New Owner Introduction

[Sparkey]

This forum isnt big enough for the ignore feature. Is it not possible to just simply not reply to something?

The point of the ignore feature is so you don't have to read the posts of certain people to begin with. Its a lot easier to filter the garbage out.

The feature doesn't work however, if other posters quote the poster you are trying to ignore. Really a waste of overhead on a site this small, imo.

[Bretsky]

Specific rules would just get questioned and nitpicked to death

Not having rules leaves the door open for authoritarian attitudes by monitor(s), and actual or percieved favoritism. Two things we saw far too much of.
Saying rules would lead to nitpicking is a theory. I doubt it. And so what if somebody does argue - they will argue whether there is a rule or not.

See, I see you as one that want to restrict the admin. Open to authoritaran attitudes ? Sure...maybe...you just have to trust the admin to be fair. Perceived favoritism ? Maybe...but that "perceived" will always be there. IMO rules would undoubtedly lead to nitpicking, and if I was admin....which I will clearly never be....no way would I want to deal with the nitpicking. Honestly, if I formulated a clear set of rules, you'd be one of the posters I'd be worried that would be the first to use the toothpick.

If I'd create some rules, they would be undoubtedly questioned. Then, I'd be accused of playing favorites since the rules would address things that certain posters may partake in. Maybe with one rule...everybody would think............" " won't like that rule at all.

Dartboard

Doing this would just make the admin into a dart board. Not worth it.

[gex]

What happens if you have someone block, and that person then starts a thread?!?

You don't see it. You don't see any part of that user except if anyone quotes them typically. It may even block the quote of that person. Not sure. I've never had to block anyone. Skin would be the first.

2nd

[SnakeLH2006]

Specific rules would just get questioned and nitpicked to death

Not having rules leaves the door open for authoritarian attitudes by monitor(s), and actual or percieved favoritism. Two things we saw far too much of.
Saying rules would lead to nitpicking is a theory. I doubt it. And so what if somebody does argue - they will argue whether there is a rule or not.

See, I see you as one that want to restrict the admin. Open to authoritaran attitudes ? Sure...maybe...you just have to trust the admin to be fair. Perceived favoritism ? Maybe...but that "perceived" will always be there. IMO rules would undoubtedly lead to nitpicking, and if I was admin....which I will clearly never be....no way would I want to deal with the nitpicking. Honestly, if I formulated a clear set of rules, you'd be one of the posters I'd be worried that would be the first to use the toothpick.

If I'd create some rules, they would be undoubtedly questioned. Then, I'd be accused of playing favorites since the rules would address things that certain posters may partake in. Maybe with one rule...everybody would think............" " won't like that rule at all.

Dartboard

Doing this would just make the admin into a dart board. Not worth it.

Kinda that, but if no rules, then it gets crazy where no one knows where it stands. Snake's been on 5 Packer forums for ex. and no real trouble to speak of, but the nitpicking and sniping goes on regardless. The difference is with sites like FF or PackerChatters, the MODs go/went nuts and targeted peeps that posted against the favored posters (ala Joe Arrigo, even though he was found to be a fraud). That's a touchy situation, cuz the community at PC is extinct based on the MOD heavy presence and favoring posters.

The last regime here, including you Brett, had a tough time but did it well. There will always be some posters that have it out for others, but it doesn't get too extreme like JS did, as we kind of MOD'd ourselves with PM's or knowing each other, etc. This is what makes/made PR such a good site, as most of my buds aren't on here as posters, ala Snake, but read daily what goes on. Someone posted how there is character thing with many posters with that allotted freedom and I do agree. Everyone who posts here a bit has a specific flavor/character which transcends this site into our own. Some don't get along (and not gonna name names) but even those posters that stir shit up, seem to get it right from time to time with posts....as most all have some knowledge to contribute, as bottom line...this is the most Passionate site for Packer insight bar none.

Hopefully not much changes, but having rules is better than none, at least you know where you stand. I seen a few good posters go against Arrigo and the "grain" at PC get booted for no good reason. If that went down here, I'm sure PackerCats could become a reality. But, alas, Snake thinks the few things the Admin said make sense. But it is a daily struggle, I'm sure. Good luck bro, though.
-----------------------------------------------

A quick question though, Administrator:

When are you gonna form your new screen name is I'm sure if you've been reading for awhile on PR that everyone here has some flavor/character, but Admin for a name is ok for now, but what is your take on the GB Packers? Will you be TT is a SLAVEMASTER or BRETT4EVA or what? Snake's LMAO, but you answered some good questions, but what is your point of view, as this forum is really pretty mutually on good behavior, but when TT or Brett come up. WATCH THE HELL OUT! LOL. Shit goes to worse sometimes as this whole forum got divided/and still is over that mess. BTW: Snake likes both. Yes, it's possible. Carry on though, young soldier. You can't be Administrator (as a screenname) forever, or will you?

