What would make people feel less ostracized from P&R?

[Landlord]

Hillary was more qualified for the position (based on experience) and her rhetoric is substantially less controversial.

Suggesting she'd receive less negative comments on here is hypothetical and probably true, but also comes with a hefty dose of "no sh*t."

Oh yeah? I'm sick of the bias groupthink. I bet you if I called a black person bro, he would be 1/10th as offended as if I called him a n****r. That's the reality.

 

[HuskerNation1]

I would say this...go pick a recent thread that was created...say Trump's America, and look through the entire 13 pages of it (or how many ever there are) and tell me how many posts were not opinionated, snarky, angry, bitter comments about Trump and his supporters. Well over half and probably closer to 75% were 100% negative opinions about Trump and his supporters. And for those who lean to the right (like me...and I know 4 or 5 others on here who feel this way), when we make similar comments, the comments begin about "injecting too much hostility." There is hostility all over that Trump's America thread and several others.

I already agreed with you in this regard, bnilhome - I think some people who lean left are getting away with many of the things you do. I will also say, again, that I think this is a perfect opportunity for all parties to reflect on their posting habits.
As such, I offer some reflective material for you. Out of all of our conservative brethren here, you and 84HuskerLaw draw more ire than anyone else by a considerable margin. Perhaps this is an opportune moment to try and understand why that is the case.

Its funny you should bring this up as 84, TG, and a couple others who lean more to the right are all examples of having a different political philosophy from most who post on here, and the tone of our emails is not much different from those who lean to the left, yet the accusations of being hostile because our views are different continue to be brought up. So let me ask you this...please give me a list of 5 Conservatives who post consistently in this forum and/or who support Trump that you feel are not "hostile."
Also as an example of the extreme left bias on here, an event organized by the right at Berkeley was set ablaze by radical left wing protesters with buildings and cars damaged, and it was called out by many news organizations, but a quick glance of the forums via my phone shows no commenting on this event. Now if I missed it, my apologies, but has this been a right wing grouo doing such a thing to an event organized by the left, there would likely be 50 comments on here already.

There are a lot of people who I think lean right here that I've never personally seen come out and say "I'm a Conservative!" I'm not going to label them - they may not even label themselves "conservative."
Regardless, why do you want to know who those people are? What do they have to do with the fact that you and 84 draw more ire for your posting style and rhetoric here than just about anyone else?

And for what feels like the 14th time, bnilhome, I've already agreed with you that 1) there is a leftist bias here and 2) many of the things people accuse you of doing are being done by people who lean left. Forgive my bluntness but you're either deliberately or unintentionally ignoring what I've continually stated. Do you want to continue throwing blame elsewhere and refuse to re-evaluate yourself? You admit that you've gone too far at times but have yet to say you're willing to adjust your approach, even if other people agree to the same thing.

My aplogies for repeating but as you can see, multiple people are replying at the same time. LOMS has replied a few times in this thread that he would prefer alternative voices like mine to simply leave, which again gets back to the point of posting in this thread after taking several weeks off of this forum. A question was raised on why many choose to not engage in this forum and I have provided many examples to answer that question. If there is a desire by the left leaning core group in here to have more engagement from the larger huskerboard community, them it will be necessary to create a more open and inclusive environment in here. If the core group simply wants to view this as a therapeutic way to vent and bi*ch about Trump and Conservatives, it will continue to be a forum that the larger contingent of Huskerboard refuses to engage in. I am having plenty of nice respectful dialogue with many others in the football and recruiting forums and wanted to give some honest feedback as the intent of this thread seemed genuine. With that, peace out. I will pray that some of you can relax a bit these next 4 years or you are going to end up with some major health issues. Later.

 

[Landlord]

LOMS has replied a few times in this thread that he would prefer alternative voices like mine to simply leave.

Wrong. This is fake news. Sad.

I said nothing of the sort. I merely expressed that you're allowed to leave if you want, and nobody is upset if you choose to because it sounds like you're not interested in participating. We are all fine with that.

Meanwhile, conservative or right-leaning folk like El Diaco, BRI, GM_Tood, Oade, NUance, and others will be in here contributing good, helpful conversation, and the rest of us will all be better off and grateful for it.

 

[Fru]

It's interesting to me how the GOP's current standard bearer is endorsed by the Klan, and yet bnil is complaining about inclusiveness.

 

[RedDenver]

LOMS has replied a few times in this thread that he would prefer alternative voices like mine to simply leave.

Wrong. This is fake news. Sad.

I said nothing of the sort. I merely expressed that you're allowed to leave if you want, and nobody is upset if you choose to because it sounds like you're not interested in participating. We are all fine with that.

Meanwhile, conservative or right-leaning folk like El Diaco, BRI, GM_Tood, Oade, NUance, and others will be in here contributing good, helpful conversation, and the rest of us will all be better off and grateful for it.

