Please Change Your Ways Dallas-Mavs.com - Page 3 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

EricaLubarsky · 02-16-2010, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

It is unfortunate that stressboy has to listen to folks bitching about him posting an opinion.

Its unfortunate that certain posters think that its not completely natural that, after someone comes to a public forum open to the 8 billion people on this planet and posts something completely public, people can respond with their own opinions. Even sadder that we can't respond with our own opinions when the person posting decides that not only is their criticism of the rest of us worthy of a post, it also deserves its own thread in an inappropriate section of the board.

Truly sad. The criticisms may not be on the mark but they are our opinions and at least we are using a current thread instead of making a new one.

Whats the difference between one poster coming in to criticize publicly (opinion) with a new thread, and people answering with their own opinions?

DevinHarriswillstart · 02-16-2010, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

It is unfortunate that stressboy has to listen to folks bitching about him posting an opinion.

I hope you see the irony in this....

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

It is unfortunate that stressboy has to listen to folks bitching about him posting an opinion.

An opinion? He was bitching, and insulting for that matter.

Sheesh.

Underdog · 02-16-2010, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

An opinion? He was bitching, and insulting for that matter.

Sheesh.

Not to mention that he posted this crap in the General Mavs Discussion when it has nothing to do with the Mavs - just another useless thread junking up the greatest news this team has had in years...

Oh, but my 10,000+ posts and several years of PAYING for this site to stay afloat don't afford me a valid opinion about anything because I joined in 2006 instead of 2001 - people who weren't here for the "good old days" when there were only 1,000 Mavs fans on the internet are definitely what's wrong with this forum (well, at least according to folks who have the time & energy to bitch about the quality of this forum but not the time & energy to actually contribute to it - does Stressboy have an opinion about the Butler/Howard trade, you know, besides the thread being too long???)

kg_veteran · 02-16-2010, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Not to mention that he posted this crap in the General Mavs Discussion when it has nothing to do with the Mavs - just another useless thread junking up the greatest news this team has had in years...

Oh, but my 10,000+ posts and several years of PAYING for this site to stay afloat don't afford me a valid opinion about anything because I joined in 2006 instead of 2001 - people who weren't here for the "good old days" when there were only 1,000 Mavs fans on the internet are definitely what's wrong with this forum (well, at least according to folks who have the time & energy to bitch about the quality of this forum but not the time & energy to actually contribute to it - does Stressboy have an opinion about the Butler/Howard trade, you know, besides the thread being too long???)

Did anyone say your opinion wasn't valid?

Murphy3 · 02-16-2010, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Did anyone say your opinion wasn't valid?

I kinda did.

Underdog · 02-16-2010, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Did anyone say your opinion wasn't valid?

Are you saying it is?

(pleasevalidatemeiloveyou!)

Male30Dan · 02-16-2010, 12:46 AM

You Fers judging Murphy were likely not here when he was at his best. Most of us are adults now with full lives. I have 2 kids, a wife, a career, and a dog, (the most time consuming part). I live in a state where I don't even get the full day to day news unless I search the local websites, which I don't have time to do at work or really at home.

This site was amazing several years back, (I am not Rylan/Murphy ancient, but I do go back a while), but it is great now as well - different, but still great. I have gone from a newbie that didn't want to post to a guy that was a bully to all and anyone to a guy that has matured a bit more and tries to only post when my thoughts are warranted. I think a lot of people go through that same stage and some of the regular posters are probably in the middle stage of my time here.

Really, what it comes down to is that a message board is going to go through times that you love and others that piss you off. I personally have no problem with the thread length, (certainly not enough of a problem to complain about it), but if I did, I would do my part to change it instead of putting the onus on everyone else while threatening to leave if THEY didn't change.

Just my 2 cents.

Usually Lurkin · 02-16-2010, 01:06 AM

I think the problem is that we've now got a bunch of kids moderating the grownups.

And there's not enough blatant trolling and flaming to keep everybody together.

Male30Dan · 02-16-2010, 01:13 AM

Dallas-Mavs.com never was in the running for thread control.

Underdog · 02-16-2010, 01:27 AM

The Butler/Howard thread climbed up to 7 pages of posts in 12 hours, but was deemed "too long" by the original poster.

This thread (that has NOTHING to do with the Dallas Mavericks) is already up to 3 pages in the same amount of time...

