Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

A Plea to the Hall

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Plea to the Hall

    A Plea to the Baseball Hall of Fame

    National Baseball Hall of Fame – Mission Statement: “Preserving History. Honoring Excellence. Connecting Generations.

    The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is an independent, non-profit educational institution dedicated to fostering an appreciation of the historical development of baseball and its impact on our culture by collecting, preserving, exhibiting and interpreting its collections for a global audience as well as honoring those who have made outstanding contributions to our national pastime.
    The Hall of Fame's mission is to preserve the sport's history, honor excellence within the game and make a connection between the generations of people who enjoy baseball. Likewise the institution functions as three entities under one roof with a museum, the actual Hall of Fame and a research library. With these parts working together the Museum is committed to fulfilling its mission by:
    Collecting, through donation, baseball artifacts, works of art, literature, photographs, memorabilia and related materials which focus on the history of the game over time, its players and those elected to the Hall of Fame.
    Preserving the collections by adhering to professional museum standards with respect to conservation and maintaining a permanent record of holdings through documentation, study, research, cataloging and publication.”


    Does preserving history mean only representing that which is deemed to be moral and ethical? Is that moral or ethical in itself? The Hall of Fame is an independent, no profit organization. If that is the case why does a ban from Major League Baseball constitute a ban from the Hall? History is history regardless of the perceived stigma attached to certain transgressions. This is about asking the National Baseball Hall of Fame live up to it’s mission statement. The Hall of Fame advocates the preservation of history, then promptly endeavors to stifle that history. As long as it is popular opinion… Mickey Mantle was banned from Major League Baseball for almost 5 years and Willie Mays for about 2 years for working in casinos, yet their plaques remained (as they should, I might add, just making a point). Fergie Jenkins was banned from baseball in 1980 when he was arrested for bringing drugs across the border into Canada. Not just Marijuana, but hashish and cocaine as well. 11 years later he was inducted into the Hall of Fame. Gaylord Perry (spitballs), George Brett (pine Tar), Whitey Ford (gunk), Don Sutton(scuffing), Stargell-McCovey-Arron(greenies) are they cheaters? Ty Cobb (bigot, game fixer), Cap Anson (bigot), Babe Ruth (drunk, womanizer), Hack Wilson (drunk), Orlando Cepeda (drug smuggler), Paul Molitor (gambling), Wade Boggs (sex addict) are these exemplary members of society? Trying to find the “honor and integrity” here? I’m not advocating the removal of anyone here, just recognition of the fact that the Hall should be embracing the achievements of the greats of the game from every era.

    The privilege of voting belongs solely to members of the Baseball Writers Association of America in good standing for more than 10 consecutive years. Why? Are these guys really more knowledgeable or have higher standards and values than anyone else? Bill Conlin (pedophile, Spink Award?), really? Can we assume that these folks are above reproach? Why are their votes not released to the public? Even congressmen and senators votes are available to public. They are paid to write about baseball, let them write about it. Don’t let them use their vote to promote themselves or use it to punish a player they have a personal or professional grievance with because they weren’t as affable as the media demanded them be. Too many use their vote as a great means of self promotion, they may publish their ballot with the view that it will be unpopular and create controversy thus keeping their name in the public eye. Again, let them write. Let them advocate for or against certain players, debate the merits of each of the candidates, but give the vote to the fans. In 2014 Dan La Batard had his voting privileges revoked for turning his vote over to reddit, great publicity for him but it should have been with the fans from the beginning.

    Baseball has been and always will be about the fans, whether it is the fans of the past that supported and helped the game grow or the fans of the future who will continue to nurture the game and help it maintain it’s place as an integral part of American culture. Without the fans baseball would not exist, period… end of story. The fans support baseball at the turnstiles, watching television, purchasing merchandise as well as visiting the Hall of Fame. As such they deserve to be treated with respect and reverence, for without them baseball does not exist. This is a way for the fans to express their love of the game and feel connected to it’s history by being part of it not having it dictated to them. People are not quite as uniformed and illiterate as the Hall of Fame must assume.

