PDA

View Full Version : More nonsense!



foretaz
07-18-2005, 10:06 AM
a trade that sends jo back to portland for zach randolph-a cheap mans jo....might be interesting....

if u included aj or something similar u could probably even get randolph, ratliff and jarrett jack and a pick....

if u throw tinsley into that scenario u probaby have to send telfair back here...not really sure bout that idea....

incidentally, if the clippers acquire shareef it might make brand a bit more available....

i know brand isnt the player jo is....

and ive stated id much rather keep jo and have he and artest lead this team to titles....but its slow and this is speculation and strictly hypothetical

foretaz
07-18-2005, 10:09 AM
Have to agree with UB. Brand has put up great stats but has yet to play for a winner in the NBA.

To me at pf , I'd only rank Duncan and KG above Jermaine.

Amare Stoudamire is more athletic but still a very weak defender. Amare has the potential to be better but he isn't yet.

Chris Bosh , is still too physically weak , can still be manhandled inside. But he appears to have the potential to improve and will get bigger.

At this point on a contender I'll stick with JO over any pf except Duncan and KG. Ask me the same question in a year or two , may be a far different answer tho.

well in all fairness to brand....he got drafted by the bulls who were at their all time worst....then traded to the clippers....say it again the clippers....i doubt the fate of either of those teams wouldve been changed much if they had jo instead of brand....

and brand did play for a pretty good 'playoff' team in college...

and not that it really matters....but hes 'buds' with artest

foretaz
07-18-2005, 10:22 AM
foretaz , a couple little notes on cheap - poor mans JO- Zach Randolph. He signed a new 6 year deal totalling $83 million last season.He also had knee surgery last winter.

Another check with anyone in Marion area, for a little background check on Zach Randolph , his being involved in shooting incedent last summer is not his 1st brush with the law.

Plus Zach . plays ABSOLUTELY NO DEFENSE, he is also even more of a black whole than JO when he gets the ball on offense.

As for Theo Ratliff , Theo gives you 5 ppg and 5 rpg for the low , low cost of $11,666,000 each of the next 3 years.

I really don't think 22 mil this season and even more the next 3 years is worth that risk.

im aware of these things....

yes...zach just signed a new deal...but hes still making 6 mill a year less than jo....

zach is not the defender jo is...no question....as stated...there are only 2 players in this league that have similar qualities on both ends...kg and duncan...with brand being just a notch below...

this whole premise is based on taking a slight downgrade at the position while improving the team....and its speculation and talk...thats all...im discussing it ....not necessarily advocating it....

as far as ratliff goes...hes overpriced...like most big men in this league....though i dont think a front line of ratliff, randolph and artest would be the worst thing in the world...not sure its a championship lineup either....

foretaz
07-18-2005, 10:35 AM
If the Pacers were to trade Ron for Peja and J.O for Dirk, my worst nightmare would come true. It would be 1991 all over again. A soft team that cannot play defense.

That won't happen


...ummm yea...i think i would literally puke if they did that....i cant see them under any circumstances trading the both of them....none....

it would only be the very small circumstance that they might trade one of them...

namely the original premise of this thread...jo deciding he simply cannot coexist with ron in a manner that would be conducive to winning a championship....and the pacers for many reasons, not the least of which is the fantastic bargain ron is, decide that ron is completely trustworthy and want to shop JO....

diamonddave00
07-18-2005, 10:42 AM
Lets see you want Zach Randolph , an undersized pf , who plays no defense and doesn't pass at all. Theo Ratliff a non scoring ,quickly aging player .

I'm sorry Zach Randolph , back ground, questionable knee , questionable work habits. Zach is already 270 lbs on his 6'9 frame with a bad knee , can't see that being a good health risk. He is all of 2 1/2 years younger than Jermaine tho. I'll be intrested to see what kind of shape Randolph is in this season.

I'm guessing its plain to see I'm not a big fan of Zach Randolph , so I may not be seeing it objectively .

Okay lets see Zach and Ratliff make 22.3 mil this year, Jermaine makes 16.4 .

So for your idea to work Pacers need to add a 2nd salary for around 5 mil a year thats Foster. Or Pollard .

Personally I think Portland would jump all over getting Jermaine back with Pollard's expiring contract or Foster for Randolph and Ratliff.

Sorry foretaz , just can't agree on your idea.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 11:03 AM
Lets see you want Zach Randolph , an undersized pf , who plays no defense and doesn't pass at all. Theo Ratliff a non scoring ,quickly aging player .

