Are the GSN boards worthwhile?

[aaron sica]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 03:17 PM\']
Be careful. I have found that even acknowledging this poster's existence is a good way to receive several rambling emails claiming vehemently that said poster is NOT a looney, when in fact said emails only cement the theory further.

[snapback]92890[/snapback]

[/quote]

Agreed....I've gotten them too.

[chris319]

One can spend too much time on game show discussion boards.

[Steve_Bier]

I was a member of GSN's boards when they used to be....ummm....tamer. Ever since the trolling and flaming began, I left. That was in late 2002-early 2003, and I haven't been happier since.

Thanks again for this slice of game-show heaven :-).

[beatlefreak84]

Now keep in mind, being an idealist isn't bad at all, but what separates this board from the GSN board is that this is more realistic and has much more substance in style.

That's definitely true.  I think part of that, though, comes from the fact that, it's not that we don't have idealists here, but those who have stayed long enough know that a post like "I think GSN should get the rights to Name That Tune, Face the Music, and Scrabble" will usually be met with comments asking why the person thinks it's a good business decision for GSN to do so.  Sometimes, it is nice to have the idealistic assumptions, yes, but many don't say so, instead claiming that it's a good business decision because they like the show (well, not in those words, but, essentially, that's what comes out!).

And besides, who wouldn't want to read the witty banter that goes along here? A great laugh always happens every day here.

Can't argue with that...

BTW, a question for myself:  Who here does post semi-regularly or regularly on the GSN boards?  I tend to lurk there to see "the dark side" of game show message boards (LOL), but I'm interested in seeing who provide the "sanity" factor over there.

Anthony

[megamanj1986]

Personally, I visit both boards equally. But with this one, when I first tried to access the boards, I had quite a whale of a time getting in. At the GSN boards, it's usually easier access, IMO.

Likewise, here, you guys have posts that take me to GS sites that I've never ever been to before, not to mention that you don't have a message length limit as is the case on GSN boards.

At the GSN boards, they originally locked up posts about credit crunches, but they seem to be a tad bit lax, now.

Overall, there's equal business going for both big boards.

[Strikerz04]

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:02 PM\']
BTW, a question for myself:  Who here does post semi-regularly or regularly on the GSN boards?  I tend to lurk there to see "the dark side" of game show message boards (LOL), but I'm interested in seeing who provide the "sanity" factor over there.

Anthony

[snapback]92911[/snapback]

[/quote]

I, for one, although my involvement is mainly limited to a post whenever the deuce I feel like posting.

And a follow-up question: When did the decline actually happen? I started posting Mid-April 2002, dropped off sometime in late 2003, and by the time I started posting again on a "frequent" basis (frequent = rare) which is around October 2004, the quality seemed to disappear...what happened?

[melman1]

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 03:02 PM\']Sometimes, it is nice to have the idealistic assumptions[/quote]I don't know what "idealistic assumptions" are.  All I remember was that GSN's boards were stuffed to the gills with incorrigible cretins who would insist on posting gems like "Everyone knows for a fact that the old Match Game set was better" and "I wish I was Richard Dawson's daughter" and long rants about "constitutional rights" to post such lunacy.  Not to mention the everpopular "ILikeHideTheBaloneyCauseItWasACoolShow, CanSomeoneTellMeHowItWasPlayed."

But, those of us who tried to be voices of reason (i.e. "no, you shouldn't say 'we' when you mean "I"... "no, that's an opinion not a fact"... "no, the Founding Fathers didn't give you rights to babble at will on a private website")  were the ones that Missy Moderator always decided to be snotty with.  In effect she was endorsing the right of her monkeys to fling their crap at passers-by.

I think quite a few of us expressed our disgust - in private and in public - about the moderation practices.  She knows what she's doing, and for some bizarre reason continues to keep her job.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'melman1\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:03 PM\']I think quite a few of us expressed our disgust - in private and in public - about the moderation practices.  She knows what she's doing, and for some bizarre reason continues to keep her job.
[/quote]
It's really simple, alas: There's more of them than there are of us. As a commercial entity, it's her job to make sure the GSN boards appeal to the largest possible audience, which means she has to side with the morons.

[beatlefreak84]

I don't know what "idealistic assumptions" are.

I said that to mean those posters that may not be aware of what GSN can do business-wise, what GSN wants to do, and/or what shows can feasibly be retrieved from a vault (i.e., ones that weren't destroyed).  The ones, under my definition, who make "idealistic assumptions" are those who write posts wanting GSN to get the rights to "Name That Tune" and Bill Cullen's "The $25,000 Pyramid," for example.  We, as the "realists," know that the latter will never happen due to Viacom holding onto those, and the former because it is largely unknown that the show will make money to offset the probably HUGE cost GSN will incur to not only get the rights to the show, but also the numerous musical clearances.  I simply wanted to state that, sometimes, idealistic assumptions are not necessarily a bad thing to have on a message board.

I am in no way defending posters who try to make their wants universal, of course, or those that claim their favorite shows will do ratings wonders for GSN with no good arguments to back them up, but I don't mind the occasional post of "Wouldn't it be nice if...?"  I'm certainly not one who makes up dream GSN schedules in my spare time, but I don't mind if others do.  I just don't like it when people who do make posts of the "Wouldn't it be nice if...?" type get flamed by everyone saying "It'll never happen; get over it" (that's the nice way... ).  I think these posts are certainly good starting points for discussion in the place that they belong:  a game show message board.