    What can be done to improve?
    1. Release writers from the vote
    2. Give the vote to the fans, it works for the All Star Game and there are notable omissions but voting for players that have played for 10-20 years will eliminate the one off great seasons that are missed due to popular vote in All Star games
    3. Let the fans tell you who Hall of Famers are or should be, Major League Baseball isn’t officially affiliated so bans there should have no bearing
    4. Embrace history, good or bad. History is only important if it is accurate and without judgement
    5. Allow the writers the task of selecting the new candidates to enter consideration each year
    6. Voting for the different eras of baseball needs to be addressed as well
    a. selection of contemporary Hall of Fame members and writers from that particular era
    b. if the era goes beyond that from which there are no living members of the Hall or from the writers then committee composed of writers with minimum 15 consecutive years and selection of Hall of Fame members

    There are many ways in which the Hall of Fame could or should change. The fact remains that it should, for the sake of the fan and for baseball itself.

  • #2
    On number 6, I'd suggest panels of scholars from the ranks of SABR (which, contrary to popular opinion, is not just statheads).

    While it's true that there's no formal link from MLB to Cooperstown, there will always be powerful motivations for the Hall to cooperate with MLB (memorabilia, cooperation of players, and so forth). That's never going to go away. I agree that morals are overused as ways to eliminate players, with PEDs as the prime example when even under the current policies it takes several violations of the rule to get kicked out of the game. I'm not inclined to include guys who suddenly "boosted their baseline" from below HOF level to HOF level just coincidentally when there's some significant proof juicing was going on. But keeping out Bonds and Clemens, who had clearly shown HOF caliber performance before there was a hint of juicing is too much IMHO. As for the Black Sox and Pete Rose, the Hall is there to honor all those who made the game the great pleasure it is. It's a place for the sport to honor those guys. Guys who sell out the World Series in the face of a clear anti-gambling ban or managers who gamble on their own team in the face of the gambling ban, not to mention getting sexually involved with several underage girls are not the kind of people anybody should want to honor as emblematic of the sport.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Smokin_jJoe_72 View Post
      There are many ways in which the Hall of Fame could or should change. The fact remains that it should, for the sake of the fan and for baseball itself.
      The single greatest reform the Hall of Fame should make is permitting the BBWAA to vote for as many candidates as they deem worthy. That alone will (a) provide a 100% accurate record of the opinion of the electorate (something not currently reflected in the results), (b) ensure no one electors' opinion counts more or less than his fellows, and (c) eliminate "strategic" voting and the several phenomena that accompany it.
      "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
      "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
      "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
      "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
        The single greatest reform the Hall of Fame should make is permitting the BBWAA to vote for as many candidates as they deem worthy. That alone will (a) provide a 100% accurate record of the opinion of the electorate (something not currently reflected in the results), (b) ensure no one electors' opinion counts more or less than his fellows, and (c) eliminate "strategic" voting and the several phenomena that accompany it.
        Because the HOF never defined what a hall of famer is, we do not know how many players should be in the Hall. If they had decided on a definite percentage of all players to be enshrined, they could specify exactly how many players would be elected each year.

        But they didn’t do that, resulting in constant tinkering with the rules to control the spigot. The Hall wants a steady stream of inductions, to maintain interest and to make for a nice ceremony every year. But the flow of candidates into the pipeline is uneven. When the flow is slow, they open the spigot, eventually resulting in a flood. They react by slamming down the spigot, eventually resulting in a drought. And so on: drought-flood-drought-flood….

        This is why they did not change the ten-vote limit when the BBWAA requested it a couple years back. Plenty of players are being elected; the Hall doesn’t want to encourage voters to elect even more. Perhaps they will be more open to this idea during the candidate drought in the mid-2020’s.

        Here’s an idea for a project: Suppose that it’s late 1935 and they’re discussing how to start the baseball Hall of Fame. It’s been decided that 1% of retired MLB players will be hall of famers. They have also set the minimum eligibility age at 40.

