Stu, I love you big guy. However I kind of think you are missing the point here. Gonzo startd this topic not me or any other moderator. He was unhappy that we locked a couple of his topics and went to them membership for opinion. I think the opinion has come though loud and clear in favor of the way the Moderators are handling this forum. MCG is not really an issue here, there is no doubt in my mind that he understands how things are being handled but unfortunately some issues from the past keep coming up, in his case I would agree with you completely. Gonzo however is a different matter. When he returned to this forum we exchanged e-mails with him and made perfectly clear the philosophy of this form where it comes to flames. But true to form he continues to push the envelope. Actually I would agree with you that if he would keep his sense of humor and knock off the childish attacks against other teams he could be a legitimate and fun person on the forum. If he does not however we will continue to lock the topic. So Stu you are a really level headed guy and I respect your opinion, so if you can talk common sense into Gozo then you will carry the day. Again though I think it's pretty clear here from a topic that Gonzo started hoping to over ride our policies that the vast majority of the membership does not agree with him.
MCG thinks he's intimidating? Wow. I'm dueling with an unarmed man here. I've never seen him post any facts or even demonstrate a clear understanding of what his own team is doing. Its like he's speaking a foreign language... At least Gonzo creates his own sections to attack ND or other schools. MCG invades every conversation with his irrelevant, self-serving BS. When facts are presented to him, he simply ignores them, suggests that the person who disagreed with him is a liar, and then continues on with his own agenda. If I had an "ignore" button like we used to have on Prodigy, I wouldn't even see his crap. That's what we really need...
Flames on each other's teams should, for the most part, be left open...trust me, these guys can hold their own. Attacks on each other should, for the most part, be locked. Kumbaya, guys, I'm off to watch the #1 team (who knows for how long) with my buddy, Gerry. PS...true story...my spell checker didn't like kumbaya, so I asked for suggestions...one of them was... "scumbag!!" :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Well Stu we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Right now I'm the only moderator up and we'll have to wait and see what the other two have to say, but as I understand our agreement among Moderators we reserve the right to lock either type of attack, to a team or to a person. It does become a matter of degree and in our opinion the line was crossed with the Notre Dame topics and they were locked. You know Stu it only takes a relatively small adjustment to post in a different manner and Gonzo doesn't think he has to make the adjustment. Apparently you agree with him but I see little other support. Thus we will have to agree to disagree.
haaa ha <r>the intimidator..........<br/> <br/> <IMG src="http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h32/geetargurl16/thcuuuute.jpg"><s></e></IMG></r>
Jo'Co....right back at ya big guy. I feel the same about you to be sure almost to the letter because of your latest flurry of insults more than anything else. Heck...I thought you and I used to get along fairly well until this.
I'm going to chime in here only because of Stu's comments. He is one of those here that I respect the most because he is level-headed, humble enough to admit when he might be wrong, and fair-minded with regard to everyone on this board. He's a cool guy. I understand his position vis-a-vis the concept of "free speech". It highlights the fine line that the moderators must follow given the credo of the board. It seems to me that there are three fundamental types of internet bulletin board communication: conveying information, discussion, and debate. It's the latter which seems to be at issue here (although discussion sometimes leads to debate). This was never meant to be a no-holds-barred forum. There are certain rules we all knew about coming in. Thus membership is voluntary and carries with it a certain amount of responsibility to adhere to the "rules of the game". It's human nature on the part of a few to bend or stretch rules wherever they exist, and their conduct here shows that they consider this forum fair game for that practice. Of course, their written "conduct" draws others into the fray and before you know it, they've accomplished what they set out to do, i.e., stir things up in a way that is contrary to this environment. When called out for this conduct, they say, Who? Me? No way! and they provide their own self-serving logic to rationalize their conduct. At that point, this board becomes separated from other similar forums in that the moderators, representing the "silent majority", take a position consistent with the house rules and enforce same. In every case like this, I have been very comfortable with their judgement. I guess the bottom line is, we all are big boys and girls and we recognize the right of everyone to leave if they don't like the way this board functions. It's that simple. It's not complicated, regardless of the arguments put forth by the perpetrators. So........while Stu's position is admirable and befitting of a class guy with an open mind, I maintain that the line in the sand is visible for all to see and permanently in place. If it's crossed it must be dealt with in order to preserve the integrity of this fellowship. That's all I have to say.
I know that someone who is better with the written word than I am will always end up saying it better for me. Thank you Sid.
