Field Gulls Mod-enforced Rules and Standards
With all of the roster moves and the draft on the horizon, now's probably a good time to bring this back to everyone's attention. FG regulars, brush up on the rules. New folks, become familiar with them.
Cheers
The following is the final set of rules and regulations decided upon by the community of Field Gulls.
Zero Tolerance
Abuse of the following rules will lead to immediate banning, possibly without chance of reinstatement.
Sexism, Racism or other Bigotry: MTV raised you right. You know better than to use "gay" in the pejorative. Cull the sexist, hate-filled slang from your vocabulary or expect an immediate ban.
Name Calling: Except to call Scruffy "Lance". He likes that. This has never been a problem here, but for the sake of comprehensiveness, let it be known that name calling of any kind will not be tolerated.
Spam: One and you're done.
Hoaxes: False headlines used to capture attention will be rewarded with a deletion of the post and a banning. Misreported news of any kind is not allowed.
Standards
Mods will enforce standards through a three strike system: correction, warning and finally banning. Mods will not punish innocent errors, but habitual abuse.
Links: A link must be provided for all news and quoted material.
Spelling and Grammar: The readers of Field Gulls are Field Gulls. Therefore you are held to basic editorial standards. Commenters must attempt proper spelling and grammar within the best of their ability. Many internet browsers have a spell check included.
Subject Line: The subject line is the small box above the body of a comment. SBN software requires this box be used. Use it.
Reply: The reply button is below and to the right of a posted comment. It's a wonderful organization and communication tool. Use it.
Site Etiquette
Site etiquette is to be enforced at the moderators discretion. It is a catch all for behavior not explicitly covered by the above rules that can be abusive to the site, those who contribute to the site and its readers.
Belligerence, Fault finding and Trollish behavior: Rudeness can be couched in the nicest words and divisive and destructive commenting can be framed as civil discussion. Persistent negative comments, thread-jacking, fault finding, petty correction, stubborn ignorance or illogic, meanness, calls to perfection, refusal to drop an argument, unfounded claims of prejudice and other acts of self-importance will be dealt with on a case by case basis.
Respect the moderators.
Never root against the Seahawks.
Fantasy discussion is for the weekly fantasy post: Fantasy comments outside of the post may be met with sarcasm.
Rosterbation: Fanposts containing logical, supported and novel roster moves are accepted, even endorsed. Fanposts that propose farfetched trades, signings, schemes or that endorse exhausted topics (ie Michael Vick, Mike Holmgren, the officiating of Super Bowl XL, etc) are not allowed.
Chat Speak: Acceptable in moderation, but "+1", "LOL" and "roflcopter" should not be stand alone comments.
A place to bury strangers.
29 recs |
86 comments
| Add comment
Comments
Looks like you've got some XML issues at the top of this post.
by BrianL on Nov 16, 2009 3:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Cute
That’s an SBN, fanpost specialty.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Put this in the "recommended fanpost" section???
A good list, but not draconian by any means, and nice to have it out in the public’s eye permanently.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 16, 2009 4:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Let's rec this up and I will update the post time so it's stays in the fanposts section for the rest of the season.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I didn't realize "rec's" were how something got to the recommended fanpost section.
I thought a mod just placed it up there. Yay for democracy.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 16, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep.
If something is good, just asking for it be recommended will usually do the trick.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Define spam
Does that mean something like those stupid Brits that keep hounding me for my info after winning their lottery?
I’m fine with everything else.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 16, 2009 4:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Spam is solicitation, essentially.
The most likely form of spam on a blog is a post that’s primary goal is to redirect readers to another site.
The best example I can think of right off the top of my head is Seahawks Addicts repeatedly spamming the Seahawks Insider comments about two years ago.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There was talk about Fanshot vs Fanpost the other day.
I think a Fanshot would be the best place to put a link to a blog or site. If someone here starts their own blog and wants to share the link, the fanshot would be a good place for it.
SEA!
by MFAN on Nov 16, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Signature is probably the best way to go for all involved
A signature is more visible and is, theoretically, affixed to content. Also, the blogger can contact me and I can put it in the links. The best way for someone to launch a blog, the Seahawk Addicts example not withstanding, is to write quality content. Write quality content and point it out to me and I won’t hesitate to link to it. Posting a link to your blog on another blog is generally considered rude.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One exception to this was (whats his name) that kept posting his stuff in fanshots
But actually discussed his stuff here which I was fine with.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 16, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
*Hawkblogger was his name.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 16, 2009 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John do we consider this ok?
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 16, 2009 4:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure.
I did not personally like it, but it’s not spam in the worst sense. He didn’t bombard the comments section or anything. As always, the standard for fanshots is very low.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When I think spam, I think
erection pills and secret inheritances. It’s not worth banning someone that is trying to get their work attention. We can all empathize with that.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Chat speak is fine in moderation.
