GBRedneck

zoogs

New member
Ehhhhh. I'm leery of making a call here -- I clearly disagree pretty sharply with this guy, and I don't want that personal bias getting in the way.

A sampling of his recent posts/partial posts (focusing on tone):

Quote

Steve Eicherson, Shawn Pederhorst -- same difference. Both Harvey's henchmen.



Quote

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.



Quote

Oh yeah. Even a trained monkey. I forgot.



Quote

And yes, there is still a chance for JS to do just that. Hopefully it doesn't turn into a Callahan/Ryan Goodman situation. But since that would be one more notch in the Callahan 2.0 belt, it will probably happen.



Quote

Sub500 has a long track record showing he is simply not a very good coach.



Quote

I thought Sub500 seemed a lot more relaxed and a lot more cogent in this presser than the last couple. I think he's getting into his comfort zone now that expectations have fallen.



Quote

ABR



Quote

ABR
(Again -- I'm not even sure what this means. Both times it was the entire response.)

Quote

No. Sub500 made it clear in the postgame presser that he didn't even consider a pass on 3rd and 7. He wanted them to use their last timeout.



Quote

It's not an either/or proposition. I can show you lots of hardcore Sub500 sunshine pumpers who turn in to crybabies when faced wth legitimate criticism of Sub500.



Quote

And there we have it. Tommy Armstrong=Joe Dailey. The "Callahan 2.0" moniker gets more accurate each week.



Quote

Well, it only took Riley six games to match Bo's total in the "Losing a 4th Quarter Lead" category.



Quote

Benning is reaching for answers. Sub500 is not a good coach.



Quote

That's real classy. Throw the student athletes under the bus in a bizarre failed attempt to prop up the loser millionaire that makes them look wrose than they are. You've been Rileyswaggled.


It seems to me that he could have discussion to offer if he wasn't so caught up in his anger. His tone is entirely (and has kind of always been) about tweaking people who like Riley. There's stuff that comes back his way from other posters, and they do get warned about that, too ... but one is taking exception and taking the bait, and the other is offering the bait as a M.O.

He has such an extensive record of that M.O., I kind of think a long break might be warranted. 2 weeks, 3 weeks? Then if he comes back and that continues (it'd be frankly shocking to me if it didn't), something permanent. If he takes his ball and goes home on his own, that's okay with me. I think or would like to believe he tries to conduct himself reasonably, but he's too angry to follow through. A little bit of the same deal with Polo, on the other side of the fence; probably a good dude, couldn't keep himself from vomiting his bitter attitude all over the place.

Thoughts?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ehhhhh. I'm leery of making a call here -- I clearly disagree pretty sharply with this guy, and I don't want that personal bias getting in the way.

A sampling of his recent posts/partial posts (focusing on tone):

Quote

Steve Eicherson, Shawn Pederhorst -- same difference. Both Harvey's henchmen.



Quote

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.



Quote

Oh yeah. Even a trained monkey. I forgot.



Quote

And yes, there is still a chance for JS to do just that. Hopefully it doesn't turn into a Callahan/Ryan Goodman situation. But since that would be one more notch in the Callahan 2.0 belt, it will probably happen.



Quote

Sub500 has a long track record showing he is simply not a very good coach.



Quote

I thought Sub500 seemed a lot more relaxed and a lot more cogent in this presser than the last couple. I think he's getting into his comfort zone now that expectations have fallen.



Quote

ABR



Quote

ABR
(Again -- I'm not even sure what this means. Both times it was the entire response.)

Quote

No. Sub500 made it clear in the postgame presser that he didn't even consider a pass on 3rd and 7. He wanted them to use their last timeout.



Quote

It's not an either/or proposition. I can show you lots of hardcore Sub500 sunshine pumpers who turn in to crybabies when faced wth legitimate criticism of Sub500.



Quote

And there we have it. Tommy Armstrong=Joe Dailey. The "Callahan 2.0" moniker gets more accurate each week.



Quote

Well, it only took Riley six games to match Bo's total in the "Losing a 4th Quarter Lead" category.



Quote

Benning is reaching for answers. Sub500 is not a good coach.



Quote

That's real classy. Throw the student athletes under the bus in a bizarre failed attempt to prop up the loser millionaire that makes them look wrose than they are. You've been Rileyswaggled.


It seems to me that he could have discussion to offer if he wasn't so caught up in his anger. His tone is entirely (and has kind of always been) about tweaking people who like Riley. There's stuff that comes back his way from other posters, and they do get warned about that, too ... but one is taking exception and taking the bait, and the other is offering the bait as a M.O.

He has such an extensive record of that M.O., I kind of think a long break might be warranted. 2 weeks, 3 weeks? Then if he comes back and that continues (it'd be frankly shocking to me if it didn't), something permanent. If he takes his ball and goes home on his own, that's okay with me. I think or would like to believe he tries to conduct himself reasonably, but he's too angry to follow through. A little bit of the same deal with Polo, on the other side of the fence; probably a good dude, couldn't keep himself from vomiting his bitter attitude all over the place.

