Team Unity?

by Spidey on Nov 4, 2010 11:14 AM EDT

Some may think this is about the team unity for the Browns. Actually, this is an open question about the role/need for team unity among the DBN board when dealing with game-specific discussions (Game and Post-Game Threads)...

Looking back at the threads for the Steelers game makes me wonder if folks here are really on the same team? Thoughtful discussion and arguments among allies are necessary, but do we need to air out all of our dirty laundry in front of the enemy?

And don't get me started with supporting posters from the opponent's board. We walk a fine line between giving these guys the freedom to make an argument for their team and trolling. Look back at the thread and you will see a Steelers fan defends Big Ben, then he gets support from some of our posters - and before you know it, the guy is trashing us with Elf pictures!!! When opponents enter our house looking to start a fight - even if they might have a valid argument - have them take it outside (maybe another fanpost or external link? And certainly not in a Game Thread or Post-Game Thread).

I'm not saying we should all be happy and cheerful, agreeing with every comment made; and I'm not saying we should trash posters from the opponents. But, let's think a little...

This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

As an SB Nation blogger, one of the biggest things we’re encouraged to do is cross promote and cross comment amongst communities. Obviously it gets heated for division games, and it was even so much to the point for the Ravens’ blog that we had to agree to refrain from posting on each other’s sites last year. It seems like it is just a fact that divisional opponents in the AFC North hate each other (not everyone, just a high percentage).

I can try to regulate that, but as I’m sure you’ve seen from in-person encounters with opposing fans, you’re not going to change their opinions or attitudes. Trying to find a balance between keeping them in line in a non-trolling fashion, without being ridiculed for being over-the-top sensitive in moderating, isn’t easy to do without outright saying, “poof, you’re gone” to every offender who comes by.

I thank Brad and Matt for their moderator work during that week.

We shouldn’t have to worry much about this again until the last three weeks, when we battle the Bengals, Ravens, and Steelers to finish off the season.

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Nov 4, 2010 1:23 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah, the civility should okay this week, if the pre-game threads with the Pats fans are any indication.

I also wonder about the protocol on these boards when it comes to allowing the last word. I wish “agree to disagree” didn’t have such a negative connotation (though it is one of my dirtiest tricks when having an argument with my wife). Maybe this is where the mods need to step in and say “you’re both right”.

I think the cross-board talk is fine, but probably not appropriate in the Gameday thead and very questionable in the post-game thread – especially when it is the losing team’s thread (gotta avoid the appearance of gloating and condescension). I hate it when they come in after a victory an tell us how tough our team is.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 4, 2010 2:50 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

“agree to disagree”

With my hubby I now say, “you may be right” instead. Even though – on occasion – there’s no way in hell he’s right, it ends the ‘discussion’ in a more positive way. I haven’t used it yet on a dissenting commenter though, but it’s good to have in the arsenal.

This is a great subject, by the way, that comes up among rivals of our AFC East division too. There are many posters that are regular visitors on PatsPulpit who are Dolphins or Colts fans that we can argue with, but in a non-insulting way. With the Jets fan base it’s harder to find rational fans who want to talk beyond typical (and boring) trash.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Nov 4, 2010 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Ha! Thanks for reminding us of what we have to look forward to next week.

“you may be right” is certainly the more mature response. “Agree to disagree” is so much more destructive.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 4, 2010 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I hope this post leads to DBN uniforms!

I vote Chris as Offensive Captain. Golan as Defensive Captain & RDC as Special Teams Captain.

ROHC THE SOHC.

by SpecialBrownie on Nov 4, 2010 1:30 PM EDT reply actions

Rufio for President!

his pick sexes put us over the top

by North Coast Flea on Nov 4, 2010 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions

President of Football Operations? Like our very own Holmgren.

I’d like to nominate myself as defensive backs coach, and make my first assessment the following: Eric Wright sucks at football.