Ironic?

alby · 02-16-2010, 01:43 AM

Thespiralgoeson · 02-16-2010, 01:59 AM

I'm fine with the way things work around here. If it's a long thread I usually just skip to the last page and pick up wherever the discussion has left off. I like that there's usually only one thread for each topic.

However...

I think it's just ridiculous how some posters here freak the hell out everytime a new poster starts a thread. I remember when I first started posting here I didn't really get how the thread etiquette worked and was made to feel very unwelcome. I damn near stopped coming to this site because of it.

Male30Dan · 02-16-2010, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I'm fine with the way things work around here. If it's a long thread I usually just skip to the last page and pick up wherever the discussion has left off. I like that there's usually only one thread for each topic.

However...

I think it's just ridiculous how some posters here freak the hell out everytime a new poster starts a thread. I remember when I first started posting here I didn't really get how the thread etiquette worked and was made to feel very unwelcome. I damn near stopped coming to this site because of it.

How lucky we all are that you managed to pull through those hard times.

ty · 02-16-2010, 04:39 AM

Access to this board is free. The mods here receive little to no financial benefit for their duties here. We should be grateful for the service they do us by keeping this board from absolute, utter chaos.

There are plenty of boards around that do not have the same level of dedication from moderators/developers, but that cost money out of your pocket.

If you feel that more needs to be done, then feel free to take action HERE. If you feel you can help contribute behind the scenes to the success of this board, then PM dj or one of the mods.

Otherwise, just be glad that you can come to a free forum and from time-to-time, logically discuss our beloved basketball team.

u2sarajevo · 02-16-2010, 07:11 AM

Honestly it beats me down incessantly. There is not a bigger power down for me than seeing thread police in action.

kg_veteran · 02-16-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Do I think I own it and want other people to change to better fit my mood?

This is where you and I differ.

Seriously, everyone needs to shut up with the "this is a free Internet, go elsewhere if you like" crap. This is a great board, but if the old farts like me want to wax nostalgic, we're going to do it and you're just going to have to live with it. When I started posting on the forum, I had a dog and no kids. Now I have the same dog and three kids. I don't have as much time as I used to have. Does that mean I'm any less of a diehard fan? No way -- my wife gives me grief because I'm already raising the next generation of Mavs fans.

I'm not going to listen to people run down Murph as one of the "worst members of this forum" or act like Stressboy is some newbie punk. I fully realize you can't go back in time (nor do I really want to), but guys like Murphy and Stressboy are the reason that there was a forum here for younger folks to stumble across years later.

*steps off soap box*

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

This is where you and I differ.

Seriously, everyone needs to shut up with the "this is a free Internet, go elsewhere if you like" crap. This is a great board, but if the old farts like me want to wax nostalgic, we're going to do it and you're just going to have to live with it. When I started posting on the forum, I had a dog and no kids. Now I have the same dog and three kids. I don't have as much time as I used to have. Does that mean I'm any less of a diehard fan? No way -- my wife gives me grief because I'm already raising the next generation of Mavs fans.

I'm not going to listen to people run down Murph as one of the "worst members of this forum" or act like Stressboy is some newbie punk. I fully realize you can't go back in time (nor do I really want to), but guys like Murphy and Stressboy are the reason that there was a forum here for younger folks to stumble across years later.

*steps off soap box*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stressboy

Only people with no lives will read 13 pages to pick up where that started

Quote:

...so those of us that try to maintain a real life can read the thread titles, and decide what is worth our time and what is not.

So because his join date says 2001, he can post insults but we "newbies" and "kiddies" aren't allowed to tell him to go shove it.

Whatever.

kg_veteran · 02-16-2010, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

So because his join date says 2001, he can post insults but we "newbies" and "kiddies" aren't allowed to tell him to go shove it.

Whatever.

I don't remember calling you a "newbie" or "kiddie", but you are welcome to take offense at my comments if you want.

I didn't find his comment about people having a life that offensive. I thought it was pretty clear that he was saying that it is difficult to read a 13 page thread if you log on for the first time and see said 13 page thread. Surely that is self-evident.

Murphy3 · 02-16-2010, 08:15 AM

I concur Thig.... Stressboy new that he was going to get blasted by some. He threw out his opinion knowing that it was going to rub some people the wrong way. However, he felt as if his opinion needed to be heard.