I am not going to enforce something that is as much culture gap as standard. Excessive use of chat speak or use of chat speak (like +1) without other content falls under site etiquette. I will update that. Thanks.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a very reasonable middleground.
I get annoyed by constant usage of chatspeak but also get annoyed at those who jump on someone for a rare usage.
by redwolf75 on Nov 16, 2009 6:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You know it.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 16, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think "Dead Topics at Field Gulls" is redundant now.
So I am taking it down.
by John Morgan on Nov 16, 2009 4:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for including "roflcopter."
Nothing makes me want to strangle people like that word.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.
by Wayward Llama on Nov 16, 2009 5:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Which usually leaves you with a fierce case of the roflclap.
All The Way, AIRBORNE!!!
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Nov 16, 2009 6:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I am so out of touch with "chat speak"..
What the hell is a roflcopter?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 16, 2009 9:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When in doubt, use urban dictionary.
by redwolf75 on Nov 16, 2009 10:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hate myself for reading that.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 8:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I love urban dictionary, however I KEPT reading definitions this time.
I guess it just didn’t seem worthy of defining and I was waiting for some payoff that never came…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 17, 2009 8:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That is exactly how I feel.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On A Scale of 1 to 10...
How similar can my comments be to ones I’d read on Kissing Suzy Kolber?
by Surf Hawk on Nov 16, 2009 10:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
How about images?
Probably not a big problem, but the general consensus is keep em’ small (especially in game threads). Specifically how small?
by aerozeppelin on Nov 16, 2009 11:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
300 pixels in height is typically what I tell people.
by BrianL on Nov 16, 2009 11:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was 300px wide?
But yes try to keep it around this range.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 8:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the bigger problem is the height of the picture rather than the width.
by BrianL on Nov 17, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jealous of tall images?
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The "Image Formatting" link under "Courtesy" on the left says width=250
by thebyron on Nov 17, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've since learned that you can replace "width" with "height" and guarantee the image isn't too tall.
Which reminds me I need to update that link.
by BrianL on Nov 17, 2009 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a question...
Where do smileys fall in the gamut? Are they generally considered annoying?… or bearable?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 17, 2009 2:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Fine in moderation.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 8:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think "no plagiarism" should be added here
Doesn’t happen a lot but just in case it does…
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 17, 2009 7:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
OK... Just had another thought (my last of the night)...
A guy (or gal) makes comments that are misunderstood by the mod’s and he gets banned.
What is the appeal process?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 17, 2009 9:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Anyone that gets banned is free to email us to take the discussion offline and explain themselves.
And 95% of the time will be reinstated.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 17, 2009 10:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol?
Is there some sort of an inside joke to all these rules?
by dsludo on Nov 17, 2009 3:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
stop by the ESPN forums, and see the difference between how sane it is at Field Gulls in comparison.
That’s the reason for the rules.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.
by Wayward Llama on Nov 17, 2009 6:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can we do something about people calling Tim Ruskell "Timmay"? That bugs the hell out of me.
by DetectiveM on Nov 21, 2009 1:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
You may be the only one on that boat.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 21, 2009 7:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well it doesn't matter anymore.
TIMMAY! TIMMAY!
by Scruffy Lefty on Dec 9, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a question on some of these more recent fanposts.
Are they a bit too close to rosterbating/speculating? Or if enough thought is put into it and it is a new idea, is that acceptable?
by LantermanC on Nov 23, 2009 12:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully with the Minnesota matchup in the rearview
the Hutchinson stories will disappear. I have a feeling that “Holmgren for GM” is going to be a reoccurring annoyance though.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.
by Wayward Llama on Nov 24, 2009 4:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think there's been more
but as the season falls apart and there’s not much else to say about anything until some solidification in the front office and the direction the personnel is moving, what pieces to keep and what not to, I can see being more flexible there.
That being said, if it’s not John doing it, I’m not very interested. So maybe it does clutter up the place and we need more moderation there now than normal.
by jacobstevens on Nov 24, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it's a problem.
People come to talk about the team… when it becomes a problem, it is a thread jacking, pervasive thing as opposed to a desire to talk about the future of your team getting better…
Besides, if the fanpost idea is a worthwhile one, people will go and comment. If it isn’t, it wont get much action. And frankly, I do want to hear what people think and have to say about things and what we could do, as long as it doesn’t consist of “trade Wrotto and Branch and a first rounder for Hutch and Rice” type arguments.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 24, 2009 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rosterbation sounds more like a jail-able offense than a ban-able offense.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Dec 8, 2009 6:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Byron your from NY...yes?
I have seen some crazy things in Soho after hours that weren’t nearly as bad as what “rosterbation” sound like.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Dec 8, 2009 7:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha!
