What the h*ll is going on around here?

[HardRightEdge]

Forget private messages. This is a public protest.

Papa San has chosen to close the thread, "Defense: Fewer Plays, More Adjustments", on the basis that in his opinion "there is nothing new here".

What an absurd pretext. If every thread was closed at the first hint of repetition, you guys might as well pack it in. Or is it that Mr. San simply does not like the tone of the discussion?

Why is only Mr. San among the moderators so overzealous, not just in this case but in other recent examples of closing threads for being "off topic" on a very selective basis? By his standards, most threads would be closed at some point, usually in short order.

What gives?

 

[thisisnate]

Maybe he needs a snack. I get grumpy when I'm hungry.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Maybe he needs a snack. I get grumpy when I'm hungry.

Well, these last few weeks have been looking like a semi-permanent state of grumpiness.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

i can relate. Many of my posts turn into off topic ****** matches. In some ways, its best to defuse the situation, even if i'm not done debating .

The problem comes when 2 months later a prediction comes true, and i cant go back and comment...

Maybe a short term lock is possible, as a warning? then be able to come back to the topic later? just a thought.

 

[Packerlover]

I think all threads should remain open for discussion

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

What the h#ll does the thread title refer to anyway?

 

[King of Jeans]

I think all threads should remain open for discussion

this.

 

[HardRightEdge]

i can relate. Many of my posts turn into off topic ****** matches. In some ways, its best to defuse the situation, even if i'm not done debating .

The problem comes when 2 months later a prediction comes true, and i cant go back and comment...

Maybe a short term lock is possible, as a warning? then be able to come back to the topic later? just a thought.

If by devolving into a "pissing match" you mean name calling, I can understand shutting down such threads that can't seem to right themselves. That's not what I'm talking about.

 

[PFanCan]

It's the off season. "Nothing new" is a fact. Probably should just shut down the forum until pre-season starts.

 

[PFanCan]

Just read the closed thread. There was a little bit of back and forth that should have been avoided, but the content of reviewing, discussing, and debating a key play from last season's first game against the Seahawks was, I found, interesting. I hadn't realized that the Hawks had an O-lineman down field on that play. DOH!

I also watched the chalk talk that was referenced. Hadn't seen that before. Very interesting. The Hawks definitely know how to exploit small details during the game.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Just read the closed thread. There was a little bit of back and forth that should have been avoided, but the content of reviewing, discussing, and debating a key play from last season's first game against the Seahawks was, I found, interesting. I hadn't realized that the Hawks had an O-lineman down field on that play. DOH!

I also watched the chalk talk that was referenced. Hadn't seen that before. Very interesting. The Hawks definitely know how to exploit small details during the game.

I wouldn't make too much of the O-Lineman down field. It happens all the time all around the league and it is rarely called, as was observed in the thread that was shut down.

 

[TJV]

The problem comes when 2 months later a prediction comes true, and i cant go back and comment...

Sure you can. If you choose to, you can act like a person unconcerned with how he is perceived by others and post “I told you so” as often as you like. The problem when you do so is you often don’t know what you’re talking about. For example, go back and read the “Wonder what everyone thinks of Barrington being the only ILB in dime?” thread you started. Try to read it as a disinterested third party. It’s a good example of your posting on this board and explains why you are involved in so many ****** matches.

You started that thread to post ‘I told you so’ about 3 DL in the dime and you based that on Barrington being the lone ILB. What you inadvertently ‘told us’ is you didn’t understand the Packers alignment in the dime, which always has one ILB. When captainWIMM pointed that out in post #2, you immediately asked ‘what happened on the field?’ So upon being challenged you admitted you didn’t know how many DL were on the field, yet you posted an ‘I told you so’ about how many DL were on the field. Step back and consider that for a minute. Let it sink in.

It gets worse: You went on to post ‘who was on the field’ a couple more times, then in post #11 you posted, “Ok. lets defuse this a bit. I may not be 100% right. But damn it im not wrong! truce?”. After calling for a truce you again display your misunderstanding of the Packers’ dime: “My point is last year we had 2 ILBs and 1 D-lineman in this exact package.” That’s wrong but in the next post you posted “… you ALL were wrong”. And again you are the one who was wrong. buggybill closed the thread. For another recent example, look at the first sentence of your post on the Adrian Hubbard thread.