I'm sorry Zach Randolph , back ground, questionable knee , questionable work habits. Zach is already 270 lbs on his 6'9 frame with a bad knee , can't see that being a good health risk. He is all of 2 1/2 years younger than Jermaine tho. I'll be intrested to see what kind of shape Randolph is in this season.

I'm guessing its plain to see I'm not a big fan of Zach Randolph , so I may not be seeing it objectively .

Okay lets see Zach and Ratliff make 22.3 mil this year, Jermaine makes 16.4 .

So for your idea to work Pacers need to add a 2nd salary for around 5 mil a year thats Foster. Or Pollard .

Personally I think Portland would jump all over getting Jermaine back with Pollard's expiring contract or Foster for Randolph and Ratliff.

Sorry foretaz , just can't agree on your idea.

you know...im trying really hard not to argue with u....

this is supposed to be a hypothetical discussion....

i think i made it pretty clear that i wouldnt necessarily like this....now didnt i? these types of discussions are interesting...nothing more nothing less...

and for the record...a 5 million dollar salary wouldnt have to be included....

aj would be enuff to make it work....

if ur going to be so argumentative, maybe u should have ur facts straight....

nevertheless....that wasnt the idea....

maybe take all that energy you seem to be utilizing to bash an idea and try to create additional scenarios, instead of doing what is very easy and requires very little brain power-finding whats wrong with something....

its a long known fact...if u want to find something wrong with something, it wont be hard...

so get with the program, and what the intention was....

the fun part of these hypothetical discussions is u come up with a bunch of scenarios and then determine which ones u like best and why....

now...can u play nice???

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 11:15 AM
-snip-
maybe take all that energy you seem to be utilizing to bash an idea and try to create additional scenarios, instead of doing what is very easy and requires very little brain power-finding whats wrong with something....

its a long known fact...if u want to find something wrong with something, it wont be hard...

so get with the program, and what the intention was....

the fun part of these hypothetical discussions is u come up with a bunch of scenarios and then determine which ones u like best and why....

now...can u play nice???

Was that necessary?

You do realize that you're just about the only one on here setting "rules" for threads and other posters, by the way?

foretaz
07-18-2005, 11:21 AM
Was that necessary?

You do realize that you're just about the only one on here setting "rules" for threads and other posters, by the way?

maybe u should reread the title of the thread....

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 11:27 AM
maybe u should reread the title of the thread....

I can read. What's your point?

diamonddave00
07-18-2005, 11:28 AM
foretaz , all I'm doing is being the opposing voice .

I said I'd not deal JO for any power forwards except Duncan and Garnett. At this time , but I also said in a years time than could change.

I prefer what I consider quality over quanity.

Personally I'd rather deal Artest and Pollard for Shawn Marion , if it came down to choosing JO or Artest as you suggested.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 11:35 AM
foretaz , all I'm doing is being the opposing voice .

I said I'd not deal JO for any power forwards except Duncan and Garnett. At this time , but I also said in a years time than could change.

I prefer what I consider quality over quanity.

Personally I'd rather deal Artest and Pollard for Shawn Marion , if it came down to choosing JO or Artest as you suggested.

thats all fine and well.....but the initial thread has nothing to do with what ur doing...

the initial post in this thread said besides the obvious kg and duncan trades...

and ur not the opposing voice...as i clearly stated, i never said i would be in favor of any of these ideas....theyre just ideas based on the parameters of the initial post in the thread....

if u take a look at this post u just made and then look at the initial post, u will find they are in direct conflict with one another...

all i was doing was trying to provide input based on the initial post....seriously...reread the initial post...it almost seems like u never read it

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 11:39 AM
DD00 was talking about basketball. Heck, he was talking about a player he wouldn't take for JO. Seems to me that (1) he was on topic, and (2) even if he wasn't totally on-topic, we go on tangents all the time around here and that's fine.

You can feel free to stop telling other people how to post at any time.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 11:54 AM
DD00 was talking about basketball. Heck, he was talking about a player he wouldn't take for JO. Seems to me that (1) he was on topic, and (2) even if he wasn't totally on-topic, we go on tangents all the time around here and that's fine.

You can feel free to stop telling other people how to post at any time.

:finger:

what he was doing was incorrectly telling me what i wanted....u may know how to read but its clear u havent done so in this thread...

ive made it abundantly clear i would not be in favor of trading jo....with the exception being trading him for kg....

but the initial post-the start of this thread asked about what players we might consider in trading jo for that DONT INCLUDE KG, DUNCAN OR SHAQ.....it also didnt ask about the validity of trading jo.....

