Do you enjoy posting in the Game Threads anymore?

[fairweatherfan]

Yes.  I guess it really pains you optimists to be around realists, doesn't it?

Please not this debate again.  This has been happening for years and I don't know about your specific positions, but the self-labeled "realists" have consistently underestimated this team's abilities and future performance, 2010 being the best example.  The pattern is  much more consistent with emotional, irrational pessimism than with some kind of clearminded, objective assessment of the team.

There's nothing new about this tendency though - one of the earliest memories I have on the site was a poster declaring the season over in the first quarter of Game 5 of the 2008 Cavs series.  Problem is, as others have noted, there seem to be more of these posters (including that same guy) than in past years, and they're driving the more neutral and positive posters away with constant Chicken Littleing and bitter, sarcastic attacks on posters who don't share their bleak views.

I think dual game threads is a bad idea and would cause a lot of problems, but if the site wants to improve the quality of the threads, there need to be either repercussions for the posters who use the threads as an outlet for their seemingly constant urge to gripe and snarl about their favorite team, or an option to ignore their posts.  At a certain point it becomes functionally identical to baiting, and should be treated that way. 

I've been a frequent game thread poster in the past but I don't expect to do much more of it til things improve.  If that makes me part of the problem so be it.  I participate in the threads for the same reason I watch basketball - to relax and have fun.  If the threads start to get in the way of that then I have no interest in them.

[PosImpos]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

[KCattheStripe]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

If WOW can do it, so can Celticsblog!

[PosImpos]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

If WOW can do it, so can Celticsblog!

exactly.  ignore / squelch are standard options in online chat programs.

[Roy H.]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

Based upon observations of other sites, this is something that Jeff and the staff have decided is a non-starter.

[PosImpos]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

Based upon observations of other sites, this is something that Jeff and the staff have decided is a non-starter.

yeah, i know that's the conclusion the staff has come to.  i'm just pointing out that from my perspective, and my experience, it's the simplest and most obvious answer to this problem which keeps coming up.

i like the idea that was pointed out earlier, though, that people should just learn to moderate their own emotions better.  a lot of what comes up in the game threads is people posting in the spur of the moment on their initial emotional reaction to every single thing that happens.  that's bound to create a polarizing atmosphere.

being able to recognize that means both trying to temper your own reactions / urges to post as well as not allowing other people's posts to get under your skin so easily.

[KCattheStripe]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

Based upon observations of other sites, this is something that Jeff and the staff have decided is a non-starter.

It's because you hate WOW, isn't it? Honestly though, given the staff's reluctance to make seperate gamethreads because of how it would divide the blog  I can understand how they wouldn't want posters be able to divide the blog on their own.

[Roy H.]

Negativity is fine as people reflect upon bad plays, or tough calls, or questionable moves by the coach.  What drives me away from the thread is a few posters who are quieter when the C's are doing well, but who seem to thrive on making 'bold' predictions of doom and gloom as soon as the C's look vulnerable. 

'The season is over' comments are frustrating to read (especially so early in the season), but I can deal with hearing them once.  It is the repetition that frustrates me. 

I get the sense that most people who are disappointed with the commentary in the game threads feel similarly.  Is that accurate?  Nobody is saying that comments like "Ugh, terrible pass" are inappropriate, correct?

[Neurotic Guy]

Some people actually come here for open discussion. If people want to be negative, let them be negative. I don't understand how this has any effect on you? In what way does negativity personally harm you or the team to the point where we need to be talking about segregating a section of the community or even restricting their ability to contribute.

I really don't get it hopeless optimist in general. At least pessimist, for the most part, are willing to entertain an optimist's point of view but optimist seem to only want to be around other optimist. What kind of a deepened sense of understanding can that lead to?

I think most posters are actually neither of the 2 forms you describe.  Most posters are reasonable and pragmatic -- perhaps sometimes a little pessimistic or little optimistic, but generally, realistic.  I think you are also incorrect that there is a greater sense of fairness with either extreme.  A true optimist or true pessimist is defined as such because they are entrenched in that way of thinking.

I agree that the forums should be open and free -- and should allow for all types of viewpoint.  This also means that if some of us find certain viewpoints reptitive and annoying we are free not to post or participate.  However, prior to deciding to reduce involvement in the game threads, some want to express their concerns openly in the hope that doing so will improve the threads.  This is also an example of open discussion.

[barefacedmonk]

Negativity is fine as people reflect upon bad plays, or tough calls, or questionable moves by the coach.  What drives me away from the thread is a few posters who are quieter when the C's are doing well, but who seem to thrive on making 'bold' predictions of doom and gloom as soon as the C's look vulnerable. 

'The season is over' comments are frustrating to read (especially so early in the season), but I can deal with hearing them once.  It is the repetition that frustrates me.

That gets me as well.

[KCattheStripe]

Hey guys, the season is over.

[nickagneta]

an option to ignore their posts.

to me this is the answer that makes the most sense.  if there are certain posters you just can't stand, whose opinions seemingly always ruin your fun, then you should be able to simply not see their posts anymore.  both posters get to participate in the same threads, but they aren't bumping heads every time anymore.  problem solved.

Based upon observations of other sites, this is something that Jeff and the staff have decided is a non-starter.

yeah, i know that's the conclusion the staff has come to.  i'm just pointing out that from my perspective, and my experience, it's the simplest and most obvious answer to this problem which keeps coming up.

i like the idea that was pointed out earlier, though, that people should just learn to moderate their own emotions better.  a lot of what comes up in the game threads is people posting in the spur of the moment on their initial emotional reaction to every single thing that happens.  that's bound to create a polarizing atmosphere.

being able to recognize that means both trying to temper your own reactions / urges to post as well as not allowing other people's posts to get under your skin so easily.

I don't want to put words in others mouths but I think what many on here are complaining about are not the every once in a while negative emotional reactions to bad things happening on the court. I think we could all live with that and I think we are all guilty of that.

No, Pos, what we are complaining about is something quite different. Its a constant barrage of the same old prophecies of doom and gloom regardless of the situation coming from the same old people saying the same old things game in and game out.

- UP 15....we're doomed to lose because of ___________
- Tied...we're doomed to lose because of____________
- Losing regardless of how much time is left in the game....I told you we were going to lose, just blow this team up or play all the rookies or this player sucks or that player is worthless or Doc needs to be fired or ______________

That is what people are complaining about and why people are being driven from the thread. I'll try this once again but I don't think trying to guilt people into going to the game thread to make it a more balanced atmosphere is going to work. Its not our job to be miserable to make the game threads more balanced out. Its up to every person to adhere to rules and be a positive addition to the thread.

[Roy H.]

I'll try this once again but I don't think trying to guilt people into going to the game thread to make it a more balanced atmosphere is going to work. Its not our job to be miserable to make the game threads more balanced out. Its up to every person to adhere to rules and be a positive addition to the thread.

It's not about "guilt tripping".  However, in part the "negativity" of the game threads does become a (collective) self-fulfilling prophesy.  If all of the "positive" posters stop posting, it simply results in a more and more negative atmosphere.

[contramundum]

being able to recognize that means both trying to temper your own reactions / urges to post as well as not allowing other people's posts to get under your skin so easily.

I think there is a lot of truth at the end here - its just as easy for the "optimists" to quell their emotions when dealing with a "negative nancy" as it would be for the negative nancies to not post at all.

It is in our nature to debate - politics, basketball, economics... we all want our opinions known and we all want to shape the debate with our views.  The problem is that while most of us don't mind hearing an opposing view, nobody wants to hear that we're crazy if we disagree.

My personal opinion is that the game threads need to be kept on topic of the current game.  Stuff like "That was a terrible shot selection." or "Rondo needs to get less fancy with those passes, hes just throwing the ball away." is fine in context of the game.  When every turnover results in the same few people saying "WHAT DID I TELL YOU WE NEED TO BLOW IT UP TRADE EVERYONE ARGH".

With that said a good counterpoint can be made - the color commentators last night thought the C's should throw in the towel and conserve for the next game, just like numerous game thread participants.  I'm glad they didn't, that was an exciting bit of basketball toward the stretch!  My point being is that giving up then was obviously a legit tactic if Marv Albert is bringing it up as well.  Or maybe the negative nancies might feel a little dirty, knowing they agree with Marv Albert? Hmmmm....

[barefacedmonk]

My point being is that giving up then was obviously a legit tactic if Marv Albert is bringing it up as well.  Or maybe the negative nancies might feel a little dirty, knowing they agree with Marv Albert? Hmmmm....

Marv Albert has a man crush on LeBron. He'll wash his feet and drink that water if he got a chance.