Favre: What's With the Bashing? Some Sound Like Sad Exes....

[Bossman641]

Packersnews.net and packerchatters has no mobbs, 007s, snakes, etc

willing to bet my life that they have plenty skirt wearing whiners...

4 words

Broke (1) Spoke (2) Bar (3) and (4) Grill (5)

rofl

ROFL indeed

Damnit Mobb why'd you have to go and edit your post

[MOBB DEEP]

he he he...

BTW, i dont think there needs to be more than one favre thread...it does get a lil stiffing though to be sure

and its kinda unfair but im down with "the majority rules"


1

[Administrator]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

[mraynrand]

Leave him alone! Can't you see he has enough to deal with being on the cover of SI? Do you know what that means? DO YOU?

Favre is on the cover of SI?

[mraynrand]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

[sheepshead]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

Holy Shit, now what rules are being broken? Is this stuff published somewhere? I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I dont get it. Seems like a reasonable topic to me.

[mraynrand]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

Holy Shit, now what rules are being broken? Is this stuff published somewhere? I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I dont get it. Seems like a reasonable topic to me.

You have been warned.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

There was nothing wrong with this thread until a couple posters decided to come in and ruin our discussion. Thanks guys.

Have it in private then. Ty didn't see it labeled a Gunny and Snake private Favre thread.

You have PM, feel free to use it.

[Freak Out]

DAYUM!

[Joemailman]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

I think the policy was to have 1 Favre thread in the Packer Forum so you don't end up with 15 Favre threads like we had the day the Packers traded him.

[Administrator]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

I think the policy was to have 1 Favre thread in the Packer Forum so you don't end up with 15 Favre threads like we had the day the Packers traded him.

It is really that simple. Was it any fun to read this when every other post was "ANOTHER FAVRE THREAD?". Then I comment that we already have a Favre thread and hear "WOW, WE BROKE THE RULES? WHAT RULES".

ridiculous.

[Gunakor]

There was nothing wrong with this thread until a couple posters decided to come in and ruin our discussion. Thanks guys.

Have it in private then. Ty didn't see it labeled a Gunny and Snake private Favre thread.

You have PM, feel free to use it.

Did you read my posts in this thread Ty? I said, verbatim, this was an open discussion to anyone with anything worthwhile to add. Had it taken place in PM's nobody else could have joined the discussion should they have had anything worthwhile to say. If you don't, don't post here. Someone else might. Get it?

[mraynrand]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

I think the policy was to have 1 Favre thread in the Packer Forum so you don't end up with 15 Favre threads like we had the day the Packers traded him.

It is really that simple. Was it any fun to read this when every other post was "ANOTHER FAVRE THREAD?". Then I comment that we already have a Favre thread and hear "WOW, WE BROKE THE RULES? WHAT RULES".

ridiculous.

I think you're ridiculous. Your so called rules are arbitrary and absurd. One Favre thread only? Really? lame. But hey, it's your web site.

[mraynrand]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

I think the policy was to have 1 Favre thread in the Packer Forum so you don't end up with 15 Favre threads like we had the day the Packers traded him.

And? So what? It was pretty wild, but people settled on threads they wanted to comment on or not. But if you wanted to be treated like a child, feel free.

[MJZiggy]

Snake - there is already a thread for Favre discussion. If that was not your point for this thread it should not have been posted in the packers area. Consider this a warning.

So is the policy that any new Favre thread gets a warning? What is the policy? lame

I think the policy was to have 1 Favre thread in the Packer Forum so you don't end up with 15 Favre threads like we had the day the Packers traded him.

And? So what? It was pretty wild, but people settled on threads they wanted to comment on or not. But if you wanted to be treated like a child, feel free.

Don't rewrite history. Mad got sick of all the crap and we all settled on the one thread so that the forum wouldn't be completely deserted by anyone who wanted to do anything besides fight about Favre. It was done for a reason and Joe just continued what Mad did (because it's a good idea and makes sense, but damn common sense, right?).