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

Progressive HoF Project?

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

  • Progressive HoF Project?

    We've tried this a few times in a few forms, but would anyone be interested in conducting a progressive Hall of Fame project? I'm thinking it would be very similar to the project I headed about a year ago in which we had our own mock HoF elections going back to 1979. That worked out pretty well and we regularly had a pretty good turnout. I'm thinking we'd do the same thing but go back much earlier.

    If people are interested, I was wonder about some logistics, such as....

    - How far back should we start? Should we start at the 1936 election, or perhaps even earlier?

    - What about the rules? I'm think we'd just operate as if the current BBWAA rules applied from the first year, as such would make conducting this project a lot easier (as the early BBWAA elections were kind of chaotic in which players were eligible). So there would be a 5 year waiting period, 15 years of eligibility, 75% for election, and 5% dropped. I might modify the 5% rule a little though as at first we might have a number of worthy candidates and I wouldn't want to see anyone dropped due to the overwhelming number, so I'm thinking we'd provide that a person is dropped after being below 5% in two consecutive years, and adopt a lower threshold for one and done (say 2%?). I'd also probably keep the 10 player vote limit, as I think when you open up the ballot, voters could become too liberal with voting, and it makes for some interesting strategy and discussion.

    - What to do with all the players at the beginning? For example, if we start say at 1936, do we only include players that retired as far back as 1916, and would we only give them that one year of eligibility since their 15 years would be up? In many ways it would be easier to conduct the elections to just have the bright line 15 years (+5 waiting) from the beginning, but then again, we'd be arbitrarily slighting a number of players that happened to play a little earlier. So to remedy this, we could either have a presumed VC from the beginning (even if we're not actually conducting VC election, though perhaps freakshow would be interested in doing that in conjuction with this as he did last time), and thus just throw everyone that's been retired for more than 20 years into the VC; or do we waive the 15 year requirement at first, and postpone the 15 year limit for 15 years (thus, everyone in the first election, as long as they meet the 5% rule, would have 15 years of eligibility, regardless of when they retired). I'm favoring the latter, but even then I would want a cutoff. In that case I would suggest a 15 year buffer, so if we're starting with the 1936 election, players who retired in 1901-1931 would be eligible for 15 years (5% being met), and players retiring before 1901 would go the imaginary VC. If we were to start at 1936, the dates would work out nicely as 1901 marks the AL's inception, but I wouldn't be adverse to starting at the elections with an earlier year.

    So if people are interested, to summarize the format I'm proposing:

    - Begin in 1936 (or earlier if people want)
    - 5 year waiting period, meaning the first election will not have anyone that retired after 1931 (if we start at 1936)
    - 15 year eligibility, waived for 15 years, meaning everyone eligible in the first election will be eligible for 15 years regardless if they retired more than 20 years prior
    - Initial eligibility stretching back an extra 15 years to 1901, rather than 1916 (if starting at 1936); everyone retiring before 1901 goes to imaginary VC (unless someone wants to simultaneously conduct that election); players dropped who retired between 1901-1916 (and progressively forward), would immediately be eligible for the VC, so the 15 year eligibility extension would not work against them in this regard
    - Limit to 10 votes per election
    - 75% for election
    - Finishing below 5% in two consecutive years results in dropping. Falling below 2% in initial year results in dropping. This should hopefully keep the initial large number of worthy eligible candidates eligible

    So what do you guys think? If people are interested, I'll try to get it running in the next few days, though I'll probably run an initial candidate list by everyone given the extended period at first, and the fact that I'd rather not have the ballot go beyond 40 or 50 players.
    Last edited by DoubleX; 04-25-2008, 08:18 AM.

  • #2
    I think it would be fun to begin before 1936

    Comment


    • #3
      --I think we'd have to begin earlier than 1936 if you are interested in getting a fair shake for 19th century players. Only the inner circle guys from the 1800s are going to have a shot if we start 35-40 years after they were done.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm also thinking now that starting earlier would be good as it would prevent a huge backlog of worthy candidates.

        So what year? I do want to maintain the 10 year ML requirement from the start, thus it would be impossible have an election prior to 1891 (all the notable players that played at the beginning of the NL but didn't make 10 years, would go to the imaginary VC to be considered as pioneers). The problem with starting too early though is that there will be too few good candidates at the beginning.

        I'm thinking 1901 might be a good year start. It's arbitrary but it's a nice benchmark year for baseball as it's when the AL started and dating back 15 years, would reach players that retired in 1886, the 10th anniversary (well 11th season) of the NL. So the numbers work out nicely and we should get a decent crop of candidates.

        So if we started at 1901, players retiring between 1886 and 1896 would be eligible, and I'd still postpone the 15 year rule for 15 years. Thus everyone in the 1901 election, would be eligible for 15 years until the 1915 election, provided they maintain 5%. I'd also probably drop my recommendation for modifying the 5% rule, as it wouldn't be as necessary with an early start and less viable candidates.

