Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions

[MattG12]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

I think IP handled Rondo2287's post perfectly

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

I say we assign every member a member-number, then using a random number generator generate a number evertime there is a disciplinary action.  The member who is assigned that member number is then drafted to be on the disciplinary board for that disciplinary decision.  It would be like Celticsblog Jury duty.

I think you are underestimating the pain in the butt factor of that idea. There are a LOT of actions taken by mods. Whether it is editing a post or banning a spammer or whatever. What I think you really want is to make sure someone is there when an established poster is banned. I can understand that. I disagree with it, wholeheartedly, because I know how we do it, and I know how we handle disagreements, and I know that adding a completely unpredictable, and assuredly biased random opinion to the mix would be counterproductive, but I understand it.

You make friends on here, you get posters whos posts you look forward to reading. Losing them without knowing the whole story is frustrating. I could understand that too. I can tell you that as a mod there have been a few people that have been banned that pained me to see them go. But, if someone breaks the big rules (offensive behavior, insulting, just basically being a complete butthole and being mean to the rest of the members that disagree with them is really the one that we dislike the most) enough times, and/or shows no inclination of changing the behavior, they get banned, plain and simple. I keep reading about consistency, but we are consistent in that. Almost everyone gets a second chance, unless they decide to just nuke the place on their way out.

regarding S&MP's post...one thing that I find kind of troubling...you ask for transparency, or the parties you represent ask for transparency, or unnamed people who have certain feelings they can't voice themselves but they're still there, or whatever. You/they want transparency..but what about us? We hear rumors about our own behaviors all the time, but the people spreading these rumors (see: I have heard from many people, established posters on the site, that the mods something something) never come forward. Heck they never even have the decency to shoot us a PM. The people that have come forward in this thread with concerns, they don't get banned, but if there is a silent majority out there, why so quiet?

Next time you have a problem, or hear a rumor, or feel like a mod is basically just being a royal jerk, tell them, or tell another mod. See what happens. You don't always get what you want, but if you feel like you werent treated fairly, then call me a liar. I imagine you will be surprised.

Except anything regarding Master Po. I'm not touching that. 

Notice how he gave Rondo a good description on why it's a bad idea without belittling him and saying "Terrible idea".

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

[Donoghus]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

I think IP handled Rondo2287's post perfectly

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

I say we assign every member a member-number, then using a random number generator generate a number evertime there is a disciplinary action.  The member who is assigned that member number is then drafted to be on the disciplinary board for that disciplinary decision.  It would be like Celticsblog Jury duty.

I think you are underestimating the pain in the butt factor of that idea. There are a LOT of actions taken by mods. Whether it is editing a post or banning a spammer or whatever. What I think you really want is to make sure someone is there when an established poster is banned. I can understand that. I disagree with it, wholeheartedly, because I know how we do it, and I know how we handle disagreements, and I know that adding a completely unpredictable, and assuredly biased random opinion to the mix would be counterproductive, but I understand it.

You make friends on here, you get posters whos posts you look forward to reading. Losing them without knowing the whole story is frustrating. I could understand that too. I can tell you that as a mod there have been a few people that have been banned that pained me to see them go. But, if someone breaks the big rules (offensive behavior, insulting, just basically being a complete butthole and being mean to the rest of the members that disagree with them is really the one that we dislike the most) enough times, and/or shows no inclination of changing the behavior, they get banned, plain and simple. I keep reading about consistency, but we are consistent in that. Almost everyone gets a second chance, unless they decide to just nuke the place on their way out.

regarding S&MP's post...one thing that I find kind of troubling...you ask for transparency, or the parties you represent ask for transparency, or unnamed people who have certain feelings they can't voice themselves but they're still there, or whatever. You/they want transparency..but what about us? We hear rumors about our own behaviors all the time, but the people spreading these rumors (see: I have heard from many people, established posters on the site, that the mods something something) never come forward. Heck they never even have the decency to shoot us a PM. The people that have come forward in this thread with concerns, they don't get banned, but if there is a silent majority out there, why so quiet?

Next time you have a problem, or hear a rumor, or feel like a mod is basically just being a royal jerk, tell them, or tell another mod. See what happens. You don't always get what you want, but if you feel like you werent treated fairly, then call me a liar. I imagine you will be surprised.