I actually like having brilhome's voice in these discussions. He's a strong Trump supporter, and I'm interested in what that group has to say, even if I usually strongly disagree with them.

 

[teachercd]

See, people once again calling trump names ( I'm fine with it) but when I made fun of Clinton I got in trouble. It's stupid.

 

[Mierin]

See, people once again calling trump names ( I'm fine with it) but when I made fun of Clinton I got in trouble. It's stupid.

You were calling her a man. In Every. f'ing. Post you made in this forum. Nothing anyone else is doing here even approaches what you were doing when you were suspended.

It'd basically be like me making fun of Trump's masculinity in every post I made about him. And then things I would be making fun of him for would be traits many other men share. So it would essentially be like I was disparaging a huge group of men every time I did it.

That's what you were doing every time you called Clinton a man. There are lots of valid things to complain about her for but the sh#t about her being manly for her demeanor or clothes or being a b!^@h are things that I think hit close to home for a lot of women. Regardless of your intent it seems a lot different than calling one person a name.

 

[teachercd]

See, people once again calling trump names ( I'm fine with it) but when I made fun of Clinton I got in trouble. It's stupid.

You were calling her a man. In Every. f'ing. Post you made in this forum. Nothing anyone else is doing here even approaches what you were doing when you were suspended.

It'd basically be like me making fun of Trump's masculinity in every post I made about him. And then things I would be making fun of him for would be traits many other men share. So it would essentially be like I was disparaging a huge group of men every time I did it.

That's what you were doing every time you called Clinton a man. There are lots of valid things to complain about her for but the sh#t about her being manly for her demeanor or clothes or being a b!^@h are things that I think hit close to home for a lot of women. Regardless of your intent it seems a lot different than calling one person a name.

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.

The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

 

[Landlord]

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.
The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

What did you say about her that got you in trouble then? I'm super interested to know about this double standard if it's so obvious.

 

[teachercd]

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.

The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

What did you say about her that got you in trouble then? I'm super interested to know about this double standard if it's so obvious.

Gender questions...never name calling.
I also don't know Trumps gender...I have no idea what trump is.

 

[Landlord]

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.

The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

What did you say about her that got you in trouble then? I'm super interested to know about this double standard if it's so obvious.

Gender questions...never name calling.
I also don't know Trumps gender...I have no idea what trump is.

What, specifically, did you say, and how did you get in trouble?

 

[teachercd]

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.

The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

What did you say about her that got you in trouble then? I'm super interested to know about this double standard if it's so obvious.

Gender questions...never name calling.I also don't know Trumps gender...I have no idea what trump is.

What, specifically, did you say, and how did you get in trouble?

Don't know...sorry. I just like that this thread is free of bans

 

[NM11046]

Holy smokes - do some travelling and step away from the board and whole lotta shakin' going on!

What I try to remember when in these discussions where there are strong opinions ... posing your comments as a question rather than a statement is an easy way to diffuse a potentially aggressive conversation. (Zoogs does a great job of this pretty consistantly). We are all here to learn and share our opinions, but just asking someone "tell me more about why you say that" rather than, "thats just not true" is an easy way to make sure we aren't putting fellow Huskers back on their heels in defense.

Cant say Im able to do it all the time, but I find when I do its a better dialouge and often I have more of an appreciation of the whys and hows behind someone's belief.

Now to you conservatives - you're all just wrong. (Jk)

I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on how conservatives are wrong?

Did I do it right? /jk

You did it perfectly!!!

 

[Mierin]

See, people once again calling trump names ( I'm fine with it) but when I made fun of Clinton I got in trouble. It's stupid.

You were calling her a man. In Every. f'ing. Post you made in this forum. Nothing anyone else is doing here even approaches what you were doing when you were suspended.It'd basically be like me making fun of Trump's masculinity in every post I made about him. And then things I would be making fun of him for would be traits many other men share. So it would essentially be like I was disparaging a huge group of men every time I did it.

That's what you were doing every time you called Clinton a man. There are lots of valid things to complain about her for but the sh#t about her being manly for her demeanor or clothes or being a b!^@h are things that I think hit close to home for a lot of women. Regardless of your intent it seems a lot different than calling one person a name.

That is not the point...and I don't think I called her a man.
The point is...you either can or can't poke fun.

Ridiculous.
Let's say I'm pissed at Mike Riley because he lost to Ohio State 63-0.

I can say he lost because he's an idiotic, awful coach who doesn't know what he's doing, in a fun-poking way.

Or in a "fun-poking" way I could say he coaches like he has a pair of ovaries instead of testicles.

Or I could say in a "fun-poking" way he coaches like an old White man.

One of these things is poking fun at only Riley. The other 2 are what you were doing with Clinton in nearly every post you made in this forum.

 

[ZRod]

See as a guy, we don't really understand how that is offensive. Yes, I can see how it can be, but since I don't experience the discrimination or challenges of being a woman first hand it's harder to empathize. Also because I've been conditioned that way probably.