Yeah, New Yorker for the past 8 years….and yeah, there’s some crazy happenings.
by thebyron on Dec 9, 2009 7:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Byron.
I live in NYC too. Are you making it to the draft this year?
I went last year and it was awesome.
by nickfru1 on Mar 16, 2010 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure, it'll depend on whether I feel like sitting in line for X hours.
If you aren’t going this year, shoot me an e-mail at TheByron@gmail.com if you want to hit up a draft party with a bunch of other NY Hawks fans!
by thebyron on Mar 17, 2010 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll throw this out to the community
Should Field Gulls enforce some standard of factual accuracy? Sometimes information is thrown around or used to support and argument and that information is wholly incorrect. Now, in theory it is easy enough to fact check that information and disprove the claim, but not everyone has time to do that, and not everyone does do it for whatever reason.
If someone is fast and loose with their facts, given sufficient transgressions and warnings, should it then be a bannable offense?
by John Morgan on Dec 9, 2009 3:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
There's been a bit too much random percentage slinging for my liking.
I’d be okay with this being a bannable offense if it’s a recurring problem with a user.
by BrianL on Dec 9, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. Misinformation is harmful to progress of a conversation and repeated misinformation is tantamount to trolling.
by abender20 on Dec 9, 2009 5:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tough one...
I have seen sites on the net that contain stats that contradict each other… some references are more accurate than others.
How about this as food for thought:
Stats that are used as “evidence” to support a claim in a debate should have a source cited. This way, a person is held responsible for having done a modest amount of “due diligence” but isn’t responsible for possibly inaccurate resources.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Dec 9, 2009 7:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm wary.
I think an important part of the Field Gulls (and SBN) community is the assumption of good faith, but also the understanding that we don’t do this full-time. Not everyone fact checks everything others say, but enough do that I don’t think we let a ton of BS stand without being challenged. Further, we sometimes suffer from information overload and are forced to use our memory (hence the prevalence of IIRC and similar qualifiers). However, if it’s a repeat offender (and by “repeat” I don’t mean “second time”) and if the person has been warned multiple times then I’d tentatively be on board.
by thebyron on Dec 10, 2009 7:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John, or anyone
Can you give an example of something recently that you considered false or misleading statements? Just as a point of reference?
by Big E-Z on Mar 16, 2010 7:12 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
This is the age of Google and Wikipedia.
We have more access to information than any previous generation of humanity. It’s inexcusable for someone to not do simple fact-checking before posting.
I wouldn’t make it a bannable offense, but it should definitely be worth a paddling.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Mar 17, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
John
Does this mean I can’t always try and bring a thought back to Kafka?
1.Brandon Graham 1.Charles Brown 2. Syd Thompson 3.Torell Troup 4.Andrew Quarless 5.John Jerry 6.Mike Kafka 7.Quinton Andrews 7.Preston Parker
by supraman on Feb 27, 2010 11:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
feels a touch elitist to me
as if waiting a few days for my request to join wasn’t elitist enough, now there’s the field gulls style guide. you don’t have to ban me—i’m leaving.
by The Train on Mar 16, 2010 6:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I really don't see the elitism in having standards.
Maybe you appreciate buffoonery on a level I do not, but I think the internet is chock full of places that have too few rules and standards. Either way, I wish you good luck in wherever the search for non-elitism takes you.
by Menthu Ra on Mar 16, 2010 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In a community where anonymity is everywhere
Standards and rules have to be enforced. Nobody likes trolls. Without commonalities, community rarely exists anyway.
by Tyler Cox on Mar 16, 2010 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's why we do these things
In the past, we had serious problems with trolls that commented here only looking for a reaction. We’d ban those people, and they’d immediately create ten alternate accounts to continue trolling and spamming. We had to institute the two-day waiting period so the moderators could have enough time to parse through the new user entries and take care of people who were abusing the system.
As for the commenting guidelines, I won’t sugarcoat it, they are a lot more stringent than most other online communities. However, we expect these things from the userbase for a reason. The comments here at Field Gulls are an integral part of the content provided (for free) on this blog. When you comment, we (the moderators, authors, and the whole community) have the expectation that you will be positively adding to the discussion. These rules help to facilitate that.
Yes, these guidelines are tougher than just about every online community not named USS Mariner or Lookout Landing, but they’ve gone a long ways to making this a better place for both registered users and lurking readers.
by BrianL on Mar 16, 2010 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This isn't the only blog that does day waiting moderation.
It’s used to stop spammers and trolls.
"BANG!" - Jim Lampley's first word as a child
by SSreporters on Mar 16, 2010 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something is wrong with the formatting at the top of the page where it says "The following is a set of rules...."
"BANG!" - Jim Lampley's first word as a child
by SSreporters on Mar 16, 2010 7:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by 


