[Scott Campbell]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

[SnakeLH2006]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

Yeah, it makes sense though, Scott. (BTW, where the hell you been man? Seen you post a bunch the last week?) That sounds about right as GB football talk is paramount and this site has tons of great members that bring breaking news to topic like none other. That's the main reason I came here 3 years ago and haven't been disappointed as the conversation get heated, but it's not like anyone will murder someone or go off on an expletive laden tirade like on JSO. It's kinda like the USA Network advertises "Characters Welcome". Even the posters who get alot of heat do contribute sometimes, and are welcome overall, cuz without disagreement it's groupthink like PC became.

Not like you, I, or any longterm poster wouldn't know a thing about sniping as it's kinda a barb, but fun for all for the most part. Opinions are what drive this forum at PR. Makes for a better read, as the stats/logic show up, but ISO (in Snake's opinion) disagreement to make us a better team and checking the following day is what makes it fun to login and post on PR.

Good stuff and Snake agrees.

[gex]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

Yeah, it makes sense though, Scott. That sounds about right as GB football talk is paramount and this site has tons of great members that bring breaking news to topic like none other. That's the main reason I came here 3 years ago and haven't been disappointed as the conversation get heated, but it's not like anyone will murder someone or go off on an expletive laden tirade like on JSO. It's kinda like the USA Network advertises "Characters Welcome". Even the posters who get alot of heat do contribute sometimes, and are welcome overall, cuz without disagreement it's groupthink like PC became.

Not like you, I, or any longterm poster wouldn't know a thing about sniping as it's kinda a barb, but fun for all for the most part. Opinions are what drive this forum at PR. Makes for a better read, as the stats/logic show up, but ISO (in Snake's opinion) disagreement to make us a better team and checking the following day is what makes it fun to login and post on PR.

Good stuff and Snake agrees.

Well put, as long as the personal attacks stay out of it { like calling a post/poster "retarded(we know who likes to use terms like that) } we should all be allowed to state our opinion and respectfully agree to disagree.

[SnakeLH2006]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

Yeah, it makes sense though, Scott. That sounds about right as GB football talk is paramount and this site has tons of great members that bring breaking news to topic like none other. That's the main reason I came here 3 years ago and haven't been disappointed as the conversation get heated, but it's not like anyone will murder someone or go off on an expletive laden tirade like on JSO. It's kinda like the USA Network advertises "Characters Welcome". Even the posters who get alot of heat do contribute sometimes, and are welcome overall, cuz without disagreement it's groupthink like PC became.

Not like you, I, or any longterm poster wouldn't know a thing about sniping as it's kinda a barb, but fun for all for the most part. Opinions are what drive this forum at PR. Makes for a better read, as the stats/logic show up, but ISO (in Snake's opinion) disagreement to make us a better team and checking the following day is what makes it fun to login and post on PR.

Good stuff and Snake agrees.

Well put, as long as the personal attacks stay out of it { like calling a post/poster "retarded(we know who likes to use terms like that) } we should all be allowed to state our opinion and respectfully agree to disagree.

True dat Gex, and Snake agrees.

<<Queing Fritz's awesome Medieval voice:

"Who thoust useth terms youseth retarded? Thoust shall face the vengeath of thoust young Adminastoth's banhammer. Whom postereth thoust speakoth?"

....Like we didn't know, but was fun to go all medieval.

[cpk1994]

I've asked Skin countless times to not address me in any way, shape or form on these forums, but he simply refuses and continues to make snarky remarks.

Try something new. Completely ignore each other!





.....but then again, it is off season entertainment. :P

I agree. I have been ignoring a couple of posters. It has been hard(as my tounge is in a lot of pain because I have been biting it so much ), but has gotten easier as time has moved on.

[falco]

I'm sure he'll give you a beer if you stopped by after completion.

Believe it or not, I still get that way a few times a year (was just a few miles away from there about a month ago). If you are familiar with the area, you can probably guess why.


I will swing out and look at it. I am sure glad to hear he is working things out. When I talked to him that day he sure sounded like a guy with the weight of the world on his shoulders. Did he ever get any satisfaction from the guys who took his money?

[Harlan Huckleby]

See, I see you as one that want to restrict the admin.

Yes, yes, yes! But not because the admin is an asshole, but because the admin is a human being.