Except anything regarding Master Po. I'm not touching that. 

Notice how he gave Rondo a good description on why it's a bad idea without belittling him and saying "Terrible idea".

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

You're terribly mistaken if you believe that we don't take other posters seriously.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

I think IP handled Rondo2287's post perfectly

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

I say we assign every member a member-number, then using a random number generator generate a number evertime there is a disciplinary action.  The member who is assigned that member number is then drafted to be on the disciplinary board for that disciplinary decision.  It would be like Celticsblog Jury duty.

I think you are underestimating the pain in the butt factor of that idea. There are a LOT of actions taken by mods. Whether it is editing a post or banning a spammer or whatever. What I think you really want is to make sure someone is there when an established poster is banned. I can understand that. I disagree with it, wholeheartedly, because I know how we do it, and I know how we handle disagreements, and I know that adding a completely unpredictable, and assuredly biased random opinion to the mix would be counterproductive, but I understand it.

You make friends on here, you get posters whos posts you look forward to reading. Losing them without knowing the whole story is frustrating. I could understand that too. I can tell you that as a mod there have been a few people that have been banned that pained me to see them go. But, if someone breaks the big rules (offensive behavior, insulting, just basically being a complete butthole and being mean to the rest of the members that disagree with them is really the one that we dislike the most) enough times, and/or shows no inclination of changing the behavior, they get banned, plain and simple. I keep reading about consistency, but we are consistent in that. Almost everyone gets a second chance, unless they decide to just nuke the place on their way out.

regarding S&MP's post...one thing that I find kind of troubling...you ask for transparency, or the parties you represent ask for transparency, or unnamed people who have certain feelings they can't voice themselves but they're still there, or whatever. You/they want transparency..but what about us? We hear rumors about our own behaviors all the time, but the people spreading these rumors (see: I have heard from many people, established posters on the site, that the mods something something) never come forward. Heck they never even have the decency to shoot us a PM. The people that have come forward in this thread with concerns, they don't get banned, but if there is a silent majority out there, why so quiet?

Next time you have a problem, or hear a rumor, or feel like a mod is basically just being a royal jerk, tell them, or tell another mod. See what happens. You don't always get what you want, but if you feel like you werent treated fairly, then call me a liar. I imagine you will be surprised.

Except anything regarding Master Po. I'm not touching that. 

Notice how he gave Rondo a good description on why it's a bad idea without belittling him and saying "Terrible idea".

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

Did I say anything about not respecting one another? I respect all my friends and yet we have very heated debates from time to time, and call each other names if the situation calls for it. Not saying that it has to be this way in here, but what has been created is a place where status quo is one that appears to be overly polite at times, and as such the most minor of "social infractions" (like in this thread Fafnir calling someone's idea terrible) it suddenly becomes an "issue" unnecessarily just because people get too sensitive about this things... very minor things.

If I were to be one of those over-sensitive types, I would take exception to you calling my post garbage. But I'll let it slide because I'm such a nice fella. But good to see we're respecting one another...

[Chris]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

First of all, you need to differentiate the difference between calling an "idea" terrible, and a "post" terrible.  If you call the post terrible, that may be an attack on the way they post, which is borderline at best.  But you can feel free to argue that an idea is terrible.  That is what good debate is all about.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

So, no, this would not be acceptable, because you are attacking the post, rather than the idea, which infers something about the poster, other than that you disagree with them.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

He could have.  And that would be fine.  But it is not necessary.  First off, the poster was making a joke anyways, so I don't know if he really needs to thank the person for taking that time.  But also, you don't need to start every post with some condescending formality.  If you have a point, and you make it respectfully, which he did, then that is fine.

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

I understand this, however, I think you are misconstruing our explanations of why things would not work as us "shooting down" ideas.  We take EVERY suggestion and poster seriously.  Just some of them simply would not work in our opinions.  We have been trying to explain why, but our explanations clearly fall on deaf ears way too often.

[MattG12]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

I think IP handled Rondo2287's post perfectly

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

I say we assign every member a member-number, then using a random number generator generate a number evertime there is a disciplinary action.  The member who is assigned that member number is then drafted to be on the disciplinary board for that disciplinary decision.  It would be like Celticsblog Jury duty.