Anthony

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:18 PM\']I just don't like it when people who do make posts of the "Wouldn't it be nice if...?" type get flamed by everyone saying "It'll never happen; get over it" (that's the nice way... ).
[/quote]
I don't mind it either. What I DO mind is, when they have it explained to them WHY it won't happen, they insist on pushing the issue. (I subject as Exhibit A, pyramid100's thread about "wouldn't it be great if I could leech shows off of BitTorrent?")

Would it be great? Yeah, it'd be great. Here's why it won't happen. "But...but...but, it would be great!" That's what USUALLY happens.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 08:18 PM\']I said that to mean those posters that may not be aware of what GSN can do business-wise, what GSN wants to do, and/or what shows can feasibly be retrieved from a vault (i.e., ones that weren't destroyed).  The ones, under my definition, who make "idealistic assumptions" are those who write posts wanting GSN to get the rights to "Name That Tune" and Bill Cullen's "The $25,000 Pyramid," for example.

[snip]

I simply wanted to state that, sometimes, idealistic assumptions are not necessarily a bad thing to have on a message board.

[snapback]92939[/snapback]

[/quote]
Idealistic assumptions are indeed a bad thing when the holder of said assumptions clings to them even after he is told what the facts are.  This thread is a classic example; a search for other posts by the Scrabble-Obsessed One reveals many other equally fact-free rants.  Meanwhile, a search for other posts by the self-professed Grundy Expert in the same thread reveals that either he has more connections than Fred Wostbrock, Steve Beverly, Bob Boden, Steve Ryan, and David Schwartz combined, or he's making things up.

Here, Chris, Matt and I expect people who make claims of special knowledge to back up said claims -- and we take action against those who post without regard to accuracy.  I couldn't imagine taking a laissez-faire attitude toward the truth... as David Brinkley put it in his book, "everyone is entitled to my opinion" but there's only one set of facts. :-)

[beatlefreak84]

Idealistic assumptions are indeed a bad thing when the holder of said assumptions clings to them even after he is told what the facts are. This thread is a classic example; a search for other posts by the Scrabble-Obsessed One reveals many other equally fact-free rants.

Okay; I have to admit, I did get a laugh out of reading that thread!  But, I feel I should clarify something:

My post on "idealistic assumptions" was in no way meant to be an all-encompassing blanket to defend everyone who doesn't know facts.  I would take issue with this poster as well, especially since he tried to claim he knew some kind of special knowledge with no proof of where it came from.

I don't agree with posters who claim to know something with no proof.  I don't agree with posters who try to force-feed me their ideas about things.  And I'm not a fan of posters who whine when they're wrong and resort to childish comebacks.  My only concern is that, even though there are many of these posters out there, there are still some who may bring up a thread like, "Wouldn't it be nice if GSN had Scrabble?" that don't violate the above.  I don't mind threads like that, and I would hate to see people who do write threads like that be put in the same class as the "Scrabble-Obsessed One."  That was my only concern.

And I can only imagine how hard it must be to be able to, as a moderator, discern these people from the "Scrabble-Obsessed Ones" out there.  But, like I said, I would just like these people in the latter class to be able to avoid the label of those who can't seem to get the idea.

And, as I trip off my soapbox and fall on my rear end, I shall end this...

Anthony

[NickS]

My take:

In today's world, I think the only way to have sane discussion on a topic is to have a moderated board.

Moderated doesn't mean censorship -- it's just asking for coherent, competent thoughts.  If you're going to act like a fool, prepare to be banned.

My timeline with game shows and online has been atgs, then starting up GS-L, then being offline for awhile and coming back on here, if even only to lurk until recently.  I've been on another board that's modded well, and I think that's the way to go.

I come back here for Matt and Lemon, the Mackey Brothers and Klauss, et. al., because I know who they are from years past.  Not to take anything away from some of the newer people, but that's why I read them -- I can count on not seeing "Bob Barker Shits his Pants" from any of them... just actual discussion about game shows.

That's why, in summary, that you won't see me on a GSN board.  Even if they ban Mike.

[sshuffield70]

[quote name=\'Strikerz04\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:50 PM\'][quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:02 PM\']
BTW, a question for myself:  Who here does post semi-regularly or regularly on the GSN boards?  I tend to lurk there to see "the dark side" of game show message boards (LOL), but I'm interested in seeing who provide the "sanity" factor over there.

Anthony

[snapback]92911[/snapback]

[/quote]

I, for one, although my involvement is mainly limited to a post whenever the deuce I feel like posting.

And a follow-up question: When did the decline actually happen? I started posting Mid-April 2002, dropped off sometime in late 2003, and by the time I started posting again on a "frequent" basis (frequent = rare) which is around October 2004, the quality seemed to disappear...what happened?

[snapback]92916[/snapback]

[/quote]

Dave, my brutha, it's been going down for awhile.

But as most people know, I post both here and there.  It allows me to vent about programming (mainly, how bad the new stuff is), and try out updated game show formats (like Card Sharks.......which Dave is currently losing $250-$0).

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'megamanj1986\' date=\'Aug 1 2005, 05:50 PM\']Personally, I visit both boards equally. But with this one, when I first tried to access the boards, I had quite a whale of a time getting in. At the GSN boards, it's
[/quote]
Not sure if you knew or not, but you can always stayed logged in here as well, and just set a bookmark...and bam! You're here.