I thought that the discussion re: Bergquist was resonable and without excessive rancor.
The fact that a couple of posters with differing opinions engaged in some reparte' shouldn't be reason to kill the thread.
Rather than kill a legitimate thread and direct everyone to smack, why don't you split the topic and move the smack?
Overmoderation sucks.
I am not one of those who in expressing opinions confine themselves to facts.
..........Mark Twain..........
I thought that the discussion re: Bergquist was resonable and without excessive rancor.
The fact that a couple of posters with differing opinions engaged in some reparte' shouldn't be reason to kill the thread.
Rather than kill a legitimate thread and direct everyone to smack, why don't you split the topic and move the smack?
Overmoderation sucks.
Please no splitting. That makes things impossible to follow. Just be happy it didnt get deleted. I started two threads in smack. I'll say it again. In the smack section hammering on everybody's favorite poster, and they both got deleted.
(waring:this thread will soon be deleted. Sorry tailbone for my insensativeness)
THE INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, I'M HERE TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN!!
I thought that the discussion re: Bergquist was resonable and without excessive rancor.
The fact that a couple of posters with differing opinions engaged in some reparte' shouldn't be reason to kill the thread.
Rather than kill a legitimate thread and direct everyone to smack, why don't you split the topic and move the smack?
Overmoderation sucks.
Please no splitting. That makes things impossible to follow. Just be happy it didnt get deleted. I started two threads in smack. I'll say it again. In the smack section hammering on everybody's favorite poster, and they both got deleted.
(waring:this thread will soon be deleted. Sorry tailbone for my insensativeness)
Not impossible, just more difficult.
Try following a deleted thread.
I am not one of those who in expressing opinions confine themselves to facts.
..........Mark Twain..........
It's not really about what is being said, but WHO is saying it.
Glad you're still here.
The first thought that crossed my mind, when seeing how two topics with your involvement disappeared from the main forum, was that you might have gotten banned.
Ridiculous.
I am not one of those who in expressing opinions confine themselves to facts.
..........Mark Twain..........
Remember guys. Opinions are like a##holes. Everybody has one, some just stink more than others. AG2 and I are just doing a little bantering. His opinions are valid. I just don't agree with some of them.
Remember guys. Opinions are like a##holes. Everybody has one, some just stink more than others. AG2 and I are just doing a little bantering. His opinions are valid. I just don't agree with some of them.
True, and I took my bashing of his meaningless rhetoric to the smack board. I guess I am the new thread killa.
THE INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, I'M HERE TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN!!
Remember guys. Opinions are like a##holes. Everybody has one, some just stink more than others. AG2 and I are just doing a little bantering. His opinions are valid. I just don't agree with some of them.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
Who loves not women, wine and song remains a fool his whole life long.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
so I am assuming you are admitting to be SGF, Wolfman etc?
I don't let anyone tell me how to run the board but I do take suggestions and ideas. What you were doing in the past was not tolerable, especially after MANY warnings that you failed to comply with.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
AZ you just really want to be one the cool kids don't you? Play nice and I might give you a pucker shot of your choice before a playoff game. (PS we're not really the cool kids but we like to think we are)
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
My question is why can't you be man enough to take your punishment and go away. You have been banned countless times, even more times than we have had D1 threads, which is hard to believe. Chris gave you chance after chance after chance, and you blew every one of them. You got one board shut down, and even bragged to me in PMs that you would come on this board anytime you want and do the same. So just go away. If you have all the money you keep bragging about then you can start your own board and rule the roost. This board is at it's best when you are NOT here, that is not opinion, that is FACT.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
You gotta give this guy a break. He obviously has been lurking since the board started and finally got up the courage to get a username and post. Too bad that one of the guys that has been banned 236 times used most of the available usernames and he had to go with thoughtful griz 2 because thoughtful grizmust've already been taken.
THE INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, I'M HERE TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN!!
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
You gotta give this guy a break. He obviously has been lurking since the board started and finally got up the courage to get a username and post. Too bad that one of the guys that has been banned 236 times used most of the available usernames and he had to go with thoughtful griz 2 because thoughtful grizmust've already been taken.
That's what this board has become. There is selective censorship and selective banning of posters. If anyone crosses GB1, he whines to the monitors to get that poster banned. The board has rarely has good discussion any more. It has evolved into a homogenous love-fest for sugar coated rhetoric. Any discenting opinions are squelched and the poster banned. Some message board, huh?
My question is this, I thought the ignore feature was implimented so that some posters could avoid getting their panties in a wad from reading stuff they don't want to read. If that is so, why the need to ban anyone?
There are many posters who enjoy reading different points of view, as is evidenced by the responses in this thread. The current monitors should stifle their trigger-happy ban function. If they would rather write poetry or songs, may I suggest www.poetryfest.com. This is a football board. People are opinionated about football. Get used to it and toughen up.
You have been a member since October and no one has been banned since then so how would you know anything about slective censorship of this site and selective banning?
And, I have done nothing to get banned, either, isn't that correct. I have been playing nice, and, in my opinion, adding good discussion to the board. But GB1 is already whining about me being banned. Why do you allow a few select posters determine who is able to post? That is not selective?
You also have allowed GB1 to expose personal information about me, which should NEVER be allowed. This is wrong, and should be tolerated. Why is he not banned for doing this? I believe that these examples prove my point about selectivity.
Chris, I am not trying to be an A-hole here, I am just making points to illustrate why I believe that certain posters get away with things that would get others banned.
And yet anothe lie by you SD. You have lied so much you cannot recall the truth. Number one, it wasn't me who exposed you on the board. I did call you out after all your threats to me, which Chris was given copies of. If you learn anything, try learning that if you only told the truth you wouldn't need to remember all your lies, you get caught in them each and every time. For once in your life, man up and leave. You promised to leave under multiple names, yet you cannot even make good on your own promises. Is spewing hate that important to a big rich man like you always say you are?
Joined: 23 Oct 2007 Posts: 2294 Location: "Stayin out of harms danger" 1187 eGriz Bucks
HaucksDAD wrote:
Remember guys. Opinions are like a##holes. Everybody has one, some just stink more than others. AG2 and I are just doing a little bantering. His opinions are valid. I just don't agree with some of them.
I agree, and just because we smack each other a bit doesn't mean we are pissed off and the thread should be deleted.
UPWIMT does a great job keeping the crap off this board, he doesn't get paid for the babysitting he does around here and to call him out is a bunch of crap. If all you a holes and haters don't like it start your own fuggin board then you can have a place to go hating and bashing. Other wise stay off the backs of the monitors.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
