Well done??? I thought that was an extremely negative article. You're on a one-way elevator to athletic damnation. Heading down. Way, way down. You pass the gluttons (Hello, Mr. Kemp!). The thieves (Mommy, look: It's Ike Austin!). The sowers of discord (Michael Westbrook, are you wearing a black belt?). And finally, good ol' Beelzebub himself (Stuart Scott? Boo-yah!). But that's not the end of it. Nope, there's one more floor to go. A tenth circle in the Sports Inferno. The deepest, darkest, most forsaken pit of them all, a place where fiction is fact, rumor is currency and gossip is seldom — if ever — idle. In other words, Internet message boards. Is that supposed to be funny?? The article's not news-it's commentary. It paints internet boards in a simplistic negative context. The article is redundant, too long, and isn't well organized. The English professor from Montgomery College is calling. Just gives me another reason to not read the Washington Times. I didn't need another one.
Tell me whether or not you find this kind of positive stuff in the article: -The humor that goes on in the boards -The fact that there are moderators who check the validity of threads -The fact that some boards are better than others -The fact that each board seems to have its own culture -The fact that MLS has partnered with BigSoccer to try to expand the fan base -The fact that there's threads to get all sorts of information, such as the FAQ thread, or you can start a thread and ask a question and get it answered -The fact that it's a great way to waste time at work -The fact that it's a great way to learn social skills/interact w/other people safely (ok I'm going overbard perhaps........) I came up w/this stuff in a minute. There's all kinds of positive stuff about an internet board such as this one that doesn't make the light of day in that article. That's why I say it's a simple slanted commentary and not a news story.
I mean for what other professional team do you get to be so close to the writers, the coach, the organization. Look at what we get on this board. -Posts from writers Stephen Goff, Ed Morgans, Jeff Bradley -Posts from DC organization members Zack, Catherine, etc -2 invitation from coach Hudson to meet us at a bar w/players like Stoichkov, Stewart, etc to talk about DC United -Invitations to parties w/players at places like the Exchange where former coach Rongen gives a "hello" on the air It's an absolute treasure to have such close contact to a professional team. We need MORE people on these boards to take advantage of the opportunities here, not LESS. The way the article was written, NONE of this stuff gets talked about. If this kind of stuff gets talked about, you can be sure more people would come to this board. Also from a previous Washington Times article we had some author who was waiting for the Redskins to start again say something like "I could watch DC United. But why??" That was just another example of paint brush reporting from the Washington Times.
check check check check no (but the article was about sports message boards in general, not just Bigsoccer) implied I thought it was a good article. Fair (it did point out that some of the rumors turn out to be true) and sometimes funny. I'd wondered what ABMOD meant. Cherno
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the stuff he wrote about BigSoccer seemed rather positive to me. He mentioned how Peter Wilt and Stephan Zack are on the boards and how we have amazing access to ask them questions. He pointed out how many people have met and become friends through BigSoccer and that it's like sitting at a bar and discussing soccer just without the beer. You say he didn't mention any of that, yet I just pointed out where he did. Did you actually read his article, or had you made up your mind to hate it because it was written in the WashTimes? He wrote that some boards can be havens for people to spread rumors whose sole purpose is to hurt someone else. And gave examples mainly in college sports. Have you been to any of these boards? Please tell me where he is wrong. I thought it was a great article.
Outline of the article: I. Introduction Describe 3 bizarre examples of elevator stops on the way to athletic damnation only to get to the tenth circle in the Sports Inferno, also known as the internet boards. (Tell me if anyone other than Patrick Hruby knows what that means.) II. Main Section A. State how 2 coaches (Price, Eustachy) were fired because of internet boards. B. State 4 crazy rumors from internet boards (Spurrier coaching Notre Dame, Piazza gay, Jordan coaching Illinois, Bobby Bowden retiring from Florida State) C. State how internet boards are like all vices D. Get into BigSoccer.com 1. Peter Wilt quashed an internet rumor 2. Stuff about Stephen Zack semi-regularly? posting on BigSoccer.com 3. Fan quote about Stephen Zack 4. State internet message boards aren't all bad (what's this negative sweeping statement doing here in the ?? Shouldn't it be at the beginning or end) 5. More BigSoccer stuff, including what ABMOD means E. .........redudancy, redundancy, redundancy, redundant example, more sweeping statements about internet boards until we get to a concluding quote.... III. Conclusion Wilson sighed. "I know for a fact that some of these messages are planted just to cause other schools problems," he said. "But by the same token, you can't discount them, because one in 10 turn out to be true."
