Tangent Thread - P&R Edition

Lawson said:
All of this in order to achieve their agenda of attempting to influence the moods of voters of key states regarding the presidential election. 
Click to expand...


But if somebody thought that Political Party X caused football to be cancelled and it upset them, wouldn't they vote for the other party?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lawson said:
As I am posting this I am unaware of any vote by the Big 10 regarding whether to play or not this fall. The way I see it is if the liberals powers in control of the Big 10 allow football at all this fall it will be only at a date that will put the league in serious jeopardy of participating in the national platform of a playoff for a national championship. They may allow football in late fall to attempt to take the heat off of themselves for their decision to cancel but will not likely allow the league to play enough games to be viable candidates for the playoff and potential national championship. I predict they vote for at best an early November start or perhaps October 31st which would likely impair the Big 10 teams that may opt to play chances of being included in the hunt for the national championship. All of this in order to achieve their agenda of attempting to influence the moods of voters of key states regarding the presidential election. 
Click to expand...
You really think anyone would think cancelling football would help either party? If they wanted to make it political, they would obviously just blame it on the other party.

This was done somewhat based on medical advice, and mostly because the presidents wanted to save their hides if anything happened to players.

The B1G expected the other conferences to follow suit, but now that they haven’t, they’re trying to save face. The approval of the rapid tests plays a huge part in that, as well.

People point to Kevin Warren’s drive to allow athletes to become well-informed voters as proof of liberal motives. Thing is, being an informed voter doesn’t mean you’re a liberal voter. Getting upset about more people voting or being well-informed only makes you seem nefarious.

Of course it’s political now, because of certain interjections. But anyone who takes a truly objective look at the situation can see it was purely a safety and/or liability issue.

/soapbox

 
Publicly asking moderators to ban someone is not the same thing as criticizing the content of someone's post. I think that should go without saying.

Having a disagreeable or unfounded opinion is not necessarily a violation of board rules, either. There are a lot of people who share similar thoughts and opinions as NDJ, yet the moment they're shared, they become a board troll. I regularly see people share unfounded, hyperbolic and/or incendiary opinions in P&R (particularly anti-Trump ones) yet those often go unreported or unmentioned.

 
Oh, bullshit, Enhance.

Enhance said:
I regularly see people share unfounded, hyperbolic and/or incendiary opinions in P&R (particularly anti-Trump ones) yet those often go unreported or unmentioned.
Click to expand...


Regularly. Like who? Show us which posters/people put unfounded statements about Trump in P&R at the frequency that NDJ does.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I feel like we've been pretty consistent with that message for some time, particularly as it relates to P&R.

I also disagree that the claim is BS, but I'm not going to turn this into a witch hunt to appease anyone's appetite for validation. This is an overall topic area the mods/admins have spent quite a bit of time looking at in recent years and we did not arrive at this perspective out of bone idleness.

 
Enhance said:
This is an overall topic area the mods/admins have spent quite a bit of time looking at in recent years and we did not arrive at this perspective out of bone idleness.
Click to expand...


"We thoroughly understand and deeply value what sports mean to our student-athletes, their families, our coaches and our fans. The vote by the Big Ten Council of Presidents and Chancellors (COP/C) was overwhelmingly in support of postponing fall sports and will not be revisited."

I thought that sounded familiar.

 
knapplc said:
Can we just ban this guy? This is straight up misinformation, and he's been doing it for years. 

This isn't even an attempt at good-faith conversation. This is verifiable lying.
Click to expand...


I don't think the solution is to ban him.

I don't think much of anybody in P&R is buying what NDJ is selling. But he's very emblematic of a typical Trump voter; in some ways he's one of the good ones because he at least attempts to make reasoned arguments to support his views, even if they're flawed and at times downright dishonest, rather than just spewing vitriol and bile.

We should either A) continue pointing out how his arguments are crappy or B) ignore him. At the moment I prefer A.

 
Danny Bateman said:
I don't think the solution is to ban him.

I don't think much of anybody in P&R is buying what NDJ is selling. But he's very emblematic of a typical Trump voter; in some ways he's one of the good ones because he at least attempts to make reasoned arguments to support his views, even if they're flawed and at times downright dishonest, rather than just spewing vitriol and bile.

We should either A) continue pointing out how his arguments are crappy or B) ignore him. At the moment I prefer A.
Click to expand...


Why is one better than the other?

 
Danny Bateman said:
There's redress for liars. You expose them as liars.

There's not much you can do with your average angry Trump supporter who just wants to be a d!(k.
Click to expand...


Would there be any truth to the statement that by being an active supporter of Trump that, by proxy, you are a liar? Or, at the very least, should there be some sort of redress for enabling his vitriolic behavior, even if you aren't actively participating in it? 

 
Cdog923 said:
Would there be any truth to the statement that by being an active supporter of Trump that, by proxy, you are a liar? Or, at the very least, should there be some sort of redress for enabling his vitriolic behavior, even if you aren't actively participating in it? 
Click to expand...


I don't think just being a Trump supporter should get you banned, and that's not why I'm advocating banning NDJ (despite that direct insinuation). 

It's that he knowingly posts misinformation habitually, nearly every post in P&R. If facts and truth don't matter, then just shut that forum down. But if we're trying to have a quality forum with good conversation, at some point a decision has to be made about people who aren't interested in that. 

What NDJ does in P&R is no different than what Omaha fan did in Husker Football - continually posting in a manner that disrupts conversation. Apparently the solution is to spend all our time fact-checking him or to put him on ignore. But the ignore function makes for a messy board, and it's ineffectual when other people quote the person you've ignored.

 
knapplc said:
I don't think just being a Trump supporter should get you banned, and that's not why I'm advocating banning NDJ (despite that direct insinuation). 

It's that he knowingly posts misinformation habitually, nearly every post in P&R. If facts and truth don't matter, then just shut that forum down. But if we're trying to have a quality forum with good conversation, at some point a decision has to be made about people who aren't interested in that. 

What NDJ does in P&R is no different than what Omaha fan did in Husker Football - continually posting in a manner that disrupts conversation. Apparently the solution is to spend all our time fact-checking him or to put him on ignore. But the ignore function makes for a messy board, and it's ineffectual when other people quote the person you've ignored.
Click to expand...
And it would also be different if, regardless of his views, he was willing to actually engage in discussion. But NDJ doesn't do that. He drops in a couple times a day with dishonest and inflammatory comments but rarely participates in an actual conversation and never answers questions in response to the crap he posts.

It is glaringly obvious that he has no interest in conversation or debate, no interest in defending his views, no interest in honesty, and only is here to throw s#!t at the wall for the express purpose of generating a negative response. That is the definition of trolling. 

 
Back
Top