Thoughts?
I don't think he's angry at all. I think he's enjoying doing this, and gets a real kick out of the schadenfreude. Anything he's posted has always been in a manner that goes out of its way to put down the coaching staff or AD in some capacity (like the bolded above).

I'd be fine with his posts if he could provide some legit criticism without having to make a derogatory remark towards our coaching staff or AD or other posters. I'm perfectly okay with giving him a lengthy vacation, and if he comes back and posts the same way, then ban him.

We're talking about driving traffic away from HB, well consistent posting like that does a good amount of traffic away from the board. Who wants to put up with that?

 
Hm, well, I'm not big on the traffic angle personally (if we're fair and represent ourselves well, good things follow in the long term), and I don't want to guess at characterizing his enjoyment any more than I want to guess at whether RADAR is an Iowa plant, for example.

In fairness to him, he doesn't really lose control of his conduct when it comes to other posters. That's good. But for whatever reason, he can't restrain *something* about his tone, and the result of that is instigation, flamebait, starting threads destined to go in the wrong direction, turning threads in the wrong direction, with almost all of his (very many) posts.

On the other hand, a new poster venting angrily a few times is one thing and far easier to let go. Is that fair or unfair general policy? To only start talking to people when it's an issue of scale, and giving newer posters a chance to show a "non venom" side to their presence here?

GBR has been talked to before about this, so perhaps a stronger statement is necessary. However, I don't want to do something that necessitates suspending a whole lot of other similarly opinionated people for consistency. It's only merited if this is clearly a "GBR" issue, not a "People angry at Riley" issue.

* To be clear, there's some devil's advocate here; not to try to disagree with anything, just to be careful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd forget the "tone", and concentrate on what is more clear-cut, such as derailing or a personal attack. If he's doing those, nail him for that.

 
I let him know that this was part of a trolling/instigating pattern: http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/76825-riley-supporters-are-wrong/&do=findComment&comment=1603345

Quite possibly the best article I've read on the subject. Ever.
The article is crap.
This is a good sign. You've advanced from Denial to Anger.
He responded:

Sorry, I'll try to tone it down. I was getting emotional.
Content to leave it there for now.

 
I let him know that this was part of a trolling/instigating pattern: http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/76825-riley-supporters-are-wrong/&do=findComment&comment=1603345

Quite possibly the best article I've read on the subject. Ever.
The article is crap.
This is a good sign. You've advanced from Denial to Anger.
He responded:

Sorry, I'll try to tone it down. I was getting emotional.
Content to leave it there for now.
His response might have something to do with this:

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/76638-riley-supporters/ (posts #33-end)

Sorry, I know it looks like I'm on a witch hunt, I'm not. I just don't think anything that he's posted here is adding anything to the board and is doing nothing but riling up a good portion of other members. I feel the same way about people who are arguing the other way as this group and who are being just as irrational.

At the same time I'm hesitant to do anything because I don't want to look like I'm going rogue. I want us to make as well-informed decisions as possible. At the end of the day, we all want what's best for the board.

 
Oh, yeah, I know. I responded with a serious "Thanks" to that because I mean it. Gives him the opportunity to mean what he said about toning it down.

Being irrational is okay, it's posting to incite that I think is not. As long as it's not just a personal judgment call on my part, which I recognize is probably easy for me to tend towards.

At the end of the day, we all want what's best for the board.
Amen
default_thumbsup.gif


 
He's basically RADAR, with a completely opposite viewpoint, except he doesn't use personal attacks. The whole "Sub500" thing is a play off of RADAR's "408" schtick for Bo Pelini.

My preference would be to fire them both into the sun, but we can't do that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can we astrick out the word sub500? I'm so sick of this a-hole saying sub500 all over the board it's driving me nuts. He's so damn immature it's annoying, his time here is short, I get that, but good lord!

 
Can we astrick out the word sub500? I'm so sick of this a-hole saying sub500 all over the board it's driving me nuts. He's so damn immature it's annoying, his time here is short, I get that, but good lord!
He's doing it because of RADAR starting the 408 thing, and that didn't get nuked.

 
What's the rule (or guideline) we have? Something like: if someone has a problem with you, that's on them. If a bunch of people have a problem with you, then that's on you?

Well...3 statuses this morning from Redux, Atbone, and SPH abotu Redneck, and this is on top of the issues we've been having with him so far.

 
saunders45 is right - he started doing it after RADAR kept posting 408.

When he Reported the Personal Attack by AFhusker I PMed him not to bring up Riley's record in every thread. If it's off topic it doesn't need to be there.

But that's kind of the problem with these guys. They get a lot of flack and everyone focuses on them but they're not really doing anything different than others are, just from the other point of view. I haven't kept up with as much going on the last few days but it's pretty easy to hold the guys with the opposite opinion to a different standard than guys we agree with. StPaulHusker should really be under the microscope because he's using personal attacks against GBRedneck in about every post but people agree with him so no one notices.

I'm fine with cracking down on things but I think we need to crack down on everyone equally.

 
Back
Top