Murphy3 · 02-16-2010, 08:29 AM

No, UD, your opinion doesn't matter with your 10,000 posts. Post count and join date really aren't all that important. No one believes that to be the case. However, there was a time when the forum was different...and yes, better. Stressboy is just trying to get a little bit of the old feel back in this forum.. that's all.

Underdog · 02-16-2010, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

No, UD, your opinion doesn't matter with your 10,000 posts. Post count and join date really aren't all that important. No one believes that to be the case. However, there was a time when the forum was different...and yes, better. Stressboy is just trying to get a little bit of the old feel back in this forum.. that's all.

If Stressboy wants to bring the "old feel" back, then he should just do it - lead by example.

If he started a new thread about whatever was on his mind about the Mavs instead of complaining about forum members, then we'd all be talking about that instead of this.

(oh, and I'm surprised you didn't lay into me harder about the uselessness of my 10,000+ posts - you're losing your touch, Murph!)

Murphy3 · 02-16-2010, 08:43 AM

I think all Stress was saying is that someone should have had the common sense to start a new thread concerning the trade sooner than what actually occurred. And no, it's not the rule of the forum to make one large thread. However, many have been chastised for starting new threads. At this point, alot of people are a bit gun shy about starting a new thread even when it's warranted. So, you end up with an unfortunate case in which there's 13 pages in one thread that obviously should have been two separate threads.

Underdog · 02-16-2010, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I think all Stress was saying is that someone should have had the common sense to start a new thread concerning the trade sooner than what actually occurred. And no, it's not the rule of the forum to make one large thread. However, many have been chastised for starting new threads. At this point, alot of people are a bit gun shy about starting a new thread even when it's warranted. So, you end up with an unfortunate case in which there's 13 pages in one thread that obviously should have been two separate threads.

How about a little context here?

That thread got up to 13 pages in a little over 24 hours (almost one page every half hour after the news broke) because everyone in Mavsland was excited about our blockbuster trade - people were posting so fast that I couldn't even keep up in realtime.

The only conclusion I can draw is that there are a lot more Dallas Mavericks fans online these days than there were back in 2001... In my book, that's a good problem to have - I bet the Nets forum doesn't have "too many posts" in their threads!

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

I don't remember calling you a "newbie" or "kiddie", but you are welcome to take offense at my comments if you want.

I didn't find his comment about people having a life that offensive. I thought it was pretty clear that he was saying that it is difficult to read a 13 page thread if you log on for the first time and see said 13 page thread. Surely that is self-evident.

And I don't think it's offensive to tell him to enjoy DB.com if he wants a billion threads, or LoneMavs if he wants a smaller community.

How is reading 10 threads with 10 posts each any easier?

As I've said previously in this thread, if you want to complain about the "2009 General NBA Thread" fine. I get that. I understand not liking multiple conversations in one thread. But if there are 13 pages in a thread about the Butler trade...I mean what exactly should we do about that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I think all Stress was saying is that someone should have had the common sense to start a new thread concerning the trade sooner than what actually occurred. And no, it's not the rule of the forum to make one large thread. However, many have been chastised for starting new threads. At this point, alot of people are a bit gun shy about starting a new thread even when it's warranted. So, you end up with an unfortunate case in which there's 13 pages in one thread that obviously should have been two separate threads.

As UD points out, I don't think it's at all obvious that the second Butler trade thread should have been split off into new threads.

kg_veteran · 02-16-2010, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

As I've said previously in this thread, if you want to complain about the "2009 General NBA Thread" fine. I get that. I understand not liking multiple conversations in one thread. But if there are 13 pages in a thread about the Butler trade...I mean what exactly should we do about that?

I was there in real time for the Butler thread, so I know that it developed quickly. In that sense, Stressboy's complaint was probably misdirected. Still, I get his overall point.

Rhylan · 02-16-2010, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

I was there in real time for the Butler thread, so I know that it developed quickly. In that sense, Stressboy's complaint was probably misdirected. Still, I get his overall point.

For me it's more the "General NBA Season," or "Rangers 2009 Season" threads that give me tired head. All the player appreciation threads, which should have seen a lot of simple posts and die a quick death - threads which I have almost no desire to participate in - turned into General-Discussion-About-Player-X thread.

