Special Spring Football Chat with PS Writer Stephen Bailey Set for Wednesday Night 3/4 at 8 PM

[Chip]

Used to post them after chats with Dave all the time, and he was more plugged in than these guys.

I'd send him the transcript and he could edit what he thought might be too sensitive, but I don't remember any changes.

The lecture by people about the use of chats from people who weren't around before is a bit much.

Agreed. Weird that the protection is based on a point in time of availability. They should have the chats at 2 am on Sunday.

 

[CuseLegacy]

Thank you. And for the record based on my PMs I'm not the only person who had no idea this rule existed.

Used to post them after chats with Dave all the time, and he was more plugged in than these guys.

I'd send him the transcript and he could edit what he thought might be too sensitive, but I don't remember any changes.

The lecture by people about the use of chats from people who weren't around before is a bit much.

Well if you don't like it I guess you can take it up with CTO and Tom... as they are the ones who have stated over and over about no chat transcripts being posted.

 

[jekelish]

I'm not entirely sure why I was quoted in that above post since I plainly said that, now that I know the rule, I'm fine with it. But I think it's pretty abundantly clear that this rule is not nearly as widely known as you seem to believe it is, which makes it even more important to have it stated when each new chat is announced. Not a single person who has PM'ed me (and there have been many) has known anything about this rule, and it looks like the majority of the people in this thread don't know about it either.

It's fine if there's a rule. I just don't see why a big deal is being made about making that rule a little more clear outside of being in the chat room, which it sounds like is the only place it's ever been explicitly stated, and only at the very beginning of the chat.

 

[orange79]

Used to post them after chats with Dave all the time, and he was more plugged in than these guys.

I'd send him the transcript and he could edit what he thought might be too sensitive, but I don't remember any changes.

The lecture by people about the use of chats from people who weren't around before is a bit much.

I have been around 'before' (AOL days) and I always knew there were no transcripts posted. I think the Dave R. transcripts were the exception rather than the rule, and that was because he OK'd them. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember any others posted.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I have been around 'before' (AOL days) and I always knew there were no transcripts posted. I think the Dave R. transcripts were the exception rather than the rule, and that was because he OK'd them. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember any others posted.

Years ago (back in the old neighborhood), you needed a premium subscription to access the chat room.

Transcripts might have been posted on the premium board for subscribers only.

 

[orange79]

Years ago (back in the old neighborhood), you needed a premium subscription to access the chat room.

Transcripts might have been posted on the premium board for subscribers only.

Yeah, you're probably right

 

[Deano]

I have been around 'before' (AOL days) and I always knew there were no transcripts posted. I think the Dave R. transcripts were the exception rather than the rule, and that was because he OK'd them. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember any others posted.

I can recall chats with Mike Waters being posted.

 

[orange79]

I can recall chats with Mike Waters being posted.

I think it may be as OrangeXtreme said - they were posted on the pay side.

 

[jekelish]

My whole thing is this: I have been posting with the people here for about 15 years and have never seen this rule ever mentioned. Last night I thought I was doing a favor by keeping the transcript for people who couldn't be in the chat room, only to be kind of chastised for it, because of some rule I didn't know existed.

I just think it's easy to write one sentence saying the rule exists, and hey, this is avoided in the future.

 

[Deano]

I think it may be as OrangeXtreme said - they were posted on the pay side.

This was in the last few years. I recall them leaving the transcript up for a few days then took it down as they did with a few others.

 

[mountaincuse]

I'd love if you emailed me the transcript jeke!

Many a transcript had been posted in the past. I've asked for transcripts of chats recently so that it's where I heard the rule.

I've participated in chats and read transcripts of ones that I have missed, of that I am grateful. It's a bummer though now as the typical chat room time is not one that works for me, and I'm sure others, due to other responsibilities.

If I have to miss a game I can dvr it, wish I could do the same for a great thing this board does.

Why can't something be done where an admin distributes documents (like jekelish has offered) to trusted posters?

 

[Upstate]

My whole thing is this: I have been posting with the people here for about 15 years and have never seen this rule ever mentioned. Last night I thought I was doing a favor by keeping the transcript for people who couldn't be in the chat room, only to be kind of chastised for it, because of some rule I didn't know existed.

I just think it's easy to write one sentence saying the rule exists, and hey, this is avoided in the future.

I think that if there were a premium side to this site, I'd agree, it should be posted over there. But in all honesty, roughly anyone could get a username on this site and access the chat. It's not a Fort Knox thing. Anyone with an internet connection could access the chat. I'm all for the transcript, so thank you for going through the process on your end.

 

[GoSU96]

Well if you don't like it I guess you can take it up with CTO and Tom... as they are the ones who have stated over and over about no chat transcripts being posted.

I don't care one way or another, but the scolding is a bit much though.

What I know is that for the ones I helped with, it wasn't an issue, and it wasn't that long ago.

When common knowledge isn't common, is it common knowledge?

 

[kcsu]

You didnt miss much. Nothing new and nothing that the board has not already discussed or posted. Pretty pedestrian chat

 

[texascpa]

Thread to be closed and deleted in 3...2...

 

[jekelish]

Before I forget to mention it, by the way, one other thing:

I said in this very thread, 30 minutes into the chat, that I had the transcript and would be happy to post it unless there were admin/mod objections. No one replied. I said the same thing 45 minutes AFTER the chat was over. No one said anything. I finally posted it a full hour after the chat ended.

That was 90 minutes in which someone could have seen me post not once, but twice, saying I'd be willing to post unless there was a reason not to. No one said a word, so again...how was I supposed to know it was a rule, if I had never seen it, and no one bothered to actually say anything about it?

 

[Chip]

I have been around 'before' (AOL days) and I always knew there were no transcripts posted. I think the Dave R. transcripts were the exception rather than the rule, and that was because he OK'd them. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember any others posted.

I think it depends on the chat. Gameday chats are a train wreck, can't imagine anyone would want to see them. I don't even get in them anymore, they're depressing and it becomes hard to even follow the game.

But the concept of having a PS writer come on and chat is fairly new (at least to me, as a longtimer, who's 41 year old memory could be going). And I know Tom used post them. Maybe it was premium, but I felt like so many of us (except most notably Swish) were premium I guess I forgot the difference.

Not a huge deal at the end of the day, but life rarely allows me the opportunity to attend these. And, like Go, I started to wonder where the heavy hand was coming from.

 

[CuseLegacy]

Before I forget to mention it, by the way, one other thing:

I said in this very thread, 30 minutes into the chat, that I had the transcript and would be happy to post it unless there were admin/mod objections. No one replied. I said the same thing 45 minutes AFTER the chat was over. No one said anything. I finally posted it a full hour after the chat ended.

That was 90 minutes in which someone could have seen me post not once, but twice, saying I'd be willing to post unless there was a reason not to. No one said a word, so again...how was I supposed to know it was a rule, if I had never seen it, and no one bothered to actually say anything about it?

Whatever. I will happily eliminate any more discussion on this and will no longer arrange for any chats with Bailey. Problem solved.

 

[jekelish]

Whatever. I will happily eliminate any more discussion on this and will no longer arrange for any chats with Bailey. Problem solved.

That's a very mature and leveled response. The old "take my ball and go home" thing.

Look - I think it's become clear, people didn't know about this rule. All that has to be said is "Please don't do this" and problem solved. I'm not sure why it's getting so much pushback.

You're taking this as some sort of personal thing. It's not. Literally the only thing I've said is that the rule is fine, I have no issue with it, but it needs to be made more explicitly clear. There are people who have been in this community for YEARS who have said they did not know about the rule. That is all.

 

[CuseLegacy]

That's a very mature and leveled response. The old "take my ball and go home" thing.

Look - I think it's become clear, people didn't know about this rule. All that has to be said is "Please don't do this" and problem solved. I'm not sure why it's getting so much pushback.

You're taking this as some sort of personal thing. It's not. Literally the only thing I've said is that the rule is fine, I have no issue with it, but it needs to be made more explicitly clear. There are people who have been in this community for YEARS who have said they did not know about the rule. That is all.

No it was clearly posted in the first post of the thread no transctripts. You decided to post one. You all can take this up with admins about posting transcripts or not. I just prefer not to be involved with arranging any more chats.

 

[Chip]

There is a reason that these discussions are held in a chat forum. NO TRANSCRIPTS. Don't p0st it again.

This is probably what started the whole thing. Is it so hard to just say Hey, we can't post the transcripts due to (insert reason).

I don't see why it needs an iron fist.

And I don't see why people taking issue with said iron fist makes you want to get out of the arranging chats business.

When I read Tomcat's original post, I just assumed he meant HE wasn't going to log it and post it, like he has done in the past.

Weird thread, glad I could contribute to it.

 

[jekelish]

No it was clearly posted in the first post of the thread no transctripts. You decided to post one. You all can take this up with admins about posting transcripts or not. I just prefer not to be involved with arranging any more chats.

No, it said "there will be no transcript posted." It did not say there CAN'T be a transcript posted. The indication was not that it was against the rules, just that no one was going to do it.

 

[jekelish]

This is probably what started the whole thing. Is it so hard to just say Hey, we can't post the transcripts due to (insert reason).

I don't see why it needs an iron fist.

And I don't see why people taking issue with said iron fist makes you want to get out of the arranging chats business.

When I read Tomcat's original post, I just assumed he meant HE wasn't going to log it and post it, like he has done in the past.

Weird thread, glad I could contribute to it.

Exactly, that's how I read it as well.

 

[sutomcat]

Thank you. And for the record based on my PMs I'm not the only person who had no idea this rule existed.

No big deal Jek. We know you are a good guy and were just trying to help out the people that missed the chat.

You are right. We did not always have the rule. The reason we have it is that sometimes in one of our chats, a guest might mention something that they later wish they hadn't. Some tidbits might embarrass people that shouldn't be embarrassed, reveal sensitive info that shouldn't be posted on a public message board, etc.

It isn't that big of a deal when this happens if the transcript is not posted anywhere. It can be if it is.

Understand, we don't pay people to stop by as guests. They do it out of the goodness of their hearts, their love for the sports they cover and the enjoyment they get from talking about these sports with people with a similar passion.

Having a policy that the transcript will not be posted protects the guests from possible problems. This encourages them to stop by for chats. Our top priority is to provide great content on the board, even if sometimes it is not available to people indefinitely in the form of posts.

I am genuinely sorry we can't share the transcript with the people that miss the chats. But we have to protect our guests and ensure that their willingness to do a good deed for the fanbase does not end up hurting them.

I hope you and everyone else understands where we are coming from.

 

[jekelish]

No big deal Jek. We know you are a good guy and were just trying to help out the people that missed the chat.

You are right. We did not always have the rule. The reason we have it is that sometimes in one of our chats, a guest might mention something that they later wish they hadn't. Some tidbits might embarrass people that shouldn't be embarrassed, reveal sensitive info that shouldn't be posted on a public message board, etc.

It isn't that big of a deal when this happens if the transcript is not posted anywhere. It can be if it is.

Understand, we don't pay people to stop by as guests. They do it out of the goodness of their hearts, their love for the sports they cover and the enjoyment they get from talking about these sports with people with a similar passion.

Having a policy that the transcript will not be posted protects the guests from possible problems. This encourages them to stop by for chats. Our top priority is to provide great content on the board, even if sometimes it is not available to people indefinitely in the form of posts.

I am genuinely sorry we can't share the transcript with the people that miss the chats. But we have to protect our guests and ensure that their willingness to do a good deed for the fanbase does not end up hurting them.

I hope you and everyone else understands where we are coming from.

Thanks tomcat - that's all perfectly fine with me. I was never trying to cause any trouble with my continued posts here, either - just wanted to get my point across that it would be helpful in the future to just add a quick mention that transcripts cannot be shared on the forum. Although something tells me that at this point, that's not going to be necessary, and everyone is going to have a pretty good idea of the rule by now...haha.