THAT WAS THE PREMISE.... therefore, using that premise, i participated in the discussion, while alluding to the fact from time to time, that i didnt advocate or favor such things.....

only to have people tell me if thats what i want, they disagree....

too funny....

then when i point out i wasnt in favor of that and wasnt saying thats what i wanted, that i was following the discussion parameter i get the same thing again....

at which point i suggested arguing with me with a different set of parameters seems a bit ridiculous and maybe the discussion should be more focused on the actual parameters...

now if someone doesnt like those parameters and wants to argue just for the sake of argument, then so be it...im not interested....

the topic of the thread, no matter the validity, was a topic i could converse in...and since its slow..i did....

if someone doesnt like the parameters...so be it....just dont expect to take issue with me and not get some sort of rebuttal...after all i didnt start the thread...i was just contributing....

if someone wants to start another thread disputing the validity of these parameters, i d probably take part in that one too....but there was a thread that kinda dabbled in that, hence i think thats where this thread came from....some people think its good to try and keep threads somewhat on topic...i have no problem with that....others seem intent on taking threads off topic when they dont like the premise....so be it, i guess....

diamonddave00
07-18-2005, 11:54 AM
Foretaz- I read the title. My comments told you NO PLAYER at PF would I take beyond Tim and Kevin.

Then told you why I didn't want Randolph , then said push comes to shove deal Artest not Jermaine.

I thought fact I pointed out why I didn't want Brand , Stoudamire ,Nowizki and Bosh at this time was pretty clear too.

Just because I don't want to trade JO for what I consider lesser players , is just my side of the discussion.

As I said YES I READ THE HEADING.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 11:59 AM
Foretaz- I read the title. My comments told you NO PLAYER at PF would I take beyond Tim and Kevin.

Then told you why I didn't want Randolph , then said push comes to shove deal Artest not Jermaine.

I thought fact I pointed out why I didn't want Brand , Stoudamire ,Nowizki and Bosh at this time was pretty clear too.

Just because I don't want to trade JO for what I consider lesser players , is just my side of the discussion.

As I said YES I READ THE HEADING.

and as ive said like twenty times....not once did i ever say i wanted any of these things...not once...in fact, as ive said...id only want to trade jo for kg...but reread the initial post in this thread...everything that u say here is basically moot...

i have no trouble with someone playing devils advocate....only one problem....i wasnt advocating anything...and i stated that numerous times....

seriously ....READ THE INITIAL POST

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 12:03 PM
I didn't realize we had annointed another new moderator.

Congrats!

I'm not even sure he was annointed "moderator". Seems to me he thinks he's "king" or something.

grace
07-18-2005, 12:09 PM
I'm not even sure he was annointed "moderator". Seems to me he thinks he's "king" or something.

Might I suggest King of the Ignore List.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 12:32 PM
Might I suggest King of the Ignore List.

lol...i know btown and jays beef.....whats urs? :D :D

Believe_in_blue
07-18-2005, 12:32 PM
Might I suggest King of the Ignore List.

:laugh:

Hicks
07-18-2005, 12:33 PM
lol...i know btown and jays beef.....whats urs? :D :D

Your poor attitude, likely.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 12:49 PM
Your poor attitude, likely.

interesting....funny how i was thinking the poor attitudes lay somewhere else....

i guess people with great attitudes often insert negative comments and the like in conversations that in no way involve them...

funny thing is....i have no beef with dd00....we have had numerous discussions and i respect his point of view...just think, in this case, he was misunderstanding what was going on....i thought i had made it abundantly clear, i wasnt necessarily in favor of any of these ideas, but only throwing them out there based on the initial thread in the post that asked about the best players from other teams besides kg, duncan, and shaq....

now the others...specifically a certain two.....have a bit of an axe to grind, and more and more look to chime in whenever the opportunity might present itself....which i typically try to ignore, admittedly unsuccessfully more often times than not...

now grace...who knows...one minute shes happy with ya....the next minute shes not...tough to tell...thats why i asked...i know she likes my color...but hates my ellipsis.....

the ignore feature is a wonderful feature....i just always find it humorous when others publicly suggest others use it with regard to a certain person....

