Sorry if the answer to this question has already been given, but why not have a "recommended diary" list like at BCB? Seems to work pretty well... You could put one of these diary nazis that are constantly hectoring people about decorum etc. in charge of the thing.

honestly, i rarely go through the main threads anymore, even though i always read and enjoy them, because i don't have a whole lot to say in response to the draft breakdowns, or interviews with journalists specializing in off-the-field sports controversies. i enjoy reading that content, but i don't really think i have much to add to it, so i usually don't even open up the comments part of the main thread.

but when a new development in the direction of the team occurs, such as a new acquisition, it seems like an appropriate time for a diary. this can focus the discussion properly: the main thread post, which is usually the more substantive, can stay less muddled and on topic. the diary can cover the specific new development.

(now i'm going to rant for a second, so everyone can ignore me if they'd rather not see it.)

honestly, all this diary fuss has me a bit puzzled. i've spent enough time on message boards and online forums to understand that sometimes you have to sift through some dreck to get to the good stuff. it's not like there aren't a bunch of inane posts in the main threads also, which distract from discussion. but that's sort of the point of the internet: everyone gets a voice. i've learned to live with it at VeB, just as i have everywhere else, so i'm never upset if i read a somewhat poor diary.

i can understand why you would want to preserve the integrity of the site, LB, so i understand if you institute stricter policies. but i don't understand all these other people who are not in charge of the site getting all up in arms over this as if it were their site, when it's not. it's LB's world... we all just play in it. the talents of LB and his guest contributors have led to some outside attention from newspaper writers, and that has led to greater traffic, which has probably led to a lower average level of sophistication overall, but so what? it's not like anybody is paying money for this. it's supposed to be about fun, not snobbery and elitism. so, while i understand that certain long-standing members here want to keep the quality standards high for their own benefit, i also understand that newer members want to participate on a level that they are capable.

i've been here since the '04 off-season or thereabouts (IIRC), and i've seen plenty of people say plenty of silly/stupid things. i've seen just about everyone overreact at some point or other, including myself. i've seen a lot of folks making arguments that turned out to be silly in retrospect (for example, i argued in 2006 that Daubach should've been called up instead of Duncan when Pujols got hurt), but which seemed reasonable at the time.

so sure... institute some minimum standard for the diaries. i'd be happy with such a system. But a bit of humility and grace would also be a good thing, especially for those who've been on the site a long time and know better.

1. any change to the 40-man is at least diary-worthy, if not front-page-worthy. in times like these, even a rule 5 pickup can be cause for hope and celebration; in any season, even a guy like j-rod deserves a eulogy.
2. i think part of the maelstrom here is the winter meetings. not that that's the whole reason this all happened, but i'd say at minimum, winter meetings:veb kerfuffle::archduke ferdinand:wwii. as this site grows, i think it's going to require more creative ways to handle special events like this - specific programs/guidelines/events for the draft, for spring training, etc. those things get people excited in ways that are out of the ordinary, and i think they call for unique ways to express that excitement. the new daily hot stove thread is a smart example of this; here's to more in the future.
3. hinkster, you should know better - although if you're doing 3 mo's diaries per day, i might lose my job.

i propose "deactivate" rather than "delete" only because a hidden entry will still turn up on a search --- and you never know when that particular content might prove relevant to some later discussion. so rather than destroy the content, it would simply be removed from circulation.

that's my rationale, but this is all negotiable. if delete would be better --- or if the threshold should be 10 comments rather than 3, or whatever --- comment away.

daily hot-stove thread --- all rumors / news to be discussed therein
no more than 2 diaries per 24 hour period for any given author
diary will be deactivated if it draws fewer than 3 comments in 24 hours (author's own comments don't count)

. Is it possible to automate the 2 diaries per day ala the 300 character minimum? Also there is a loophole in the 300 character minimum. Just add these.........................................................

if you take a look at the last 50 diaries, a lot of them are duplicated.  at first glance you could probably boil those down to under 20 if you were to group them similarly.

If possible to have Diaries for subjects we will talk about forever.

for example.

Could we have just one diary for Steroids. Locked in near the top? anything new. in that diary. comments. in that diary. stories. in that diary.

so what happens if later that night, i want to post something more substantive? what if i woke up this morning and wanted to?

i understand what you're saying, and i think it's a balance - hopefully most of us heard 2/day and thought of that as a maximum, rather that a target.

I've also done the, preload a couple tabs in Firefox with VEB discussions.  I know that I can easily kill time on a flight with those.

Something to consider when reading/replying to posts or comments: according to a study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (that I know of only because of this article in Wired) there is only a 50/50 chance that people are interpreting the tone of your posts correctly.

Unless there is a breaking news story to be reported upon (ie. Hancock dies, Ankiel is linked to HGH, Pujols is a god), diaries should not be a short a short snippet and a link; they should be thought of as an extension of the main page. Before you post a diary, think of it as an "audition" (if you will) to being a writer on the front -- ie. would LB, or HC, or AZ, or RB, or PBR, or FUBAR, or any other weird letter combo we have so fantastically writing at VEB now write anything close to what you just wrote?

I'm not asking anyone to be as introspective as The Red Baron or as stats wise as AZ, or as full of common sense and Midwestern sensibilities as LB, but to think, before they publish a diary: "would the thousands of people who visit VEB every day really care about what I have just written? Is it well thought out enough to hold up against the panel of critics which may follow? Is it redundant? Can it be any better?"

That's what I ask myself after everything I write: "Can it be any better?" And the answer is always yes. There are things I have written three years ago that I wish I would have waited an extra twelve hours to print; I bet in five minutes, I will find a dozen things wrong with this comment.

This falls under the old Dwight Schrute rule of "Right before I do something, I ask myself 'would an idiot do this?' If the answer is 'yes', I don't do it."

I'm sorry that I come off as such an ass about the whole VEB diary situation, but I hate to see such a great site be brought down by a terrible signal-to-noise ratio, and I appreciate those who keep it as intellectually stimulating and challenging as a baseball site can be.