This is not a new problem. Its been debated and tested for centuries. Lets start with the Magna Carta in 12th century, says the King doesn't rule totally by his whims, there's also the rule of law. Doesn't mean the King isn't the King anymore, or that the King is a tyrant, but things work better if there is some balance and clarity.

Do you think it is the smart or dumb companies that have an employee handbook? Why do they bother with that nitpicking?

Open to authoritaran attitudes ? Sure...maybe...you just have to trust the admin to be fair.

Phooey. There is no such thing as a fair human being. We all get mad, we all have our biases. Written laws are intended to ameliorate that condition. Look at how Mad got into personal grudge matches with individual members. I think Mad did a very good job of running the forum most of the time. If he had a set of standards to back him up, disciplinary actions would have been less personalized.

IMO rules would undoubtedly lead to nitpicking, and if I was admin....which I will clearly never be....no way would I want to deal with the nitpicking. Honestly, if I formulated a clear set of rules, you'd be one of the posters I'd be worried that would be the first to use the toothpick.

I'll concede that rules can lead to nitpicking. If you are afraid of nitpicking, then just lead by gut feeling. Leadership by whim is pretty much the definition of authoritarism.

Wiser people than us have discovered over and over that rules can be messy, but they are well worth it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

if you drive-out all the dysfunction and wierdness, you end-up with a boring forum. See PackerChatters. As irritating as SCott Campbell, SkinBasket, Snake and Woody (I hold myself above this group of weirdos) can be sometimes, they also make the place far more entertaining.

Having clear (as possible) lines in the sand allows constructive dysfunction to flourish without fear of being whacked in the pee pee.

[SkinBasket]

Well put, as long as the personal attacks stay out of it { like calling a post/poster "retarded(we know who likes to use terms like that) } we should all be allowed to state our opinion and respectfully agree to disagree

If my opinion is that this post is retarded, which it is, then why should my opinion by stifled by your set of values and your limited connotative understanding of the English language?

[Scott Campbell]

Lets start with the Magna Carta in 12th century................

[cpk1994]

Well put, as long as the personal attacks stay out of it { like calling a post/poster "retarded(we know who likes to use terms like that) } we should all be allowed to state our opinion and respectfully agree to disagree

If my opinion is that this post is retarded, which it is, then why should my opinion by stifled by your set of values and your limited connotative understanding of the English language?

He is just trying to get a rise out of another poster. Its sad really. He is, however, a good example of why an ignore function is needed.

EDIT: SC, did I mention how good it is to have you back?

[Scott Campbell]

Do you think it is the smart or dumb companies that have an employee handbook?

Good point Harlan!

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/1533657.html

"A committee representing Enron's creditors and Enron have signed off on a plan to pay former workers $13,500 in severance. The plan needs U.S. Bankrupcty Judge Arthur Gonzalez's approval.

Creditors, however, could back out because 54 former workers, out of 4,200, won't agree to the deal and are seeking the full severance package, as outlined in the company handbook. Former executive John Sheriff, for instance, wants $1.6 million."

[Green Bud Packer]

Best of luck to you.

[mraynrand]

Do you think it is the smart or dumb companies that have an employee handbook?

Good point Harlan!

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/1533657.html

"A committee representing Enron's creditors and Enron have signed off on a plan to pay former workers $13,500 in severance. The plan needs U.S. Bankrupcty Judge Arthur Gonzalez's approval.

Creditors, however, could back out because 54 former workers, out of 4,200, won't agree to the deal and are seeking the full severance package, as outlined in the company handbook. Former executive John Sheriff, for instance, wants $1.6 million."

Good one SC! In a related story, the NFL has decided to dispense with their rule book. Said retiring rule committee chairman Mike Holmgren: "Nobody paid any fucking attention anyway. Did you see the shit Charles Woodson gets away with? That fucking bastard holds on every goddamn play." When it was suggested to Mr. Holmgren that, without rules, the game might descend into chaos, Holmgren responded: "Fuck you."

[Freak Out]

Very interesting post Snake.

It sounds like the dysfunction is a big part of the appeal - as long as it doesn't screw up the football threads.

So perhaps the job as Administrator is to nurture constructive dysfunction.

if you drive-out all the dysfunction and wierdness, you end-up with a boring forum. See PackerChatters. As irritating as SCott Campbell, SkinBasket, Snake and Woody (I hold myself above this group of weirdos) can be sometimes, they also make the place far more entertaining.

Having clear (as possible) lines in the sand allows constructive dysfunction to flourish without fear of being whacked in the pee pee.

[Scott Campbell]

Good one SC! In a related story, the NFL has decided to dispense with their rule book.

In my best MOBB voice:


BRING BACK CHARLES MARTIN!!!!! (just for the Vikings game)