I think you are underestimating the pain in the butt factor of that idea. There are a LOT of actions taken by mods. Whether it is editing a post or banning a spammer or whatever. What I think you really want is to make sure someone is there when an established poster is banned. I can understand that. I disagree with it, wholeheartedly, because I know how we do it, and I know how we handle disagreements, and I know that adding a completely unpredictable, and assuredly biased random opinion to the mix would be counterproductive, but I understand it.

You make friends on here, you get posters whos posts you look forward to reading. Losing them without knowing the whole story is frustrating. I could understand that too. I can tell you that as a mod there have been a few people that have been banned that pained me to see them go. But, if someone breaks the big rules (offensive behavior, insulting, just basically being a complete butthole and being mean to the rest of the members that disagree with them is really the one that we dislike the most) enough times, and/or shows no inclination of changing the behavior, they get banned, plain and simple. I keep reading about consistency, but we are consistent in that. Almost everyone gets a second chance, unless they decide to just nuke the place on their way out.

regarding S&MP's post...one thing that I find kind of troubling...you ask for transparency, or the parties you represent ask for transparency, or unnamed people who have certain feelings they can't voice themselves but they're still there, or whatever. You/they want transparency..but what about us? We hear rumors about our own behaviors all the time, but the people spreading these rumors (see: I have heard from many people, established posters on the site, that the mods something something) never come forward. Heck they never even have the decency to shoot us a PM. The people that have come forward in this thread with concerns, they don't get banned, but if there is a silent majority out there, why so quiet?

Next time you have a problem, or hear a rumor, or feel like a mod is basically just being a royal jerk, tell them, or tell another mod. See what happens. You don't always get what you want, but if you feel like you werent treated fairly, then call me a liar. I imagine you will be surprised.

Except anything regarding Master Po. I'm not touching that. 

Notice how he gave Rondo a good description on why it's a bad idea without belittling him and saying "Terrible idea".

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

You're terribly mistaken if you believe that we don't take other posters seriously.

No I'm not... but I didn't mean to generalize. Some mods don't take others seriously. You are not one of them.

[MattG12]

Okay then... if that's the way we want CelticsBlog to be run. I can be like Fafnir and call somebody's post terrible as long as I explain myself.

Budweiser Celtic, your post is garbage because I think if we're going to call CelticsBlog a community we need to be able to respect one another.

On a serious note... Fafnir easily could have said, "While I'm glad you're taking the time to try to come up with ideas, this isn't a very good idea because... etc."

I think IP handled Rondo2287's post perfectly

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

I say we assign every member a member-number, then using a random number generator generate a number evertime there is a disciplinary action.  The member who is assigned that member number is then drafted to be on the disciplinary board for that disciplinary decision.  It would be like Celticsblog Jury duty.

I think you are underestimating the pain in the butt factor of that idea. There are a LOT of actions taken by mods. Whether it is editing a post or banning a spammer or whatever. What I think you really want is to make sure someone is there when an established poster is banned. I can understand that. I disagree with it, wholeheartedly, because I know how we do it, and I know how we handle disagreements, and I know that adding a completely unpredictable, and assuredly biased random opinion to the mix would be counterproductive, but I understand it.

You make friends on here, you get posters whos posts you look forward to reading. Losing them without knowing the whole story is frustrating. I could understand that too. I can tell you that as a mod there have been a few people that have been banned that pained me to see them go. But, if someone breaks the big rules (offensive behavior, insulting, just basically being a complete butthole and being mean to the rest of the members that disagree with them is really the one that we dislike the most) enough times, and/or shows no inclination of changing the behavior, they get banned, plain and simple. I keep reading about consistency, but we are consistent in that. Almost everyone gets a second chance, unless they decide to just nuke the place on their way out.

regarding S&MP's post...one thing that I find kind of troubling...you ask for transparency, or the parties you represent ask for transparency, or unnamed people who have certain feelings they can't voice themselves but they're still there, or whatever. You/they want transparency..but what about us? We hear rumors about our own behaviors all the time, but the people spreading these rumors (see: I have heard from many people, established posters on the site, that the mods something something) never come forward. Heck they never even have the decency to shoot us a PM. The people that have come forward in this thread with concerns, they don't get banned, but if there is a silent majority out there, why so quiet?