        They’ve done the research, so they know that there were 5,998 former MLB players inactive in 1935. They also found that 4,767 of these were age 40+ by the end of 1935. So the HOF should already have 48 players (1%). However, that’s more players than they want to elect at one time.

        They decide that they’ll elect four players every year until they reach the target of 1%, in about 16 years. After that, they’ll elect one or two every year to maintain HOF membership at 1%.

        At the present time, January 2019, PI says there are 15,875 former MLB players inactive in 2018, born in 1978 or earlier. So 159 guys should now be in the Hall for their play in MLB. Or if you prefer 1.5%, there should be 238 players (slightly more than the actual HOF).

        Anyone wanna run that?
        Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

        Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Freakshow View Post
          Because the HOF never defined what a hall of famer is, we do not know how many players should be in the Hall. If they had decided on a definite percentage of all players to be enshrined, they could specify exactly how many players would be elected each year.
          1. No one knows how many "should" be in.
          2. The Hall left that up to the voters to decide.

          But they didn’t do that, resulting in constant tinkering with the rules to control the spigot. The Hall wants a steady stream of inductions, to maintain interest and to make for a nice ceremony every year. But the flow of candidates into the pipeline is uneven. When the flow is slow, they open the spigot, eventually resulting in a flood. They react by slamming down the spigot, eventually resulting in a drought. And so on: drought-flood-drought-flood….
          3. For these (obvious) reasons, the Hall should always have required at least one new inductee per year.
          4. Also for these reasons, the Hall needed to either maintain perpetual eligibility for players before the BBWAA or, relegate them after a reasonable period of time to a special committee of experts. The dividing line should ideally be between the period of time where BBWAA members are no longer familiar with the candidates.
          5. The Hall sort of, kind of did #4 there, but the current 10-year tenure on the BBWAA isn't remotely where that division used to (or should) be.

          This is why they did not change the ten-vote limit when the BBWAA requested it a couple years back. Plenty of players are being elected; the Hall doesn’t want to encourage voters to elect even more. Perhaps they will be more open to this idea during the candidate drought in the mid-2020’s.
          6. Agreed. Bottleneck or no, the Hall isn't interested in large inductions becoming routine. I see the mid 2020s as a repeat of the 1990s and 2000s. In other words, the Hall won't see it as a problem. Even when we have another 2013.

          Here’s an idea for a project: Suppose that it’s late 1935 and they’re discussing how to start the baseball Hall of Fame. It’s been decided that 1% of retired MLB players will be hall of famers. They have also set the minimum eligibility age at 40.

          They’ve done the research, so they know that there were 5,998 former MLB players inactive in 1935. They also found that 4,767 of these were age 40+ by the end of 1935. So the HOF should already have 48 players (1%). However, that’s more players than they want to elect at one time.

          They decide that they’ll elect four players every year until they reach the target of 1%, in about 16 years. After that, they’ll elect one or two every year to maintain HOF membership at 1%.

          At the present time, January 2019, PI says there are 15,875 former MLB players inactive in 2018, born in 1978 or earlier. So 159 guys should now be in the Hall for their play in MLB. Or if you prefer 1.5%, there should be 238 players (slightly more than the actual HOF)
          Great idea and I would suggest the 1.5% is more akin to what the BBWAA should have been doing all along (to avoid the "demand" for a VC).
          "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
          "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
          "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
          "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jalbright View Post
            On number 6, I'd suggest panels of scholars from the ranks of SABR (which, contrary to popular opinion, is not just statheads).
            No, it isn't just statheads, but it is predominantly people who aren't scholars at all. The pool of scholars would be quite small, and some of them are off their rockers as to who should be in the HOF. Heck, even some SABR folk think some SABR members should be in the HOF. The vast majority of people have no care what SABR thinks, and we should keep it that way.

            Comment

            Ad Widget

            Collapse
            Working...
            X