haroldsnepsts

When I edit posts, it's almost always to remove a quoted post that I've had to delete. And I typically show that it's been edited along with an explanation why. I think I've also edited a post on occasion when someone has circumvented the profanity filter. But then all I do is type the profane word out and let the filter do its job. There have been instances where part of the post is off topic and may be responding to someone trolling the thread, but then the rest of the post is on topic. In cases like that I'll sometimes delete the response to the troll, but keep the on topic section. I'm asking in all seriousness, would you rather I nuke the whole post? Or go ahead and leave whatever portion can be saved? (Leaving it be is not an option). I can't think of a reason or instance i've ever changed someone's post, other than the above examples. I've never changed the words or content. As for being repulsed by editing or deleting content, no matter how tactless, you have to remember this is a community. We're hardly rated G here, but there are times where we've had to remove things not so much because they offended us as moderators, but because they offended a lot of members here. Again, it's not like we're making these decisions purely based on our personal biases. We're trying to maintain a fairly friendly environment that keeps most people happy. That being said, honestly I can't remember the last time I've had to remove something because people found it offensive. I think if people spend a bit of time on the site the parameters of what's acceptable becomes clear pretty quickly.

This. A million times this.

i can't speak to that specific incident but in my time as a mod here, it takes a whole lot more than that to get permabanned. That may have been the straw that broke the camels back. Typically people are pissed after they've been warned or had a post deleted and will react in anger so I try to let it slide. But then after that initial reaction subsides I can usually have a civil discussion with them about what happened. Not always, unfortunately, but usually. It also brings up another point to touch on from the perspective of a moderator. I can say that out of all the warnings and suspensions I've given, probably 90% of the people who PM me about their suspension say it's because I have some personal problem with them. They've never been right. Sure there's been a couple members I found somewhat irritating, but probably not nearly as many as you think given how long I've been doing this and the number of people here. And when an incident did arise with those people, I defer to other moderators about any potential incident, because I don't want any personal irritation to influence my moderating. And to be clear, that irritation is never because someone has an unpopular opinion. If your posts are thoughtful, civil, passionate about hockey, even if unpopular, I'm probably a fan of your work. The moderators all check in with one another about people who have become a problem and discuss the issues. When someone is warned or suspended, it leaves a record and an explanation that all the other moderators can look at. So no one is going rogue, banning members willy nilly. We're certainly not perfect, but we do try to maintain a level of consistency and do a good job for Matt. Ultimately it's like officiating. If everyone is a little irritated with us on any side of an issue, we probably handled it okay.

I do have to run but I do understand the frustration. I spend some time on hfboards and have actually gotten reprimanded by mods there a few times. I get it. More than anything I guess what I want to demystify is the idea that we're power hungry and throw it around just for the sake of doing it. I've come across mods like that but I can honestly say none of the active mods really are that way here. We're Wings fans who got sucked into LGW like the rest of you, and agreed to be moderators because we like the site and wanted to help Matt out. And we do check in with one another about what exactly we should let go and when we should step in. It's usually a grey area. And there's multiple mods so we want to enforce consistently but it's tricky sometimes. We may not always be correct in our thinking for deleting posts, locking threads, etc. but it's not done out of malice. Even if it's misguided, it's generally an attempt to keep productive discussion going here. So if you disagree with something, politely ask. Like I said you may not like the answer, but at least you'll know what the thinking was. And if you disagree with the policy then maybe it can become part of a larger discussion. Gotta run but I'll check back in to later to ramble on some more...

I would just ask that if a post of yours is deleted or a thread is locked and you want to know why, please PM one of us. You may not like the answer but it can at least provide you with an explanation. And to be clear, I'm not kidding when I say PM Matt if you have a problem with the moderating or a suggestion. He's a busy guy and may not get back to you right away so it's probably best to start with a moderator, but he obviously wants this site to be as successful and popular as it can be, and is open to suggestions. As I said above, I suggest PM'ing one of the mods. I can't really provide an explanation because I don't know what you're referring to. I only spend time on a small handful of forums, but honestly the ones I go to are exactly like this or more strict.