        Comment


        • #5
          If we were to start at 1901, here's a list of 35 candidates I've come up with. I've probably missed some players and I wouldn't mind getting the ballot in the 40-50 range anyway (but certainly no more than 50). All these players retired between 1886 and 1896:

          Dave Foutz - 1896
          Tommy McCarthy - 1896
          Doggie Miller - 1896
          Oyster Burns - 1895
          Jack Glasscock - 1895
          Pete Browning - 1894
          John Ward - 1894
          John Clarkson - 1894
          Tony Mullane - 1894
          Charlie Bennett - 1893
          King Kelly - 1893
          Henry Larkin - 1893
          Harry Stovey - 1893
          Bob Caruthers - 1893
          Tim Keefe - 1893
          George Gore - 1892
          Ned Hanlon - 1892
          Tip O'Neill - 1892
          Hardy Richardson - 1892
          Charlie Buffinton - 1892
          Pud Galvin - 1892
          Mickey Welch - 1892
          Fred Dunlap - 1891
          Paul Hines - 1891
          Charley Radbourn - 1891
          Dave Orr - 1890
          Jack Rowe - 1890
          Deacon White - 1890
          Ned Williamson - 1890
          Charley Jones - 1888
          Ezra Sutton - 1888
          Bobby Mathews - 1887
          Jim McCormick - 1887
          Joe Start - 1886
          Will White - 1886

          Comment


          • #6
            5-year wait

            The first Cooperstown election for old-time players was a comedy of errors.
            HOF balloting 1936 at wikipedia (see Veterans Committee)

            Originally posted by DoubleX View Post
            If we were to start at 1901, here's a list of 35 candidates I've come up with. I've probably missed some players and I wouldn't mind getting the ballot in the 40-50 range anyway (but certainly no more than 50). All these players retired between 1886 and 1896:

            Dave Foutz - 1896
            . . .
            Note, this is how Cooperstown's 5-year wait would be implemented for December 1901 vote by mail, January 1902 announcement, summer 1902 induction --all usually called "1902". Five-plus years after their last game, they appear on a ballot in the fall.
            The Hall of Merit, which was broadly like this, started with the "1898 election" for people who did not play after 1892 (except token appearances).

            Comment


            • #7
              Sounds like a fun project. I'd recommend going with a 1901 start date to give some of the earlier stars a fair shake.
              "I will calmly wait for my induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame."
              - Sammy Sosa

              "Get a comfy chair, Sammy, cause its gonna be a long wait."
              - Craig Ashley (AKA Windy City Fan)

              Comment


              • #8
                . . .
                The Hall of Merit, which was broadly like this, started with the "1898 election" for people who did not play after 1892 (except token appearances).
                <<

                Those appearances can be a pain.
                See Sam Thompson and Jim ORourke for example.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I recommend you start with the 1901 election. I also recommend you employ an 8-year minimum rather than 10-year. That would include players last playing in 1883-1895. (A 1886 start omits Tom York, who played ten years and is surely deserving of a ballot spot. Lowering to 8 years is consistent with the HOF's first 20 years and brings Dave Orr, Tommy Bond, et al under consideration.)

                  I recommend you make a rule regarding "post-career stunt" appearances, as I like to call them. (The Hall of Merit established a rule.) As Paul mentioned, Jim O'Rourke retired after 1893. He appeared in one more game, in 1904. In fall-1900 you have no idea that he'll pull a stunt like that, so he should be on the first ballot. Examples abound in this era; see Brouthers, Latham, Thompson, later Bender, Evers, of course Minoso, etc.
                  Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

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

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
                    Note, this is how Cooperstown's 5-year wait would be implemented for December 1901 vote by mail, January 1902 announcement, summer 1902 induction --all usually called "1902". Five-plus years after their last game, they appear on a ballot in the fall.
                    The Hall of Merit, which was broadly like this, started with the "1898 election" for people who did not play after 1892 (except token appearances).
                    The date thing was something I was struggling with. Voting is technically five years since the player last played, with the results announced and inductions 6 years after. I think it's a little easier to keep things at 5 years, so when we have the 1901 election, it means that voting was done in 1901 and players that retired five years earlier in 1896 would be eligible. We'll just pretend that the results are announced in 1901 as well, instead of waiting until the first week of 1902.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Freakshow View Post
                      I recommend you make a rule regarding "post-career stunt" appearances, as I like to call them. (The Hall of Merit established a rule.) As Paul mentioned, Jim O'Rourke retired after 1893. He appeared in one more game, in 1904. In fall-1900 you have no idea that he'll pull a stunt like that, so he should be on the first ballot. Examples abound in this era; see Brouthers, Latham, Thompson, later Bender, Evers, of course Minoso, etc.
                      That's why I need you guys to remind me of things like this.

                      So we'll start with 1901 and the 8 year rule works for the first year (Larry Corcoran is another who would come in). I'm envisioning a ballot between 40-50 players, so if anyone has suggestions of who to add to my original 35, that would be great. In fact, I'll start a separate thread for the ballot. Sooner we can come to a consensus on the ballot, the sooner I'll get things going.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X