BudWiser - Is the basic problem in your view that you don't think that BigSocccer (or maybe just the DC board?) got a fair shake for being - would you say - exceptional? Is that right? I don't cruise around on other sports boards so I can't say whether they're crap or not. But if this article is accurate then I'd agree with what I surmise to be BudWiser's complaint. Some boards on BigSoccer don't fit the overall view of sports message boards as portrayed in that article. That could have been made more explicit.
Look at the numbers he quotes for other sites being "busy" Blew up??? 300 in 12 hours??? Please. Jose L. Couso puts up 300 posts in 12 hours himself. He completely minimized the world of BigSoccer. 250,000 members compared to 300 posts in 12 hours. Not exactly apples and apples here. And he completely under-estimates the impact of message boards on college athletics, recruiting in general. I went to UNC, the author should have visited the message boards at insidecarolina.com when the whole Matt Doherty situation was going down. There were 2500 people on there at any time. And only 50% of recruits read message boards? Maybe in football but not in basketball. That number is closer to 99%. Recruits, their parents, HS coaches, AAU coaches, college coaches, administrators, all read the boards. Ask a college basketball journalist where he gets his ideas for articles and almost every one will tell you the message boards. 300 in 12 hours... what a joke.
From what I've seen of some other boards, I would say it's a fairly accurate portrayal of them in general. But note that the most positive features of message boards is in the part of the article that focuses on BS: Wilt's and Zack's involvement, the comparative civility, Sachin's depiction of the community, the roadtrip info, etc. Face it, you knew somebody was going to get to that one...
Yes it misrepresents BigSoccer and the DC United board, painting it w/the same brush as other internet boards w/little to no moderation and with no official affiliation w/their league.
Another treat on this board is Diceson. We get links to Diceson's in-depth practice reports that include question-and-answers w/coach Hudson. Diceson mentions here that he has a 6PM Soccer Show on Monday. And of course Diceson posts here on BigSoccer. And CWeedchop too, who I believe is also on the soccer show. And what about sormun?? Is there another like him in the world??? The one and only sormun. That's 2 more reasons why this DC United board is fantastic!!!
There's some sort of beautiful irony to the fact that there's a heated discussion on this message board as to whether message boards were given a fair shake in a news article or if they're were accurately portrayed as a hotbed of goofiness.
I agree. In a perfect world there would be a separate message board where people can debate the treatment that message boards receive from the media and/or other message boards...and a third message board to debate the debate on the second board...and so on and so forth. I am one of those who aren't interested in other sports-related message boards. But anyone who's ever listened to WTEM (980AM sportsradio) must have a good idea of the mentality of the average big-sport fanatic. I imagine most of them are worse than that. We (the Big Soccer populace)probably got off quite easily.
What the hell are you talking about. Is that supposed to be funny. If so ha ha I'm laughing. I'm sorry I went on a rant and extended this thread. This is my last post on this thread. Also, that's the last Wash Times article I'll take seriously. No need to get upset over trash.
Honestly, I don't see what you're upset about. I thought it was a pretty fair description of Internet message boards and it gave a lot more play to BigSoccer (and me!) than I expected. We may be one of the world's largest soccer message boards, but I'm pretty sure there are larger sports message boards out there. Sachin
So you're no longer going to take the Washington Times seriously because of an article in the sports section about message board fanatics that many of us think was a great article? Sheeesh, I can only imagine what you must think of the NYTimes and their fiasco with Jayson Blair.
Sachin is like Farmer Ted! He's kinda like the king of the dipshits! At least, that's what that article tells me. While it did paint internet message boards negatively in some respects, it also showed that some legitimate discoveries and stories have originated there.
I resent having the board compared to pornography. (Except for that Ray Hudson thread on the Metros Board earlier. I'm sure that's been closed though EDIT: No it hasn't)