Well...ok to all of that, but... The moderators do a great job but sometimes that line in the sand may be seen differently by individuals. If the moderators are truly representing the majority then I presume that they would welcome our input. :wink: I'm gonna put out one more post here, the last one, and then catch whatever heat it brings me like a man (actually I'm down in Columbus in the hotel lobby with Whobe so I might not catch up to the flack until Sunday)... Two things...first, as I reread this thread, almost all of the personal shots have been taken at Gonz and MCG...rather than coming from them. I know that the response will be to look at their past history, they deserve it, etc. but it is what it is...if we are going to censor them then we should police ourselves as well. We're all getting too sensitive. If that's the standard I'm going to hafta get a ghost writer.
I think I'm with Stu. I would like to err on the side of more "discussion" and "debate" than less. Now I don't agree that MCG is being picked on. You can't isolate a single entry in a single thread. He has gone on about a couple of themes for at least a year and to now say he is the victim is not fair. This thread is just a continuation of that on-going "discussion". I vote for restraint in locking threads. Obviously namecalling and personal attacks should not be tolerated but if someone says something about my school, I will defend and argue their facts and if they are not logical or truthful then I will stop participating in that discussion. That is my opinion on this situation. Gonzo falls under the tenet of "I would rather be thought a fool than open my mouth and remove all doubt". I choose to just not participate in discussions that I don't feel are worthy.
Stu and kp, I don't think I really see anything different in your posts than we have basically been doing as moderators. There have been very few topics locked, but more that in the past. There are a couple of things that we have been monitoring more, beating a subject to death, hijacking topics, and starting topics with inflammatory names and inflammatory writing on the topic. As far as a line in the sand, I would say we have defined the line a little better but it's always been there. Perhaps to say enforce it a little better might be a better way to say that. It's not easy being a moderator here and the diversity of the three of us is why I think things have always worked well. I would also say about this topic that it was started by Gonzo because he was unhappy with the way we were handling some of his topics. We let it stay here because we were interested in the members thoughts on that subject. Did some people take the time to dump on a couple of posters, yes. Was it the same as what we have been locking topics for, not in my opinion. It was honest feedback in my opinion. Not always the way one of us may have done it, but honest. I can lock this topic but am inclined not to, I hope all of us may have learned something about how others here feel. And one last thing I'll say again, all Gonzo has to do is pull back on his language, it's up to him whether he does that or not, if he does then I don't think we would be locking many of his topics. If not? I think the picture is clear. And Stu and kp your input is always welcome and I'm not intending to send any heat your way. In fact both of you have many times made me reconsider my position. This time I hope you understand why we are so adamant about what we are saying.
Bill, Fair enough. I was reading the thread and when I got to Stu's statement I found that I agreed with him, and I felt that maybe you were looking for feedback. I am not saying that the Admin's have done anything "wrong". As others have said, there are times when a thread has been driven into the ground and I usually try to bow out ("so be it"), if the thread continues it usually branches off into really rediculous directions and people are more likely to say things they really don't mean. In those cases locking the thread is probably a good thing. BUT, I have been on other forums where any criticism of the moderater's favorite team/issue/coach etc. will get a thread locked. I am not suggesting that has happened here but I am advocating that you reserve the locking of threads for the most egregious offenders. That's all. Please don't misunderstand. Thank you all for you do. This forum is a refuge where I can read and sometimes discuss college football with knowledgeable and articulate people. I am just advocating that you keep it as open as is reasonably possible.
kp, I keep telling my self not to just answer every post here but I do want to say that even though we didn't start this topic the moderators have read it with interest for feedback and all were appreciated. So thanks for giving it and we try to be fair and there are really minimal topics that are locked. Good luck to day, no offense Tom, but the Gators do need to not only keep winning but catch a break from Tennessee.
I agree with the well stated positions of Kp and Stu. This forum needs debate and discussion or it devalues the enlightenment one can glean from hearing opinions offered by fans and schools of different areas of the country. I never find it amusing however when people who feel "defeated" or frustrated by that debate to resort to personal insults. There is no room for that here in my opinion and that is NOT why we are here.
Just when I think I'm done posting! MCG, this board does allow debate and discussion. It's not going to allow the same thing said over and over and over again! (seems like I remember a song with those lyrics) Nor is it going to allow inflammatory titles and discussion. No change there.
Once again, for the record <r>the "Bubble Boy" comment has waaaay more to do with the reaction to JOCO's initial post than it did to Dave actually being a 'Bubble Boy.'<br/> <br/> I like to agree and disagree with MCG. What I didn't care for what this obtuse rush to protect that seemed to come out of left field.<br/> <br/> We've been comfy kicking each other in the nads for years now and it seems to stir interest in certain topics. Why break up a good thing? <E></E></r>