Instead of playing the victim, try to view your posts on that thread from the perspective of a Packers fanatic who understands the dime defense. All that started because you “had” to brag about being right about something you had no idea whether or not you were right about. In your haste to gain credibility here you again displayed you didn’t understand the Packers dime. IMO there’s one valid idea you presented in that thread: The Packers may have enough talent on the DL to play three down lineman more. That’s not exactly a start-a-new-thread idea (BTW there’s no prize for starting the most threads), but it certainly would be appropriate to add that to a discussion of the Packers D.

Many of my posts turn into off topic ****** matches.

That’s correct. The more you realize you are the common denominator in those ****** matches, the better your chances of gaining credibility.
. . .
As to why the thread in question was closed it seems to me a better reason to close it was the back and forth on the first page than because the subject matter was nothing new. But I'm glad I'm not a moderator and think overall they do a good job.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Sure you can. If you choose to, you can act like a **** and post “I told you so” as often as you like. The problem when you do so is you often don’t know what you’re talking about. For example, go back and read the “Wonder what everyone thinks of Barrington being the only ILB in dime?” thread you started. Try to read it as a disinterested third party. It’s a good example of your posting on this board and explains why you are involved in so many ****** matches.

You started that thread to post ‘I told you so’ about 3 DL in the dime and you based that on Barrington being the lone ILB. What you inadvertently ‘told us’ is you didn’t understand the Packers alignment in the dime, which always has one ILB. When captainWIMM pointed that out in post #2, you immediately asked ‘what happened on the field?’ So upon being challenged you admitted you didn’t know how many DL were on the field, yet you posted an ‘I told you so’ about how many DL were on the field. Step back and consider that for a minute. Let it sink in.

It gets worse: You went on to post ‘who was on the field’ a couple more times, then in post #11 you posted, “Ok. lets defuse this a bit. I may not be 100% right. But damn it im not wrong! truce?”. After calling for a truce you again display your misunderstanding of the Packers’ dime: “My point is last year we had 2 ILBs and 1 D-lineman in this exact package.” That’s wrong but in the next post you posted “… you ALL were wrong”. And again you are the one who was wrong. buggybill closed the thread. For another recent example, look at the first sentence of your post on the Adrian Hubbard thread.

Instead of playing the victim, try to view your posts on that thread from the perspective of a Packers fanatic who understands the dime defense. All that started because you “had” to brag about being right about something you had no idea whether or not you were right about. In your haste to gain credibility here you again displayed you didn’t understand the Packers dime. IMO there’s one valid idea you presented in that thread: The Packers may have enough talent on the DL to play three down lineman more. That’s not exactly a start-a-new-thread idea (BTW there’s no prize for starting the most threads), but it certainly would be appropriate to add that to a discussion of the Packers D. That’s correct. The more you realize you are the common denominator in those ****** matches, the better your chances of gaining credibility.
. . .
As to why the thread in question was closed it seems to me a better reason to close it was the back and forth on the first page than because the subject matter was nothing new. But I'm glad I'm not a moderator and think overall they do a good job.

That's overkill. I think "familiarize yourself with the search function" would have sufficed.

I think the moderators by and large do a fine job by virtue of making infrequent appearances.

By the way, I don't find anything more offending in the first page of that shut down thread than calling somebody a **** in this one.

 

[TJV]

By the way, I don't find anything more offending in the first page of that shut down thread than calling somebody a **** in this one.

Point taken. See above.

 

[Ogsponge]

I think we all need to get together and do some ***** shooting as a team building exercise.

why was the word Ske et censored?

 

[fritothedog]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[paulska]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

JORDI LAFORGE ftw!

Anyone think Deanna Troi might be a great safety with her enhanced ability to read the defense? #streetFA

 

[El Guapo]

She's only a half-breed, so she'd be more like a hybrid cornerback/safety. We need Worf's tenacity and fight with Piccard's cerebral approach.

 

[El Guapo]

...and to this thread's topic, sometimes the sandbox needs to be cleared before the kids even start throwing sand when you've seen the same players go down the same road time after time.

 

[scotscheese]

She's only a half-breed, so she'd be more like a hybrid cornerback/safety. We need Worf's tenacity and fight with Piccard's cerebral approach.

plus she can't actually read minds. she's an empath, so can feel peoples feelings

god i'm such a geek

 

[Vrill]

Mods having a heavy hand is a recipe for running folks off a message board. I've seen it many times. I think threads need to stay up until flames start. As long as the conversation remains *somewhat* civilized, I don't see a problem. Also, its always been a problem for threads to get off topic. It happens on every single message board since forever ago. No use in moderating that.