Vicious Tyrant
07-18-2005, 01:00 PM
Foretaz, you are a vicious tyrant.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 01:02 PM
Foretaz, you are a vicious tyrant.


evidently ;) :laugh:

diamonddave00
07-18-2005, 01:22 PM
I have no beef with foretaz either , in this case, we just seem to disagree on what we consider relavent to the thread.

Kstat
07-18-2005, 02:12 PM
I wish I knew what axe I had to grind.

I also wish I were an admin, so I could say whatever I wanted when someone was dictating to other members what is "appropriate" for the forum and being an a.......

Oh wait, I am an admin. That means I can discuss what the recourse in this situation would be and post accordingly, like I did today! Whoopie!

:laugh:

This thread is gold. Now you guys know how I feel.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 02:34 PM
I have no beef with foretaz either , in this case, we just seem to disagree on what we consider relavent to the thread.

simple disagreement or misunderstanding....not that big of a deal...least it wasnt to me...nor did i think it was to u...

however, to others it would be a different situation....

i think some of it might have to do with the "annointing"

when some feel that they have been "annointed" and then like to point it out...

well...

foretaz
07-18-2005, 02:41 PM
I wish I knew what axe I had to grind.

I also wish I were an admin, so I could say whatever I wanted when someone was dictating to other members what is "appropriate" for the forum and being an a.......

Oh wait, I am an admin. That means I can discuss what the recourse in this situation would be and post accordingly, like I did today! Whoopie!

interesting....

very interesting...

i truly hope u have no ambitions of going into law enforcement ;)

btw...ur choice (or whoevers choice) of posts to move to this arena are questionable at best....normally i dont say anything....but this time i feel id be interested in an explanation....as i find it very difficult anyone can justify why the first few posts in this thread were moved out of the initial thread....

but then again, justifying a number of things that seem to be taking place might be difficult....nothing worse than people having a separate agenda misusing certain powers to further that agenda....

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 03:24 PM
It was clear that it was just a misunderstanding. And its not like DD00 needs someone to defend him. And yes, I was a bit surprised to see these moved myself, but I could go either way on it.

Mostly, I was just trying to put a stop to a recurring, but generally minor problem: If you'd quit telling people how they should think and post, and leave out the unneeded and condenscending put-downs, the discussion would be over. Just because DD00 wasn't really offended doesn't mean that there weren't others - occasional posters or lurkers or even regulars - thinking to themselves, "Wow, I don't think I want to get into a discussion with this jerk."

+++++++++++++

For example, "I think you missed the premise of this thread" is sufficient, you don't need to add crap like:


-snip-
maybe take all that energy you seem to be utilizing to bash an idea and try to create additional scenarios, instead of doing what is very easy and requires very little brain power-finding whats wrong with something....

its a long known fact...if u want to find something wrong with something, it wont be hard...

so get with the program, and what the intention was....

the fun part of these hypothetical discussions is u come up with a bunch of scenarios and then determine which ones u like best and why....

now...can u play nice???

Unfortunately, I think you've tried to turn it into several things it was not, add a few humerous comments from your peers, and *presto* ... Welcome to the Shout Box.

++++++++++++++

There are other examples of this - and although none of them are particularly bad in their own right - after a while, "enough is enough." IMO, there was nothing here bad enough to warrant a PM or a warning or anything like that, it was just something was (1) totally unnecessary, and (2) receiving a small amount of complaints. So we thought we'd try to draw a line in the sand so everyone is reminded that its okay to say, "You missed my point", but its not okay to say, "You missed my point, idiot."

++++++++++++++

Lastly, I'm not much of a consiracty theorist, so I'll need some help here: What separate agenda is being pursued? I'm really curious because the only intent I'm aware of is the one I just mentioned above.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 03:55 PM
It was clear that it was just a misunderstanding. And its not like DD00 needs someone to defend him. And yes, I was a bit surprised to see these moved myself, but I could go either way on it.

if u could go either way on the fact that the first 4 or 5 posts of this thread shouldve been moved.....then something is bad wrong...which points to my "conspiracy theory"....theres not a reason in the world that those posts shouldve been moved...not one...not unless someone has a different agenda


Mostly, I was just trying to put a stop to a recurring, but generally minor problem: If you'd quit telling people how they should think and post, and leave out the unneeded and condenscending put-downs, the discussion would be over. Just because DD00 wasn't really offended doesn't mean that there weren't others - occasional posters or lurkers or even regulars - thinking to themselves, "Wow, I don't think I want to get into a discussion with this jerk."

