The fine line between too much and never enough

The response to the Devin Willock tragedy has been pretty much universal sadness — even, to their credit, at Stingtalk.  With one exception, because it always seems like there’s at least one of those people inhabiting any message board/comment section.

Again, it’s to their credit that this tool was immediately called out for his post.  The point here isn’t to hammer on Stingtalk or Tech fans in general, for that matter.  It’s to feed into a larger point that’s the subject of this post at Eleven Warriors.

In a world I perceive to be growing in toxicity and polarizing behavior by the day, it’s certainly aided by the largely anonymous protection registering and posting on message boards, tweeting etc. provide. It’s not a new phenomenon that people say things online that they’d likely not have the balls to say to someone face to face.

But against the backdrop of public discourse eroding regardless of topic or venue, the fact is there really aren’t many stated ground rules for how fans should interact or talk about players and coaches across channels. Combined with the noted option of anonymity and not having to stand toe to toe with the target of criticism, a fan’s evolution to fanatic, fringe lunatic, someone that takes the games way too seriously and can’t control their emotion or maybe was raised by wolves can bring out the worst in them. In all of us, really.

And with that, we all end up having our own version of what the rules of engagement are, which in and of itself can fuel angry disagreements over not even the topic at hand but how the topic is being discussed.

Ultimately, I suppose this is more my problem than yours, but I’ve received enough emails over the years about how the behavior of certain posters affects the ability of folks to enjoy the site to know it’s not mine exclusively.  And I’ve changed my approach to moderating comments here from a laissez faire, almost anything goes, approach to a recognition that for some people, obnoxious expression is more a matter of behavior than it is of pure speech, and setting boundaries in the comments to clamp down on that.

Honestly, that’s turned out to be fairly easy to deal with and it’s been a success.  It’s been some time since I’ve had to boot somebody from commenting and I really haven’t had to issue many warnings about crossing a line here lately.  But if politics and personal attacks on other commenters are relatively low hanging fruit, what about personal attacks on players and coaches, or spreading harmful unsubstantiated rumors about them?  Back to the 11W post:

None of this means it’s wrong for a fan or a columnist or anyone in between to lodge a complaint, snarky or not, about an Ohio State player, coach or team on the internet. Certainly a beat writer shouldn’t do this – it’s really their job to report the news – but for others writing for an outlet or the fans, honestly discussing the perceived strengths, weaknesses, successes and failures – individual or otherwise – are part of what makes sports fun and interesting.

At a school like Ohio State, the players and coaches need to accept some level of bad with the good, right? Passionate fans spend money. The passion indirectly and directly helps pay for stadiums, amenities and athletic facilities. It drives television ratings, creates the very need for NIL deals to entice players to come to or stay in Columbus. Players at Podunk U. don’t have to deal with any level of criticism but that’s because nobody cares. One of the reasons players and coaches come to Ohio State is because fans care. A lot.

It’s not to say those realities give fans a license to cross the line in tweeting at players or coaches, which they really shouldn’t do anyway but saying negative things about them on message boards or Twitter on some level is part of the territory, right?

But what is crossing the line?

Good question.  It’s easy to see that Stingtalk post as an example of too much, but where does, say, a decade of Reggie Ball mockery fit in?  I’d like to think his on-field production (or lack thereof) is fair game for snark, without taking him on personally, and hopefully that’s something I’ve managed correctly.  What about speculating about the reason(s) why a player or coach may not be performing at a level we expect and letting that speculation negatively wander into the realm of behavior that no one outside of the subject or someone very close to them could know?  Does doing so out of a sense of fan’s passion excuse it?

Take it back one step further.  Obviously, criticizing a Georgia player’s on-field performance isn’t beyond the limit.  Hell, I usually do it in every Observations post (hint:  not in the next one!).  But even there, isn’t it possible to cross a line, say, by repeating the same opinion ad nauseam across numerous comment threads?

Obviously, some of this navel gazing is prompted by Stetson Bennett and yesterday’s post about what went down at the national championship celebration.  Just as obviously, it’s not like I’m trying to lay blame on myself or any of y’all for Stetson’s attitude.  But I wonder if I should be more aware of the line than I am sometimes.  Genuinely curious what y’all think.

Advertisement