth, SOSH is the only forum I read which hasn't seen a huge drop off in the quality of posting over the last few years. That is purely down to the vetting process in my opinion.

I would be able to add very little to the discussion in terms of the Red Sox, or baseball in general, so I shouldn't be considered for membership. But as long as I'm still able to lurk and educate myself I'm fine with that.

It's pretty hard to get noticed as a lurker unless you are Jnai who is someone head and shoulders above the masses. Also, having to post in the sandbox isn't exactly the easiest thing to do, considering all the nonsense you have to sift through. A application system maybe a good idea, but of course that would probably lead to a lot of extra work for the mods. Maybe after a certain amount of post 200? a lurker could be eligible to have their post looked at. I was 16 when I became a member and was banned in less than a year, to see some of the crap I wrote makes me cringe. I think I have made vast improvements and would be an asset to the sosh community. If a mod could look at some of my post let me know what I need to work on, it would be very much appreciated.

Edited by pedroia'sboys, 08 August 2009 - 04:12 AM.

[absintheofmalaise]

It's pretty hard to get noticed as a lurker unless you are Jnai who is someone head and shoulders above the masses. Also, having to post in the sandbox isn't exactly the easiest thing to do, considering all the nonsense you have to sift through. A application system maybe a good idea, but of course that would probably lead to a lot of extra work for the mods. Maybe after a certain amount of post 200? a lurker could be eligible to have their post looked at. I was 16 when I became a member and was banned in less than a year, to see some of the crap I wrote makes me cringe. I think I have made vast improvements and would be an asset to the sosh community. If a mod could look at some of my post let me know what I need to work on, it would be very much appreciated.

It's not difficult to be noticed. Go to the new member thread in MLB and see how many people have been made members since March.

This is the last time I'm going to say this. The best and easiest way to get noticed and recommended by a member or a mod is to post in the forums where you interact with members. In fact, a lurker who was doing just that last night is our newest member, Rudy's Curve.

[absintheofmalaise]

It's pretty hard to get noticed as a lurker unless you are Jnai who is someone head and shoulders above the masses. Also, having to post in the sandbox isn't exactly the easiest thing to do, considering all the nonsense you have to sift through. A application system maybe a good idea, but of course that would probably lead to a lot of extra work for the mods. Maybe after a certain amount of post 200? a lurker could be eligible to have their post looked at. I was 16 when I became a member and was banned in less than a year, to see some of the crap I wrote makes me cringe. I think I have made vast improvements and would be an asset to the sosh community. If a mod could look at some of my post let me know what I need to work on, it would be very much appreciated.

Jnai asked me to post this for him in response to this.

True story: My website and most of my posts about baseball came *after* I was made a member. You can probably ask some others about more crazy horror stories about the times when I was a lurker. =) Truthfully, I was mainly promoted because I became friends with a bunch of other people who were promoted at the same time and they recommended me.

I've often seen people come up for membership, and one or two negative threads (where someone acted like a complete ass) can really drag down someone's likelihood of getting promoted. People sometimes forget all those great baseball posts you made but hardly ever does someone forget when you made a public spectacle of yourself.

So, my suggestion, if you think you want to make a concerted effort to be a member of SoSH, even if it's heresy to some of the mods or other members, is start over. Register a new username. And with your new username, post about baseball intelligently. Do a statistical analysis of something. Make funny jokes in some gamethreads and make friends with people. But don't draw negative attention to yourself or be an asshole. Don't start threads that make you cringe, because they make everyone else cringe too.

And, just because you're registering a new username and very excited to get promoted very quickly is not an excuse to make 35 posts about baseball a day. Making lots of posts in a very short amount of time is a good recipe for disaster, just ask Imgran (or his other 37 avatars that all do exactly the same thing with exactly the same result). Having 1,000 posts is not a path to being a member at SoSH. Having 50-100 good posts is. Your bad opinion about everything is not what anyone wants to read. If you think you can start fresh and make 50 great posts about baseball over a 2-3 week period, and then continue to make intelligent posts about baseball once you're promoted, start over.

Despite the fact I have ~2,000 posts on this board I have probably deleted ~2,000 more right before they are posted. Can't recommend this strategy enough. If you aren't adding anything to a thread, then don't post. If you aren't being constructive, then don't post. Post intelligently and you will be noticed after ONE SINGLE POST (it has happened more times than I can recall). Just don't sully that record with a whole host of stupidity that no one wants to deal with.

A great thing about not having been promoted yet is that you have the freedom to do this. Members are already locked in to their SoSH persona. Some posters are "PitchFX guys". Some posters are "funny guys". Some posters have previously made an ass of themselves so quickly and completely that virtually nothing they say on the main board is taken with any sort of authority. As a lurker with nothing to lose, you can blow it up and start over fresh.

Do it, and do it right, and you will probably be promoted sooner than you think.

--Jnai

[pedroia'sboys]

It's not difficult to be noticed. Go to the new member thread in MLB and see how many people have been made members since March.

This is the last time I'm going to say this. The best and easiest way to get noticed and recommended by a member or a mod is to post in the forums where you interact with members. In fact, a lurker who was doing just that last night is our newest member, Rudy's Curve.

Thanks for the help, all three responses were very much appreciated.

[RedSoxBills07]

I think this is a great site and it is great what you guys are doing. I applaud the direction you all took. Now if only the SOX can do something to get going to that next championship so we can all be happy.

Edited by RedSoxBills07, 09 August 2009 - 04:40 PM.

[bosox188]

I suppose this is also the feedback thread for the new gamethread system?

I know this site doesn't like to put much stock into post count, but I think some small limit, say 10 posts, should be implemented in order for lurkers to post in gamethreads. I have noticed several users with 0 posts making stupid, useless comments, not to mention a few trolls (such as YoukLF at this very moment). I think this would be a simple answer to that problem, but I'm sure you could also use a time limit such as the ability to post in gamethreads 3 days after you join, etc.

[Cuzittt]

I know this site doesn't like to put much stock into post count, but I think some small limit, say 10 posts, should be implemented in order for lurkers to post in gamethreads. I have noticed several users with 0 posts making stupid, useless comments, not to mention a few trolls (such as YoukLF at this very moment). I think this would be a simple answer to that problem, but I'm sure you could also use a time limit such as the ability to post in gamethreads 3 days after you join, etc.

I don't believe it is technically feasible to implement that type of system given our current infrastructure.