Anderception [an·der·cep·tion] -noun
1. the logical end result of a Derek Anderson pass

by Simmsinns on Nov 4, 2010 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

take a shot at Daboll as well, and you’ve got my vote.

by discoinferno083 on Nov 4, 2010 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions

I SO CALL WATER BOY!

ROHC THE SOHC.

by SpecialBrownie on Nov 4, 2010 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Can I play HB?

his pick sexes put us over the top

by North Coast Flea on Nov 5, 2010 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions

Can I be long snapper?

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Nov 5, 2010 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions

You can be jock strap cleaner boy.

ROHC THE SOHC.

by SpecialBrownie on Nov 5, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

He’s pretty sure it does not smell.

by JustBob on Nov 5, 2010 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions

I’d like to be the Assistant to the Travelling Secretary.

by Dawg Nuts on Nov 7, 2010 7:12 AM EST up reply actions

I don’t see anything wrong with fans from othe teams coming to this site to discuss football and I don’t think we should be teaming up against them. If someone comes here from another blog and gives thoughtful, intelligent posts then I will support them and even defend them against people here who attack them unecessarily, and I don’t see what’s wrong with that. Just because someone is a fan of another team doesn’t make them wrong, and just because someone is a Browns fan doesn’t make them right. I actually think there have been too many times where people on here have been rude to someone from another blog who’s just trying to have a civil discussion just because they have a different point of view.

Of course, there are people who come here just looking to start fights and antagonize us here, and those people should get criticized and possibly banned (if necessary), but let’s not assume all fans from other teams are like that. I don’t think we should be calling ourselves a “team” who should gang up on anyone who isn’t a Browns fan. That’s not the kind of attitude we want to have here.

. . . says the man from Columbus.

by Buckeye Brad on Nov 4, 2010 2:46 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

During the game thread and post game thread, it’s a fine line. Outside of those threads, we should be happy to have them. During the game and immediately after the game (especially if it’s the winners coming over to the loser’s thread), it’s not the appropriate time and place.

Maybe we set up a separate “midfield thread” where the opponents can share postgame thoughts, but they should not be coming into our lockerroom.

That’s all I’m trying to say. Not to squelch opposition and the opponent; but make it clear that there is a time and place for everything. If I am going to venture in to the Bengals board after we beat them, I sure as heck don’t expect flowers and kisses.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 4, 2010 3:01 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I don’t really think opposing fans commenting on our postgame threads is a problem on this site. I don’t even remembering it happening very often, either in a good or bad way, so I don’t really see the need for a seperate thread just for them. And I don’t really see the problem with them stopping by to say “good game” anyways. Again, if they’re doing soemthing inappropriate then we can take care of them, but we can’t be so sensitive that we’re going to shut out other fans just because we don’t want to hear from them.

. . . says the man from Columbus.

by Buckeye Brad on Nov 4, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

let’s be real here, the only times we really have any problems at all with other fans is 4 games a year. we all know the games i’m talking about. otherwise, other teams’ fans are fine on this site. since its only 1/4 of our games that give the site problems, we don’t change anything, we just let the mods handle it. simple as that. that’s just one man’s opinion.

by Dawg Nuts on Nov 7, 2010 7:19 AM EST up reply actions

I haven’t really noticed a big problem with fans from other teams in game and post-game threads stirring up trouble – unless it’s in that pile of crap that seems to develop toward the right-hand side of so many threads, in which case for me it’s buried. And I don’t see any problem with someone coming by when we’ve lost to say we played tough anyways. Some people are probably taught that such a thing is just good sportsmanship.

I’d say the much bigger problem is when someone from outside drops in to say “Good game” and they get smashed by one of our people saying “Get out, you f%#&ing troll!” Not to mention how some DBN posters often treat other DBN posters.

I say leave it to the moderators to kick out anyone who is just jumping in to stir up trouble and charge ourselves with not fanning their flames or stirring up pointless shyte amongst ourselves.

by JustBob on Nov 4, 2010 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Well said.