That's a great synopsis of what happened. I didn't personally delete the popcorn gif, but probably would have had I seen it first. Even though it was intended as lighthearted, a warning is our attempt to get a troubled thread back on topic. Immediately following a warning with a funny gif (that I'd probably otherwise let live) doesn't exactly help that cause. Another point I didn't mention is that you have to remember we're not here all the time. We don't see every post in every thread. Take the popcorn gif for example. If I went into that thread and the popcorn gif was immediately after the warning, but there's 10 other posts that are on topic, I'm going to leave it because disaster was averted and the thread stayed on topic. If I see that gif but there's no other posts after it. I may delete it just to err on the safe side of keeping it on topic. I hope all this rambling is making sense and providing some insight, because I have to go soon.

Again, I think a lot of it has to do with context. If a topic has mostly petered out, I'm fine letting it stray off topic and devolve into a funny gifs or just nonsensical humor to entertain one another. If a topic is still very active but there's a run of goofball posts that are making the thread take a hard left turn off topic, on a rare occasion I delete it. More often I end up deleting posts that insult other members and devolve into arguing about HOW people post here instead of the content of the post. I'm not sure what exactly happened that give the impression that moderators delete posts they disagree with. There's no way to make you believe me, but that's never been a reason I delete a post. Even when I "like" a post it's not necessarily saying I agree with it, but I like that the person made a thoughtful insightful argument. This place should have plenty of civil, intelligent hockey debate. It'd be so boring if everyone agreed, even if they agreed with me.

Ok, finally. something to talk about. thank you. Here's my two cents as a long time member who reluctantly became a moderator. First, believe it or not I generally try not to delete posts. No matter what the content, as a member here I know how irritating it is just to have your posts seemingly randomly vanish. I do sometimes try to let it be known in the thread why I deleted a post but that most often derails the thread into a discussion of what should and shouldn't be deleted. I may not do it enough but I sometimes send a PM just to give that person a heads up as to why their post got zapped. Sometimes it can be hard to get an idea of why things get deleted, but it's usually some combination of the following reasons. If it's wildly inappropriate and against forum rules If it insults another member or baits them in a way that will likely derail the thread. Sometimes it's for subtler reasons, like the thread has gotten ugly repeatedly. People insulting one another, going wildly off topic (when you think about it, we let topics generally stray pretty far), or has just required a lot of moderating to clean it up. It will be on a short leash. Speaking for myself, I'll sometimes delete a post I would normally let go because I'm trying to head off a problematic thread from going bad again. Contrary to popular belief, I NEVER delete a post just because I personally disagree with it. Anyone who's been here for a while should be familiar enough with my posting history to know I'm totally fine with criticizing the Wings or having a minority opinion. And because I've gotten to know the active mods here I think I can safely speak for them on what is apparently a big secret. Moderating is a pain in the ass. None of this current active group of mods relish the opportunity to delete posts or suspend members. We're first and foremost hockey fans. The more time spent moderating means the less time spent talking hockey, which is why we all came here in the first place. So what's your question exactly?

That could also be discussed in this thread, if you actually would raise an issue to discuss. This is your opportunity to have your opinion heard and discuss how you would like the site to be moderated, since you seem very unhappy with how it is currently run. Instead you're ignoring that opportunity and continuing to make sarcastic complaints. Again, you're just choosing to insult the moderators without actually citing an example to discuss.

That is sad. Perhaps the issue isn't on the moderating end of the equation. Your thread title is Moderating problems but you didn't actually include anything to discuss. As I said, I'm happy to discuss moderating issues here. My only request is that people take a minute to read the forum rules first. It should help explain much of what we do here. http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

Agreed. If it were in place during the Ducks game, I still don't see that play ending up any differently. It's a marginal hook to Kronwall's hands, he falls down and Getzlaf scores. I can't imagine a universe where they review that play on video, disallow the goal and retroactively call a penalty on Getzlaf for the hook.

And then offered a PTO and released by the Preds. You could still say it speaks to the Kings assessment of young players. Muzzin was essentially given up on by two teams, and is now a key part of the Kings defense. During their last Cup run he was second in TOI/G to Doughty, plays on the PP and kills penalties. What's funny is he was a bit of a whipping boy among Kings fans for a while because of his brutal turnovers, but he's settled down with more experience.

