Improve this thread - Extraneous BS

[Scott Campbell]

+ 1


You'd be a terrific moderator.

Now you'll hate me.

[SkinBasket]

Admin,

I would agree with most of what you posted, and I really hope you understand I was more trying to illustrate why some of us might be under the impression of some posters being treated differently than accusing you of outright doing so. You explained why and how that was. Fair enough.

The only thing I think we're going to continue to disagree on is that when someone makes comments that elicit a lot of "slam" responses, like Partial's post, it's almost entirely the result of the reputation that he's built over the years, and a lot of that comes from numerous episodes just like this one. I'm sure Harvey was still not happy about Partial's comments toward him a couple weeks ago in one of those Vince Young threads where he was called a prick and a troll for not agreeing with him. The same one where Partial called Chevelle a nobody and told him to shut up in response to a well reasoned and researched post.

I don't think anyone who's remained civil and been respectful of others has ever been randomly "ganged up on."

I do applaud the effort of splitting the thread and continuing the debate in the romper room.

[Scott Campbell]

I do applaud the effort of splitting the thread and continuing the debate in the romper room.

+ 1

[Partial]

Some of you guys are just Admin, I applaud you for actually looking at things objectively and intelligently. As a scientist, I approach things in a similar manner.

DFC? I again, reiterate, how is the worse than being called retarded? I think being called retarded is FAR more offensive. Someone please explain this to me and why its okay to attack me, yet when I respond in similar fashion, I'm the one completely out of line?

I accept responsibility for my actions, do you?

[Scott Campbell]

I accept responsibility for my actions, do you?

Why should I accept responsibility for your actions?


What the heck. I will, even if it makes no sense.


Ziggy,

Please accept my sincere apology for Partial calling you a DFC. I will try not to let him do it again.

Your retarded pal,

Scott

[GBRulz]

and TNT advertises that they know drama....

[Patler]

Some of you guys are just Admin, I applaud you for actually looking at things objectively and intelligently. As a scientist, I approach things in a similar manner.

DFC? I again, reiterate, how is the worse than being called retarded? I think being called retarded is FAR more offensive. Someone please explain this to me and why its okay to attack me, yet when I respond in similar fashion, I'm the one completely out of line?

I accept responsibility for my actions, do you?

If you truly used a scientific approach to this you would understand that there is no correlation between the rightness or wrongness of what you wrote and the rightness or wrongness of what you perceive has been written to or about you. Neither makes the other right or wrong. Each are independent acts.

[falco]

I never call a woman a cunt until I have proved both the theorem and its corollary. (and backed it with empirical evidence).

But that's just the way I was brought up.

[Little Whiskey]

The culture of packerrats was formed around the assumption that nothing would be censored unless it had to do with a violation of someone's personal information. (Which goes back to the reason this whole place was formed. Otherwise we would all be posting at sportsbubbler instead.) this forum was to self moderate. if your going to change that its going to take some time, and you're going to lose some valued contributors as well.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'll try to keep this as concise as possible. First, I would argue that if you can't read all the threads, which is understandable, that maybe it's time to find a moderator. Otherwise, it puts you in a poor position to chastise people in one thread while a flame rages out of control in another. That's not meant as some kind of jab against you, simply a way to avoid this kind of problem in the future.

Second, I believe, though I could be wrong, that I've only said that it gives the appearance that some people are being treated differently, and that's why some people feel that way, not that you necessarily are doing it intentionally. I stated that some people here obviously felt that some posters were being treated differently than others when it comes to what is and isn't acceptable to post before they're chastised by the Administrator. You denied that, so I posted the examples as a demonstration of why that could be.

Of course the examples I gave were "skewed." I was making the point that the poster you defended in one thread was simultaneously degrading people in a much, much worse fashion in another without consequence. You've explained that it's because you hadn't read that thread, which is fine, but I would still maintain that someone claiming a guy can't throw a football doesn't rise to a response of calling people little bitches and cunts. That's the gig though. Flame out, then claim victimization afterward.

I don't get your point about this coming from me being "bullshit." Yeah, you stopped Partial's personal attacks against me. That was nice and I appreciated it. but does that mean I can't say anything when he then attacks someone else or when I see what appears to be a discrepancy in how posters are being treated? I guess if you're going to equate what JH posted with everything Partial did, I can't stop you. But for someone who wants to be "fair" I find that a tough argument to carry.

Nutz, this is the dumbest shit I've heard from you in five years. IT sounds like you took ecstacy and typed this on your laptop while watching pro wrestling on TV.

Get a grip, man.