. . . says the man from Columbus.

by Buckeye Brad on Nov 4, 2010 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

From my POV, your (JB and BB) response misses the original point I was trying to make. Perhaps you really do disagree with my original point – if so, we’ll just agree to disagree…

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 6, 2010 12:33 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I don’t really see the “midfield” thread working, at least not in lieu of the game thread. I don,t think many of us would want to spend time there during the game, and any non-Browns fans would quickly abandon that dead thread for the one that is getting all the action. I think we are better served policing ourselves and just ignoring the any trolls. I skip over plenty of posts by DBN regulars as it is. Ignoring some punk interloper is just as easy.

by JustBob on Nov 6, 2010 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

I agree with all of this.

My method of dealing with the people that wanna start fights – Ignore them. If we aren’t adding fuel to their fire and they are still causing problems, then it’s an issue.

There's a new sheriff in town, his name's McCoy

by da36chamberz on Nov 4, 2010 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions

exactly.

by discoinferno083 on Nov 4, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m a long time vet of trash talking game lobbies and this sort of issue is constant. The essence of sharing viewpoints on the net is that it enhances our first amendment rights. One can expect honest disagreements. One can also expect comments intended to provoke. The only honest way to control the provokateur is to avoid engaging him or her.
Case in point: If we visit the Steelers’ site and throw around generalizations that they feel are provocative, they may misconstrue our intent and ban us. We may feel that we’ve have been unduly wronged. The whole thing is a slippery slope.

by elsandito on Nov 4, 2010 7:30 PM EDT reply actions

It’s not so much the trash talk- it’s the immediate arguments that pop up when people take the literal statements made in the heat of the game and postgame to extended conclusions.

If I want trash talk there are plenty of other places for that. But do we need the trash talk among fellow fans?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 6, 2010 12:42 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Ha ha it’s started. GroupThink in 2011.

They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best

About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback

I understand, as a big daddy come and take my spot type of demeanor?

by mooncamping on May 14, 2010 7:24 AM EDT

by Villeslgr on Nov 4, 2010 8:39 PM EDT reply actions

by discoinferno083 on Nov 4, 2010 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions

do you guys @ DBN hate the subject line?

never seen so many members not use the subject line…just wondering

Non Sibi Sed Patriae.
I love my ZX-6r Kawasaki.
I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life

Pat McAfee -Colts punter-"@StampedeBlue I hope your website gets exposed for a complete joke. There’s no reason for you to do that, and its completely ridiculous."

by NinjaZX6R on Nov 5, 2010 12:53 AM EDT reply actions

A bunch don’t prefer it. Most just don’t care either way.

his pick sexes put us over the top

by North Coast Flea on Nov 5, 2010 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions

It’s really a function of how many of us are also Indians fans who also post at Let’s Go Tribe, where they do hate the subject line. With a burning, white hot passion. Many of us got in the habit of ignoring the subject line and carry it over to the other blogs on which we post. That being said, the subject line is, really pretty useless, and throwing a few words into the subject line and carrying your sentence into the rest of the post just disrupts the flow of what you’re saying and makes posts more difficult to read. The only really good thing about subject lines is that if you use them with a large picture it does allow you to contract the post and hide the picture. That’s it for me.

"If Brown is the answer, then you’re asking the wrong question." - Ryan

by woodsmeister on Nov 5, 2010 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions

That being said, the subject line is, really pretty useless, and throwing a few words into the subject line and carrying your sentence into the rest of the post just disrupts the flow of what you’re saying and makes posts more difficult to read. The only really good thing about subject lines is that if you use them with a large picture it does allow you to contract the post and hide the picture. That’s it for me.

100% this. it seems like it was made for pics/long comments and it is very useful for that. but its really annoying when someone will type well big ben wasn’t charged with anything.

I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!

by bross09 on Nov 5, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions