11/17/24
August 28, 2002
posted by djacobs to editorial policy at 10:56 AM - 22 comments
No, self-posts are not ok, but the board isn't monitored 24/7. Also, user columns should be just around the corner.
posted by justgary at 02:31 AM on August 29, 2002
I'm of the opinion that any links are good links, self-posts or not. I really like the site. I visit at least 3 times a day, usually to dissapointment. I realize that there is a time to build and a time to publicize. It is up to the "unholy 7". I just keep wondering when this time is gonna come. Great idea. Great users. Great interface. When should we take action to garner new users? I have personally been waiting on the unholy 7 to tell us when they thought it was ready for mass consumption. In the meantime, the site has become stagnant at best.
posted by ttrendel at 02:43 AM on August 29, 2002
I apologize that my previous post may have been to harsh. But, as we slowly gain 5 users a day, the site gets old quick. If owillis can't inspire a thread dogpile, who can? I propose that the cherry is indeed declared busted and that we invite all of our rowdy friends over tonight.
posted by ttrendel at 02:47 AM on August 29, 2002
I propose that the cherry is indeed declared busted and that we invite all of our rowdy friends over tonight.Which cherry was popped and what are your rowdy friends going to do? I'm not sure I understand the metaphor.
posted by djacobs at 07:52 AM on August 29, 2002
I agree with you ttrendel, but what kind of action do you propose? The threads are plenty, but the discussion is scarce at best, most of the time. IIRC, this is how MeFi was at first. I don't know what made it change, though. Just curious as to what you would do to help improve the situation?
posted by Ufez Jones at 11:32 AM on August 29, 2002
With jokes about "rowdy friends popping the cherry" and cheerleader calendar posts, SpoFi immediately alienates 51% of the population. That makes it harder to grow.
posted by djacobs at 12:08 PM on August 29, 2002
As completely tasteless as cherry jokes are, djacobs, women are not 51% of the sports-watching population, and sex and sexism are parts of the sports culture. So I really don't think you can reasonably expect to avoid posts like owillis's- if for no other reason, they're relevant to discussion of the culture of sports if not sports itself. Owillis's post could easily have led into a discussion of double standards and sex in sports- that's certainly what I intended my comment there to lead into.
posted by tieguy at 01:08 PM on August 29, 2002
As completely tasteless as cherry jokes are, djacobs, women are not 51% of the sports-watching population, and sex and sexism are parts of the sports culture.bullsh*t. I know as many female sports fans as male sports fans. She won't be hunkering down with o-dubya on a sunday morning, but my roommate will recite the last 30 years of figure skating medals at the drop of a hat. Certainly the culture of mainstream sports is patriarchal - but that doesn't mean sportsfilter has to be.
Are you saying it's OK to make a clearly sexist comment or post, since women aren't reading the site anyway? Is reifying a sexist space a place a good way of "leader into a discussion?" I don't think so.
posted by djacobs at 01:20 PM on August 29, 2002
i meant leading, not leader, sorry.
posted by djacobs at 01:23 PM on August 29, 2002
I have no statistics offhand but if women are 51% of the audience of ESPN, 51% of the readers of the average sports section, or 51% of the audience at any sporting event that isn't figure skating, I'll eat my old Duke boxers. Certainly at events I've counted tickets at [football and basketball, both men's and women's] the ratio is no better than 60/40 and probably much worse. As to the rest- I'm not saying that sexism is to be encouraged or applauded. But a web site that wants to discuss sports culture is going to have to discuss sex and sexism. For better or for worse those things are part of sports culture, as are race and money. Obviously, there are ways and there are ways of discussing this, and I wish (for example) OWillis's post had contained more meat. But saying 'discussing cheerleading is off limits because it is sexist' is silly. Yes, it is sexist, but yes, it is also part of the culture of sports and hence is very appropriate for discussion here. [IMHO].
posted by tieguy at 01:31 PM on August 29, 2002
Will the Giants and Redskins respond in the latest NFC East arms race? One can only hope. I think this is the part of the FPP that would prevent any valid intellectual discourse on sexism in sports. Sexism as an institution in sports is something very much worth discussing. However, when the site simply mirrors the institutional sexism that is prevalent, then you will lose many members (current and potential.) IMHO.
posted by Ufez Jones at 01:56 PM on August 29, 2002
Fair enough. If that's what the critique is about, then we're all pretty much in agreement.
posted by tieguy at 01:58 PM on August 29, 2002
Certainly at events I've counted tickets at [football and basketball, both men's and women's] the ratio is no better than 60/40 and probably much worse.The attendance at liberty games is easily 75% women - and I think higher.
posted by djacobs at 02:06 PM on August 29, 2002
I thought about deleting that self-link, but I didn't have the time to contact the guy and let him know he could write it up as a column here instead. Also, SportsFilter looks dead when there's less than 3-5 links a day, so I figured it was better to have a self-link than no link at all.
posted by rcade at 03:32 PM on August 29, 2002
Which cherry was popped and what are your rowdy friends going to do? I'm not sure I understand the metaphor. "All our rowdy friends are coming over tonight" is a line from the Monday Night Football theme. Not to speak for ttrendel, but I think that all he meant was that SportsFilter is ready for prime time. I don't think he wanted to invite rowdy friends to pop cherries, and if we're going to delve this deeply into metaphor, the cherry had already been popped before he said one word about rowdy friends.
posted by rcade at 03:53 PM on August 29, 2002
My initial response was "any link is better than no link" - similar to rcade's thought. So columns are available? Maybe by 51% djacobs meant general population? I guess a more accurate figure could have been derived from the "sports fan population". the cherry thing... Well, as part of this population we're trying to not alienate, it wasn't one of the best metaphors, but I've heard so much worse. I knew when I joined SpoFi I'd be in store for some locker room talk and I'd also be a minority. I'm totally okay with that! Maybe I'm desensitized or just very liberal when it comes to guy talk, but it didn't bug me that much. Didn't strike me as a major deal. Could have been worse. But, um, you know... that wasn't an endorsement for comments to get completely raunchy. It's still a community - albeit a community with many jockstraps and just a minority of sportsbras - but we should have a bit of decorum and civility among each other. :)
posted by jerseygirl at 04:21 PM on August 29, 2002
djacobs: at your typical liberty game there are only 2/3 of the people at a typical knick game, so even if your proportions are conservative, the overall numbers still favor stats at a Knicks game. And the Liberty are a positive abberation- for the WNBA as a whole (as for most female sports) attendance is substantially lower than for equivalent male sports. Average WNBA attendance in 2001 was ~8K fans a game, over 32 games and 16 teams. NBA attendance 2000-2001 was ~16K a game, over 82 games and 30 teams. So even if WNBA attendance was 100% female, and NBA attendance was 'only' 55% male, overall attendance would still be 51% male. The best stats I could find indicated that ESPN is one of the top three cable channels for every section of the male demographic; and not in the top ten for any female age group. So... yes, there are lots of women who are sports fans. My SO is one. But pretending that sports fans have the same gender ratio as the general population (or even terribly close) is fairly ludicrous.
posted by tieguy at 05:36 PM on August 29, 2002
rcade definitely hit the nail on the head as for what I meant. I probably should have thought for a second longer before hitting the post button, but it really didn't occur to me. Any thoughts on the termination of female virginity were absent from my head. Sorry to all that took offense. On a different note, I find it highly amusing that a thread about a self-post has evolved into a discussion on female attendance at sporting events. Not that I didn't have a part in this. I just found it fun to read.
posted by ttrendel at 11:30 PM on August 29, 2002
tieguy - sure, males are larger sports consumers than women. if you want espn demographics, why not pop over to the espn message boards? But if we want to build something better, more inclusive, and generally more rewarding, let's get to it.
posted by djacobs at 12:05 AM on August 30, 2002
I still would like to know what kind of thoughts people have to get SpoFi more members and more participation. I've tried to step up my participation lately, but that's just on a personal level. Should we just e-mail friends, or do text ads or what?
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:23 AM on August 30, 2002
But if we want to build something better, more inclusive, and generally more rewarding, let's get to it. I just figured out where all this boyzone stuff is coming from. Personally, I don't think Sportsfilter should worry at all about being labeled a "boyzone." It's a sports site. The audience is going to be predominantly male. Women who love sports know they will be outnumbered here, just as they are outnumbered in sports bars, and sporting events. Within reason, I don't see how a link to sports-related cheesecake is going to exclude anyone, especially since there's nothing stopping women from responding in kind. (Aside from my thoughts and prayers, of course.) Besides, I don't think any woman would hang out in a sports venue with the expectation that all of the men are fully evolved.
posted by rcade at 12:53 AM on August 30, 2002
It's really not all that much different than allowing people to write columns, really. And it's not like sports offers the same huge number of opportunities to relevantly self-link that mefi does. So... I don't think it is ever going to happen often enough to be worth whining about, especially if user columns ever become a reality.