I didn't have any issue with the Butler thread, or really even the "Cuban not looking for a big-deal thread," although the latter could've been helped by some thread branching once or twice.

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhylan

For me it's more the "General NBA Season," or "Rangers 2009 Season" threads that give me tired head. All the player appreciation threads, which should have seen a lot of simple posts and die a quick death - threads which I have almost no desire to participate in - turned into General-Discussion-About-Player-X thread.

I didn't have any issue with the Butler thread, or really even the "Cuban not looking for a big-deal thread," although the latter could've been helped by some thread branching once or twice.

Something like the General NBA Season thread is just preference. Some people like it, some people don't.

Now on a Rangers Season thread...I really like it. Because there's generally not enough interest to drive anything but a general thread.

kg_veteran · 02-16-2010, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhylan

For me it's more the "General NBA Season," or "Rangers 2009 Season" threads that give me tired head. All the player appreciation threads, which should have seen a lot of simple posts and die a quick death - threads which I have almost no desire to participate in - turned into General-Discussion-About-Player-X thread.

I didn't have any issue with the Butler thread, or really even the "Cuban not looking for a big-deal thread," although the latter could've been helped by some thread branching once or twice.

Ditto.

Murphy3 · 02-16-2010, 09:07 AM

Ok...If you can't figure it out, then I suppose you're beyond help.

Sorry Stressboy, they just don't get it. Hopefully some DO get it and will start a new thread when it is warranted without being a bit scared off by those that wish to keep things in one thread regardless of the topic.

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

Ok...If you can't figure it out, then I suppose you're beyond help.

Sorry Stressboy, they just don't get it. Hopefully some DO get it and will start a new thread when it is warranted without being a bit scared off by those that wish to keep things in one thread regardless of the topic.

No, please, oh wise sage of the internets. Please enlighten us on when the proper time is to start a new thread. According to Stress, it's when he can no longer skim a thread in a timely fashion. So should we implement a new rule that no thread so span more than five pages?

Please enlighten us.

chumdawg · 02-16-2010, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

No, please, oh wise sage of the internets. Please enlighten us on when the proper time is to start a new thread. According to Stress, it's when he can no longer skim a thread in a timely fashion. So should we implement a new rule that no thread so span more than five pages?

Please enlighten us.

Not to speak for Murph...but look at gamedays for example. During the game you have the GDT, which I'm sure grows far more quickly than the Butler thread, and sometimes gets about as long. Then, as soon as the clock hits zeros, you get the postgame thread.

I'd say it's an appropriate analogy to consider.

Male30Dan · 02-16-2010, 09:32 AM

I can't believe this was moved. Talk about taking your friggin mod rights to an all new level. Seriously team - shape up already.

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male28Dan

I can't believe this was moved. Talk about taking your friggin mod rights to an all new level. Seriously team - shape up already.

I love you.

Robillion · 02-16-2010, 09:57 AM

People here treat starting a new thread as if it costs the dallas-mavs.com government millionsss of dollars to do so causing taxes to increase.

u2sarajevo · 02-16-2010, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robillion

People here treat starting a new thread as if it costs the dallas-mavs.com government millionsss of dollars to do so causing taxes to increase.

I felt the same way.... but have been told I am wrong.

mary · 02-16-2010, 10:04 AM

I think if you scan the first two or three pages of new threads, you would see that a good portion of them are started by newish members. So I guess they didn't get the memo.

jthig32 · 02-16-2010, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

I think if you scan the first two or three pages of new threads, you would see that a good portion of them are started by newish members. So I guess they didn't get the memo.

This.

Robillion · 02-16-2010, 10:11 AM

I propose that in the Politics forum that there is an official conservative outlook thread and an official liberal outlook thread. That way dude and 92bdad aren't making a million new propaganda threads advocating conservative 'ideals'. That is one way consolidation of threads/thread conservative would be helpful.

Doesn't just not posting in their thread usually work when the thread is crap? Allowing it to run it's natural course to the dreaded 2nd/3rd pages.

dude1394 · 02-16-2010, 10:19 AM

I would second that suggestion in the political pages if barry wasn't such a cluster that you cannot keep track of all the broken pleges, political payoffs and attacks on his enemies. It's just too much for one thread.