Board Policy -- Deleting off-topic posts

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian McQueen

Hey everyone,

I'm going to go ahead and start a new thread on this subject matter so as to not further hijack Rich's thread. Going forward it will be our general policy to not delete threads unless they are anonymous and O/T or controversial/controntational. I was the one who deleted the thread on John Smoltz as well as a couple others yesterday morning. The main reason I decided to nuke this one was because of the huge outcry Leon and I were hit with concerning the posts about Orlando Cepeda and Curt Schilling from a week or two ago. I felt best to go ahead and get rid of this one since it covered a current player before more bellyaching about OT posts begins. Also, if you recall, we had asked that everyone take a break from OT posts for a little bit because the forum was inundated with them as of last week.

However, perhaps removing the post altogether isn't the best solution since there's no way to get the thread back if we need to. So therefore, we won't be deleting any threads that are not anonymous any longer. Anonymous posts (posts authored by someone that do not include a full name or Email address) that are way off topic may be deleted as they are reserved for board members. We want all of our members to feel that they can post OT once in a while but at the same time, if several people do it all at once, our front page will fill up really quickly with subject matter that most people won't care to read. If things do get out of hand, only then will we probably lock a few threads so we can keep the focus of the board on prewar cards.

Regarding BST requests on the main board. This is an issue we rarely have with those familiar with our forum, however we have typically deleted these upon sight as well. The way we'll handle this moving forward is we'll lock the thread and respond to the individual saying they need to move their request over to the BST area. After we allow the visitor a few hours to read that response and move his post, then we'll go ahead and delete the thread altogether. We will go ahead and handle memorabilia topics in a similar fashion since we've now built a new forum for that subject matter.

Thanks everyone for your patience while we sort through a few things. We're continuing to grow which is positive but there will always be "growing pains" as you know.

Regards,

Brian
redmaccie@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Regarding the thread like the John Smoltz one, why not just immediately lock it. That way you won't be deleting it but still getting the point across that it is not applicable to the board.

You can do the same to those numbskulls who talk about Seinfeld all the time!

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Murray

Who played Billy in the Seinfeld episode "The Sponge"? Hint: This is baseball related though not particularly "vintage".

No fair looking it up until you are absolutely stumped.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Barry,
It's an honor to be in the numbskull club.....

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Steve- I've never heard that one and I don't know. I just remember he promises Elaine that he will trim his sideburns.

Remember the episode where George dates a girl who looks exactly like Jerry? What is the actress's name, and who is her real life father and grandparents (hint: they're all very famous).

Steve- is Billy her boyfriend or a different character?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I feel memorabilia topics on this card site/side should be considered off topic as any other off topic...and permitted per the forum rules. With that being said the place to really talk about that stuff is on the memorabilia side. I would not want to delete or lock memorabilia off topics over here though.....again, no different than any other O/T in my opinion, except they are less off topic than some other off topics . If they get out of hand, which I am sure they won't, then that's another story. We want this place to be as open as possible with respect to the few rules we have..It's real easy though...IF you post about pre-war vintage baseball cards, or do an occasional off topic, all is well. Thanks again to everyone for making this a great site. best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Barry why should the thread about Smoltz be locked? I clearly followed board rules. Its stated that regular users are allowed an occasional off topic thread. I utilized the ability to post my occasional off topic thread. I dont think it needs to be locked or anything else for that matter, it should just be left alone. I totally agree that they should be occasional, keeping it down to once per month as Leon put it sounds fine.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I agree with you once again....although I would think for great participant's like yourself, or so many others, once a month for an O/T is almost not enough.....as long as we keep in our mind the focus of the board is the key here...I have never seen you come close to doing anything wrong....yet ....take care

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Dylan- I wasn't the one who locked it, and because of my own shenanigans I may not be the best person to answer your question. I think perhaps what Smoltz did in winning his 200th game really wasn't significant enough to warrant a special thread. There's always somebody passing some milestone, and there are dozens of current players who could be considered worthy of HOF induction.

It would be different when Bonds hits his 756th HR, an event that regardless of your opinion of him will be major news. Perhaps that is a situation where a thread about the new record would be tolerated. But Smoltz winning 200 (I know, nobody else won 200 and saved 150) just was too minor and one of the moderators decided to deep six it. Maybe he was fast on the trigger, but it's not my call.

[Archive]

Posted By: bill

tracy

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I see Ozzie and Harriet and the two boys- where's Tracy?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Is it my imagination or has part of this thread been deleted? I've never seen a thread before that's half here, and half gone. Or am I wrong about this?