Next time you have a problem, or hear a rumor, or feel like a mod is basically just being a royal jerk, tell them, or tell another mod. See what happens. You don't always get what you want, but if you feel like you werent treated fairly, then call me a liar. I imagine you will be surprised.

Except anything regarding Master Po. I'm not touching that. 

Notice how he gave Rondo a good description on why it's a bad idea without belittling him and saying "Terrible idea".

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

Did I say anything about not respecting one another? I respect all my friends and yet we have very heated debates from time to time, and call each other names if the situation calls for it. Not saying that it has to be this way in here, but what has been created is a place where status quo is one that appears to be overly polite at times, and as such the most minor of "social infractions" (like in this thread Fafnir calling someone's idea terrible) it suddenly becomes an "issue" unnecessarily just because people get too sensitive about this things... very minor things.

If I were to be one of those over-sensitive types, I would take exception to you calling my post garbage. But I'll let it slide because I'm such a nice fella. But good to see we're respecting one another...

My comment was a comparative... I didn't even mean it, so I would hope you would let it slide.

[nickagneta]

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

But what if the ideas are all bad?

I'm not a mod but I think the ombudsman idea is bad. I further think the lottery idea is terrible. An ombudsman isn't necessary, the mods do their thankless job tremendously and behind closed doors. There's no need for the general public to know what goes on in disciplinary decisions only the person that is being disciplined. And the lottery?

So you get disciplined Matt do you want some 13 year old kid with 85 posts being your ombudsman? Or someone you don't like or respect? What about me? If my number came up to be your ombudsman, are you going to be happy about it?

Ideas are great and they are great to toss around but when they are determined not to be good ideas or just not ideas that will work within this blog, have a thicker skin and move on. Thanks for trying.

[BudweiserCeltic]

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

For the most part they're either unreasonable, bad, or just unworkable ideas. That's the nature of these things. I'm an admin in a forum and mod in a couple of others, and it's no different. People come with a crap-load of ideas that simply either don't work, or the staff isn't really interested in making that particular idea possible for X amount of reasons. But once in a while, they're accepted, and that's all you can ask.

Some of my ideas I've had for this forum have been established, many others "ignored" if you want to use that word. But hey, no need to get agitated about it.

[JSD]

Actually, I think Rondo2287 had every right to respond in the way he did. As a matter of fact, he handled it better than I have dealing with almost the exact same comment.

According to the rules:

"Respect each other at all times. There is no need for name-calling or harassment of any poster. This includes behavior in all areas of Celticsblog, including forum posts, blog comments and personal messages. While we encourage lively debate there is no reason for anyone to disrespect a fellow poster's ideas."

While that can be interpreted differently by some, "I think that's a bad idea" or "it's my opinion that's a bad idea" is just more polite.

[MattG12]

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

I understand this, however, I think you are misconstruing our explanations of why things would not work as us "shooting down" ideas.  We take EVERY suggestion and poster seriously.  Just some of them simply would not work in our opinions.  We have been trying to explain why, but our explanations clearly fall on deaf ears way too often.

I agree that Rondo's idea would not work. When I said it was a good idea, I also said it would be way too much work for the mods. IP said something very similar except with a large description from a mods perspective of why it would be too much work. I thought IP's post was an excellent way to reply to somebody who comes up with an idea that wouldn't work.

Fafnir's post on the other hand, and Rondo said this too so I'm not the only one who thinks it, came off as being condescending.

If every mod responded to every regular posters ideas the way Fafnir did, the regular posters would stop telling the mods their ideas. That wasn't constructive criticism. It was just criticism. I don't think Fafnir meant to say it in a condescending way, I'm just saying that is how it read.

[Rondo2287]

While I did find it to be condescending and disrespectful, especially since another poster had already said that they thought it was a good idea, its alright, you win some and you lose some.

Why does another posters opinion affect what you think of my response?

I was calling it a bad idea, that was my opinion of it and I gave my reasons for calling it such. That's my honest opinion and it wasn't conveyed disrespectfuly.

Just like I've called it a terrible idea to bench KG and start Sheed/BBD, or many other ideas that I thought were "awful", "terrible", and "bad".

Because honestly im used to you bashing most things i say, so that doesnt bug me anymore, but when somebody else openly agrees with an idea that i had, and then you call it terrible your not only being condescending and disrespectful to me you are being condescending and disrespectful to him to.