i tell noone how to think or post....in fact, in this case, if anyone was doing that it wouldve been DD00....and i think that part was the misunderstanding as he somehow thought that these were things that i was advocating....i tried to state very clearly that i wasnt....then when in his next post he started it out with it being something that i wanted, i became alot more blunt....

i find it funny that because i provide my viewpoints and then alot of reasoning and rationale behind those viewpoints that people interpret that to mean im telling people how to think or post...now in this particular case, my suggestion might have been a bit strong to DD00 in reference to actually providing a scenario instead of debating the one i was stating, mainly because i feel like he probably didnt read the initial post, for if he did, he wouldnt be responding the same way....i know him....and these are his specialties...he loves coming up with scenarios....and is pretty good at it sometimes...

as far as being a jerk...i often think that many times with regards to a number of people on here....difference is....if i think someone is being a jerk....and they are potentially wrong....i might engage that person....

the fact that u as a mod are now guessing what other people are thinking as a reason to speak up, in this case which i feel was a bit inappropriate, and then do it in a very "jerky" manner....what good does that do???? i have respect for u...and u know that...i do think u were a bit out of line in not only what u did, but how u did it....

btown is a different story.....he definitely has an axe to grind...and frankly i dont know why.....hes obviously offended by me in some way....anyone that resorts to the types of conversations that he has over the last week with me, has not only an agenda but maturity issues as well, as evidenced by his "im a mod, and i can do whatever i want post"...thats a joke...and we both know it....

+++++++++++++


For example, "I think you missed the premise of this thread" is sufficient, you don't need to add crap like:



Unfortunately, I think you've tried to turn it into several things it was not, add a few humerous comments from your peers, and *presto* ... Welcome to the Shout Box.

++++++++++++++

There are other examples of this - and although none of them are particularly bad in their own right - after a while, "enough is enough." IMO, there was nothing here bad enough to warrant a PM or a warning or anything like that, it was just something was (1) totally unnecessary, and (2) receiving a small amount of complaints. So we thought we'd try to draw a line in the sand so everyone is reminded that its okay to say, "You missed my point", but its not okay to say, "You missed my point, idiot."

++++++++++++++

Lastly, I'm not much of a consiracty theorist, so I'll need some help here: What separate agenda is being pursued? I'm really curious because the only intent I'm aware of is the one I just mentioned above.[/QUOTE]

i defy u to show me where i called someone an idiot....thats not kewel jay, and u know it....embellishment to make ur point in this case is shameless....i d like to think im versed enuff in the english language (despite what kstat might say)along with mature enuff to avoid calling people names....

yes...ive said uve missed my point....and i may often make it a point to do that.....but i dont believe ive ever called someone a name like that....i usually show a great deal of restraint when it comes to calling people names...

and please remember this is a message board....u start assuming what people are thinking and what their attitudes are and u are going down a road that can lead to nowhere good...

as far as the agenda goes....ive addressed that....i personally think that the fact ive pointed out u have a tendency of dragging ur disdain for artest into threads that it simply is not necessary may not have gone over very well...im not sure...i cant know what ur thinking...however u did jump in unlike any way you have in the past....i know u a wee bit, and id probably say this is probably not the case....

btown is a different case....ill try to avoid stating what type of attitude it appears he has, as ive said thats a bit out of line....but the things hes typed in my direction of late, well, lets just say that they were out of line....but wait...hes a mod...so he can do that and apparently its ok...;)

Los Angeles
07-18-2005, 04:13 PM
FWIW, I often get into long-winded and sometimes heated discussions with others. But there's always a point where saying "I apologize for the way my post sounded" (and then dropping the subject) really helps everyone cool off.

It's taken a while for me to get it, but sometimes saying your piece, acknowledging others who say thiers (even if you don't agree with them) and then letting it go is a good 1-2-3 for getting along.

:twocents:

foretaz
07-18-2005, 04:23 PM
and i have very little doubt that DD00 and i would have gotten on the same page...with neither of us being the worse for wear....we werent even disagreeing, per se'....which is the ironic part...

and in this case when u have mods jumping in rather unceremoniously with an attitude that rivals the attitude they are accusing others of having....well it took a situation that was simply a misunderstanding and turned it into something much different...

Hicks
07-18-2005, 04:26 PM
if u could go either way on the fact that the first 4 or 5 posts of this thread shouldve been moved.....then something is bad wrong...which points to my "conspiracy theory"....theres not a reason in the world that those posts shouldve been moved...not one...not unless someone has a different agenda

http://files.politicalbrief.com/i_want_to_believe-web.jpg

Los Angeles
07-18-2005, 04:38 PM
That's fine, and it's OK with me that you exercise your right to question how the mods do thier jobs.