For some context, one Kings fan started a thread about "no top end prospects" as a reaction to the "hfboards Top 50 prospects" not having any Kings prospects. If you read the thread, there are a couple people who are concerned, but most people rightly point out that they don't have the sexy high end picks because many have graduated or been traded, and the Kings are no longer drafting high because of their success. But that they still have a lot of players who could potentially work their way on to the roster and contribute.

Those are not legal alternatives to GCL. GameCenterLive is the only legal way to watch NHL games because broadcasts are the property of the NHL. These other sites circumvent copyright law by being located in another country, but that doesn't make them legal. Neither does paying for them.

To clarify, he won't be in charge of Player Safety. That's still Quintal. He'll be part of the advisory panel. But it's still pretty sketchy.

Agreed. Getzlaf does hook him, but it's a reaching one-hander. It's a marginal call at best. Kronwall should be stronger on the puck, and likely would've been but it looked like he toe picked and fell down. That's what caused the turnover. Franzen needs to play to the whistle instead of throwing his hand up and crying about the no call.

Definitely doublecheck, but I think you can cancel within 5 days and get a full refund. So you could give it a try for a few days and see if it's worth it, cancel if it's not. I ordered it but was so annoyed by the blackouts that I ended up canceling. One night there were three games on and all three were blacked out.

The problem with #2 is that there could be many games that indirectly impact the Flyers, especially as the season wears on. Say there's a game late in the season and the Pens are playing Edmonton. Malkin throws a cheapshot and it actually gets reviewed and he could be suspended. The Flyers are in no way involved, but if it's a tight playoff race and the Penguins losing Malkin for a number of games could impact the Flyers playoff positioning. I don't know that Pronger would actually let that influence his decision, but he is being paid millions of dollars by the Flyers. They've taken good care of him since his injury. Even if it's not conscious, there's probably deep loyalty there.

Yes but hitting is a much more integral part of the game, even though some hits will involve contact with the head that can cause concussion. With the league looking to reduce concussions, eliminating guys punching each other in the head is a pretty clearcut way to reduce potential concussions without affecting actual game play that much. I'm not advocating for or against, but I think fighting in hockey will be going away in the next decade. Honestly I'm torn on the issue. I've been watching hockey a long time and think fighting has a place in the game (though I hate staged fights and fights after obviously clean hits), but given the toll it takes on these enforcers after their careers are over, it's harder for me to accept as a good part of the game. A guy living the rest of his life with screwed up hands or a bad knee is one thing. But post concussion syndrome is a brain injury with much more serious symptoms.

Lewis probably does get a bit too much flack but expectations were extremely high, I agree with number9 though, I don't think Lewis was anything special. And again, you have to consider the roster he had in 2003 versus what Babcock has had to work with the last few seasons.

It's official by the way. Pronger now works for the Department of Player Safety. http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/601247 I don't quite understand how the Flyers can consider him an active player on injured reserve (and get relief from his cap hit) while he is employed in the NHL offices. Must be nice to be an owner in Bettman's inner circle.

But you have to remember the roster Lewis had. He took basically the team that won the Stanley Cup the previous year and lost in the first round. To Mike Babcock. Comparing the players Lewis had to work with to what Babcock has been working with since 09 is not exactly apples to apples. It's not even fruit to fruit. Lewis underperformed given the roster he had. Great in the regular season and tanked in the playoffs. Ilitch had gone through enough of that in the mid 90s.

Now that the season is officially beginning, just a friendly reminder about illegal streaming sites. From the forum rules: · DON'T post links to torrent or illegal streaming websites. LetsGoWings.com does not condone the sharing of illegal content on this web site and all links will be removed. (This also includes instructions on how to set up or view illegal streaming feeds without overtly linking to them.) http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 12m 12 minutes ago Chris Pronger will continue to be on LTIR with PHI while he works at the NHL. Nice deal for Pronger. I guess his concussion symptoms must be doing well enough that he's up for this, which is good. For a long while there his symptoms sounded pretty brutal.

Maybe that's why Kindl is in the lineup over Lashoff. there was already too much salary in the press box. Seriously though, let the season begin!!!