Ring thread. We've got a few of Pope Urban's Coors Light drinkers who don't know their place on a foreign board.
Time to ban a few mouth breathers Tom
- Thread starter Chickenman Testa
- Start date
It's bad enough dealing with douchbags at work - you're stuck with that situation unless you resign. Worse is dealing with them in a forum you visit strictly for enjoyment.
There are posters here whose sole purpose is to troll, instigate, stalk, try to identify people and get people banned. It's apparent who they are.
I never thought of it that way but you're absolutely right. I am going to just start ignoring them and use the "Report" function to deal with the worst offenders.
Just took a quick look at that thread. I don't know what to say. It's pretty sad when you go to another team's board to bitch about rings from a minor bowl when your team did the same thing three years ago. Some people just have to argue and try to pick fights I guess.
Yes, and what makes it worse is these are not Pitt fans. They are our beloved BigTen brethren who, we are told, love us and want us to succeed for the "good of the conference".
It's generally reflective of current society, but it's also why in the not too distant future open boards like this will not exist. Our society is going to hell in a handbasket, and regrettably even on this board we see signs of this every day.
It's just not the guys in the Ring Thread. There are pretentious PSU fans, BoT supporters, and Blehar, Bagwell and Ziegler haters. All of whom are posting only to incite, anger, and instigate.
I agree with your sentiments, but if they were banned I would have missed the great fun of watching gambit and others dismantle their weak BS. You gotta admit that was nice to see. And now, WHENEVER they come back for WHATEVER reason, we can mock their loser bowl rings from the Poulan-Weedeater bowl or whatever.
Please also ban the "Jerry's Innocent!" conspiracy theorists. It's embarrassing.
While we're at it, ban the folks who think it's OK if not every American accused of a crime receives a fair trial. That, too, is embarrassing.
Who are all these trolls anyway?
I'm seeing lots of people recently who's profile says they've been a member for a couple years, but they only started posting recently, and I'm seeing a lot of other users whose profiles say they joined 10+ years ago, yet they've only made like 40 posts.
There seems to be a lot of that recently.
I'm seeing lots of people recently who's profile says they've been a member for a couple years, but they only started posting recently, and I'm seeing a lot of other users whose profiles say they joined 10+ years ago, yet they've only made like 40 posts.
There seems to be a lot of that recently.
You have some people, ala "Judas" banking nics, them bringing them out. Or, since the amnesty, checked to see if names that were previously banned can be used again.
I like it fair. Can we add a brass section or woodwinds too please?
Honestly, I am a guest to your board and appreciate your allowing me to post. I have visited many boards and my opinion maybe a reflection of the school I support...but the posters on BWI have very thin skins. You don't need to make personal attacks or ban everyone with a differing opinion. Offer your view then ignore them if it is clear you will never agree. If a person's sole intent is to incite anger.. then yes you ban them.
I have visited other Boards as well and this one, historically, has been among the most tolerant, especially during the past 4 years when I personally believe a much quicker ban was often warranted. No poster I have seen is dumped simply because of a difference of opinion.
In other words, anyone that disagrees with you or those you follow are hater trolls and therefore should be banned?
That certainly seems reasonable.
Disagree and partially agree.
First, I find that there are very few people that are actively arguing or theorizing that JS is innocent. There are some, but they seem to be very few. From what I've read, many have argued that JS received very poor defense, as well as a number of actions by the Judge in the case as well as the investigators that at a minimum to raise questions as to whether or not he received a fair trial.
In response, I see a small number of posters that seem to treat any statements by the aforementioned as though those making the statements are claiming that JS is innocent. IMHO, that is an inaccurate accusation. It gets even worse when the two sides do not engage in a healthy debate, but basically talk right past each other, and avoid responding to the substances of the issues raised by either side.
I agree that the threads about this subject have been rather embarrassing, though I'm embarrassed for the inability of folks to stick to what is being argued, as opposed to providing counter arguments that are extreme interpretations of what is being discussed.
I concur, dem. By the time I dealt with this thread, several members of the community had done an excellent job of proving the fallacy of the statements by the outsiders. I was tempted to leave those statements up, as well as the responses. In the end, I decided that the statements and rebuttals would continue to generate a lot of silly banter, as well as continuing Reports, and I really didn't feel like dealing with such all day long.
Dude, I was banned on the Pitt board one time for merely asking a poster to provide proof of his statements. Period. That was it.
And we have thin skins?
It's always interesting to get the perspective of an outsider. That said, I disagree with your general contention.
Since I make the majority of decisions about what gets deleted, and who gets banned, I think I have a better knowledge than almost anyone of the process.
There are some on this board that do have somewhat thin skin. Then again, many of them have been dealing with drive-by attacks from fans of other schools since Nov. 2011. It does get a little tiring after many years, especially when most of the attacks are based on inaccurate information.
While some will react negatively toward such posters, I don't think the majority of this board community does so. Most of the time they just ignore the uninformed comments, and wait for the monitors or myself to decide how to handle it.
I agree that personal attacks are unwarranted. If I could make a blanket change, nobody on this board would make a personal attack on anyone else. I'd much rather folks limit their discussion to supporting their position, and for the most part that's how people discuss things on this board (or only make statements that they would make face-to-face with the poster to whom they are responding). Alas, I don't have that power, and most open boards show some degree of that type of activity.
As for banning folks that have a differing opinion, I'm pretty confident that the monitors and I have never done that. Members of the community do make posts advocating that this or that poster should be banned, but the monitors are rather measured in how they handle bannings.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
It's not 'thin skin' - it's an incredibly low tolerance for obvious trolls and bullsh*t.
Here's what you need to do to appreciate what it's like to be 'us' - get a time machine, go back to 2001 or so, when this board was set up - then, become a Penn State fan and post here regularly. After that, get ready for November 2011, and walk a mile in these shoes...
Opinion is one thing. Trolling, personal attacks, and trying to expose posters is another.
Why does this huge "Alabama/Minnesota" demographic take such an interest all things PSU? ;-)
Tom, I never meant to insinuate you ban people for holding a different opinion. What I have experienced is offering an unpopular opinion and then being trolled on here. They are attempting to get me to say something that will get me banned. I just don't take the bait. This happens to me on every board...but not to the extent it does here. I can only assume my handle plays a major role in this.
Uh, if you are on here, and you do not like how it is here, then leave. If you don't like it and you DON'T leave, then YOU are the troll.
Speaking of instigation... just because people don't believe what you do, doesn't make them instigators. The only way society has improved is by dissent. Posters coming here for flaming and name calling just to get a reaction are different and should be banned.
I have a couple of Pitt friends who visit this Board but never post. They don't see it as you do. In fact, they see quite the opposite. Because of those Pitt friends, and because my wife is a Pitt grad, I try to be as objective and fair as I can be when it comes to Panther posters. In the future, should you return, I will follow your posts with interest and make my own judgment on your complaints.
That's fine...as for how you guys are treated on the lair. I wish I had a say in it....but, I don't. I enjoy discussing Pa. Football and I think it is a shame it always turns into a p*ssing match about child rape and lack of attendence at Heinz.