 

[Mondio]

Mods having a heavy hand is a recipe for running folks off a message board. I've seen it many times. I think threads need to stay up until flames start. As long as the conversation remains *somewhat* civilized, I don't see a problem. Also, its always been a problem for threads to get off topic. It happens on every single message board since forever ago. No use in moderating that.

I agree. I guess we all have our limits, and mine are pretty lax for message board behavior. Once it become message after message of attacks on each other, shut it down. A few jabs here and there? maybe a warning. I guess i've never been a moderator, can't imagine it's fun, but I do know where they are heavy handed or very selective in how they moderate is a recipe for low membership. Once too many topics i'm interested in are shut down, messages start disappearing, etc. i'm out.

 

[El Guapo]

It is humorous to me that this thread title is a legitimate rant in any forum, but here on the Packers forum I read it as just another ode to Vince Lombardi!

 

[GoPGo]

I started posting about the Packers 21 years ago on alt.sports.football.pro.gb-packers (before that I was on a Packers email list for about 4 years.) Usenet was an excellent medium for sports discussion. There was a natural order to things. If two guys got into a pissing match, you could amuse yourself with how far it might spiral or you could mark the entire thread as read and ignore it or even have the thread automatically deleted as soon as new posts were downloaded. If you had a troll that wouldn't leave you alone, you set it to delete every post from the guy once you got tired of kicking him around for a while. You could delete them forever or you could set it for a 30 day or 90 day or whatever timeout.

There were a ton of highly knowledgeable and insightful posters who knew each other for many years and we knew each other's tendencies and when to take something seriously and when to recognize a comment as simple sarcasm. If any particular poster got overly nasty or had a huge ego for any extended period of time, he would soon find he has nobody to talk to because everyone would drop him in their bozo bins and that would be the end of it. If you got smacked down because you said something stupid or incorrect and someone put you in your place and hurt your feelings in the process, you didn't whine and cry to the mods. You put your big boy pants on and you bowed out of the topic and took your lumps and called it a day. But nobody hardly ever held grudges, because they knew if they did they wouldn't have anyone left to talk to before long. If two guys were arguing in one thread, they might be in agreement and arguing the same side of a debate in another thread. Hell, I still do that here. I might be arguing till I'm red in the face with HRE in one topic and be completely on his side in another topic. Oh, and "argue" wasn't a bad word either. An argument and the ability to articulate it are the foundation of any good debate, and without debate, informed opinions and conclusions cannot be garnered on subjects of controversy. And if the debate got out of hand and the cussing and references to ****** started, well, again there was always the ability to kill the thread personally without shutting it down for everyone. You lived with the reputation you built for yourself and you could build whatever kind of reputation you wanted as long as you understood you would have to accept whatever that reputation brought your way.

Unfortunately, Google bought Deja News in 2001 and turned it into Google Groups which sucked ***. Once that happened, and these web forums popped up more and more, fewer and fewer people used newsgroups and alt.sports.football.pro.gb-packers went from more than 50 daily posters with probably another 200 seasonal and occasional posters to less than 10 regulars by 2005. When the last of the posters I cared to interact with disappeared, I did too. Now for the entire 2014 regular season a total of 46 posts were made on alt.sports.football.pro.gb-packers and there were only 8 threads that drew any kind of discussion.

Now what's my point? Usenet was the Wild West of the internet. It could be pretty rough and tumble at times, but it had a freedom of expression and speech that is unparallelled in web forums and you knew who your friends were and you didn't have to constantly be afraid that the access to your friends would be cut off without notice. In contrast, particularly over the last 5 or 6 years, most web forums have become like living in a police state, like the kind where you and your family are killed (banned) for saying the wrong thing publicly. There wasn't an ever-growing and increasingly confusing conduct policy to constantly keep track of for changes. If someone were to set up a forum that had an appropriate balance between freedom and control, that would be awesome. We already have the ability to ignore people. Add a timeout feature to that ability. Beyond that, just give us the ability to hide specific topics and then things would work just fine. Until then, this forum is still about the best we have.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Purely out of interest here, what do you expect from the moderators ?. I`m just curious.