[BudweiserCeltic]

While that can be interpreted differently by some, "I think that's a bad idea" or "it's my opinion that's a bad idea" is just more polite.

Lol, case in point about my complaint about this place maybe being over-polite at times. hehe.

[BballTim]

I would have to say that if an ombudsman were to be elected, it would have to be a unanimous choice.  

The way I understand this, among some members of the community, there is a distrust of the staff in general.  There is a perception by some people that we are not always being fair.  Is that correct?

So, if we are going to correct this by making a non-staff-member privy to private discussions, then that non-staff-member needs to be more respected by every member of the site, or else that person's assurances will be taken with the same grain of salt that is afforded the staff, and we are right back where we started, except, we have compromised the privacy of the posters by allowing a non-staff-member to be privy to the private discussions of the staff, regarding these posters.

  Just out of curiosity, how many people get banned or suspended from this blog? Is this a rampant issue?

Absolutely not.  I hesitate to put a number on it off the top of my head, but other than spammers, I would guess you could count the number of posters who have been banned in the last year on one hand...and for suspensions, you probably would not need to take off your shoes.

  Then I'd call this much ado about nothing.

  By the way, this is an interesting topic. Not only an I not an "insider", but it turns out that I'm not even an "outsider", where people would send me PMs to warn me about admins run amok and other such things. What's the next level? Outlier? Deep-space satellite?

[MattG12]

It's a bit agitating if you are a regular poster coming up with ideas and the mods are shooting them all down. This place will never improve if the mods don't take the other posters seriously.

But what if the ideas are all bad?

I'm not a mod but I think the ombudsman idea is bad. I further think the lottery idea is terrible. An ombudsman isn't necessary, the mods do their thankless job tremendously and behind closed doors. There's no need for the general public to know what goes on in disciplinary decisions only the person that is being disciplined. And the lottery?

So you get disciplined Matt do you want some 13 year old kid with 85 posts being your ombudsman? Or someone you don't like or respect? What about me? If my number came up to be your ombudsman, are you going to be happy about it?

Ideas are great and they are great to toss around but when they are determined not to be good ideas or just not ideas that will work within this blog, have a thicker skin and move on. Thanks for trying.

Much like jury duty in real life I'm sure we wouldn't allow somebody to be the "extra juror" if they have any connections to the case being discussed. I also think we could also put guidelines to being that extra juror. It should be somebody who posts frequently, maybe a certain age.

I don't even back the idea because I think it's too much work. I just don't like the way Fafnir refuted it. That's all.

[Roy Hobbs]

EDIT: The other forum I've been a part of for years, I modded for a while.  We grew a LOT over the years I've been there.  Keith, the owner, was very clear that we were never going to please EVERYONE, and that he knew and understood that people were going to cycle through the site; people might get upset about something and leave, and there really wasn't anything that we could do about it.  Some people just need drama; you can be as fair and open and transparent as possible, and some people are still going to find something to fault you for.  Just makes me think this whole thread is ridiculous.

Thanks for your comments.  I definitely see why a thread like this could appear ridiculous, but let me try to explain the intent, at least as I see it.

Compared to other Celtics message boards, Celticsblog has comparatively strict rules, and a fairly large staff of moderators and administrators.  With such a structure, it would be pretty easy for people to assume we run a totalitarian regime here, and therefore, we go out of our way to give members outlets to express concerns.  We have a complete open door policy via PMs, but we also want people to feel that they can discuss issues publicly.  If we only allowed private discussion of our rules, people would assume we had something to hide.

It would be very easy to say "we're the staff, and if you don't like it, tough".  However, we try to be fairly transparent, especially about the rules and what they mean.  We know that there's a vocal minority of folks who will never be happy, and simply like to stir up trouble.  Those people, you can never please (and it's these people who are spreading outright lies about the staff via PMs, at least according to the information I've been provided).  However, for the vast majority of the blog, hopefully people see us discussing the rules, etc., and see that we really are working hard to make this a fun, respectful, and fair environment for everybody.

Much of it is probably wasted typing, but especially now -- when certain members with an anti-staff agenda are spreading lies behind the scenes and trying to poison the impressions of members, both new and old -- I think it makes sense for us to be public about our behavior, while at the same time staying true to our standards regarding member privacy.