[Scott Campbell]

[Harlan Huckleby]

F

The culture of packerrats was formed around the assumption that nothing would be censored unless it had to do with a violation of someone's personal information. (Which goes back to the reason this whole place was formed. Otherwise we would all be posting at sportsbubbler instead.) this forum was to self moderate. if your going to change that its going to take some time, and you're going to lose some valued contributors as well.

QFT

I do think Administrator is being very fair, though. He doesn't have any axes to grind. He's trying to institute his own vision of what "civility" means. I guess about half the membership agree 100% with him, for what its worth.

I think Administrator has set himself up for a difficult task. I'm particularly puzzled why Admin thinks people would only criticize him or others "in private." Or people will ever refrain from responding to discussions just because they don't involve them.

Good luck with that!

[GrnBay007]

One owner/operator was already driven off. Lets try not to do the same with the new one.

[SkinBasket]

Some of you guys are just Admin, I applaud you for actually looking at things objectively and intelligently. As a scientist, I approach things in a similar manner.

DFC? I again, reiterate, how is the worse than being called retarded? I think being called retarded is FAR more offensive. Someone please explain this to me and why its okay to attack me, yet when I respond in similar fashion, I'm the one completely out of line?

I accept responsibility for my actions, do you?

Is this your version of an apology?

[HarveyWallbangers]

My 'mode of operation' in the last two months has been to look at who started the original comment. Partial clearly did here. Then he and Harvey escalated it, and neither would back down. Then a bunch of other people that had nothing to do with the situation had to weigh in with insults of their own.

So, I get called out for finally slamming Partial after he got personal several times (while I held my tongue).

Young has a winning record, went to the playoffs, and has come from behind victories pulling it out for his team. What has Rodgers done besides throw for a lot of yards that ultimately had very little effect on winning games?

Young had a defense that could stop his opponent more than once in six tries after he led his offense to the game tying or leading score in the final six minutes of a game. BTW, the Packers defense gave up 381 points last year. They ranked 31st in 4th quarter scoring defense. The Titans defense gave up 297 points in 2007. It's laughable comparing Vince Young to Aaron Rodgers right now, but I wouldn't expect more out of you.

... Don't be a prick Harv.

Wow, I put together a well thought out post with actual numbers and Harv da troll as of late completely ignores it to post more north korea style propaganda. I lost a lot of respect for you bangers.

Way to make it personally.

BTW, I've never said it was entirely the defense. I'd say it's 10% teams, 20% offense, and 70% defense. If the defense had even been average stopping teams late, the Packers have a winning record.

I think it's unreasonable to expect the offense to have to make two game winning comebacks in the last 6 minutes of games so often. That I blame on the defense. Rodgers did a fantastic job of bringing the Packers back in the second half of the 4th quarter in a lot of games. He just didn't do it much in the last two minutes. Then again, when he did do it, either the defense still gave up a late score (once or twice) or the kicker missed a FG (twice). Many people (probably not Partial still) would look at Rodgers late game heroics differently if the defense had made more stops or Crosby had made one or both of those kicks.

Defenses have an advantage late in those situations. More times than not, the defense will hold late. Just look at Brett Favre's record in a games the Packers trailed by less than a TD in the 4th quarter. Well under .500. Hell, a good offense will score 3 TDs and 1 FG on average in a game, and a team usually has at least 12 possessions. Thus, the rate at which a team scores on a drive is probably somewhere around 25%. For the defense to give up the winning score in 6 of 7 games in the last 6 minutes of a close game is just horrible.

Bush is not a top 99 player. That would put him, on average, as the 3rd best player on each team. I can think of at least 3 or 4 Packers (Rodgers, Jennings, Kampman, Woodson) I would take over him, a handful of Bears (Forte, Cutler, Harris, Briggs, Urlacher, Tillman) and Vikings (Peterson, Hutchinson, Kevin Williams, Allen, Winfield) over him. Detroit might be the only team that he would be one of the three best players on. We haven't even gotten to the likes of New England (Brady, Moss, Mankins, Seymour, Wilfork) and Pittsburgh (Big Ben, Parker, Smith, Harrison, Farrior, Polamalu). I don't think he's even close to the top 99. Sure, he's good in his role, but he's just not big enough to carry a big load (see the injuries and ineffective running inside), and that's a huge downgrade.

I love how you state everything as a definitive fact. Says who he's not a top 99 player? You? Who are you? This site, in their opinion, thinks he is, and they're more credible than you, so... Perhaps you should try saying something like this.

"I think ___ (is/is not) ____, because ____ does _____ imo.

I think your list of players is by and large BS.

After awhile, you get tired of the bull.