From an outside perspective, this thread seemed dangerously close to getting out of control, and a quick "lets talk about some of this elsewhere" thread split isn't that big of a deal.

I understand you're desire to explain yourself. But the first rule of communication is "The message you send is never exactly the message that is received." Meaning: readers often interpret words to mean something outside the original intent of authors.

Bearing that in mind, a lot of the talk in this thread is an attempt to explain how the tone and perceived "attitude" in some of your posts can be adjusted to allow for more accurate and calm interpretation by your readers.

Good luck, and don't give up. ;)

- LA

foretaz
07-18-2005, 04:45 PM
http://files.politicalbrief.com/i_want_to_believe-web.jpg


is this ur explanation for why the first 4 posts in this thread were removed from the original thread?

cause im waiting.....id really like to know why theyve been moved...since they are in no way off topic or out of line by any standard im aware of....

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 04:48 PM
Foretaz, you're trying too hard to turn this into something its not.

Chill out, re-read what I've said twice, and let it go. The point is not for you or anyone else to take every word I've posted on this thread literally, as if anybody was being quoted. Rather, its for everyone to remember that we can all disagree, but we need to be civil about.

Heaven forbid we ever try to make a pre-emptive strike when we sense a problem brewing - maybe not with you and DD00, maybe not even with you, period. But we've been getting complaints about how "testy" its been around PD lately and we're trying to be preventative. You may not have called DD00 an "Idiot", and he may not have even been offended by what you said, but your comments were in a gray area.

Nobody was banned, no posts were censored, etc. This is the equivalent of a minor traffic stop. We'd just like to move everybody back to the "civil" side before there is a blowup.

Everone take five minutes to calm down.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 04:55 PM
That's fine, and it's OK with me that you exercise your right to question how the mods do thier jobs.

From an outside perspective, this thread seemed dangerously close to getting out of control, and a quick "lets talk about some of this elsewhere" thread split isn't that big of a deal.

I understand you're desire to explain yourself. But the first rule of communication is "The message you send is never exactly the message that is received." Meaning: readers often interpret words to mean something outside the original intent of authors.

Bearing that in mind, a lot of the talk in this thread is an attempt to explain how the tone and perceived "attitude" in some of your posts can be adjusted to allow for more accurate and calm interpretation by your readers.

Good luck, and don't give up. ;)

- LA

there was no tone or perceived attitude in the 4 posts that begin this thread....and as ive said....u start perceiving attitude on the internet and u go down a road that simply should not be gone down....so u will forgive me if im not particularly interested in others people opinion on how they feel i might 'adjust my tone and perceived attitude'....and people are saying im condescending ???? ;)

funny...i always thought the first rule of communication was "listen"
guess we read a different book...

but, it is possible for things to get misunderstood when only words are involved....and i have no doubt that was at the root of the initial problem....

however the mods jumped the gun and did it in a very unprofessional manner as far as im concerned.....if there were truly concerns, these shouldve been addressed privately....the fact that someone would not only do it in an open forum, but do it with the words that were used....well....it wouldnt seem to lend to the fixing of any problem, but only creating new ones and escalating a situation, which it did...and while i dont see this done on a normal basis, the ensuing remarks indicated that there definitley was some added, outside motivation for it....

Los Angeles
07-18-2005, 05:08 PM
OK, I'll let this one go.

MagicRat
07-18-2005, 05:08 PM
http://www.usatvads.net/assets/images/wendys.jpg

foretaz
07-18-2005, 05:16 PM
Foretaz, you're trying too hard to turn this into something its not.

Chill out, re-read what I've said twice, and let it go. The point is not for you or anyone else to take every word I've posted on this thread literally, as if anybody was being quoted. Rather, its for everyone to remember that we can all disagree, but we need to be civil about.

Heaven forbid we ever try to make a pre-emptive strike when we sense a problem brewing - maybe not with you and DD00, maybe not even with you, period. But we've been getting complaints about how "testy" its been around PD lately and we're trying to be preventative. You may not have called DD00 an "Idiot", and he may not have even been offended by what you said, but your comments were in a gray area.

Nobody was banned, no posts were censored, etc. This is the equivalent of a minor traffic stop. We'd just like to move everybody back to the "civil" side before there is a blowup.

Everone take five minutes to calm down.


I didn't realize we had annointed another new moderator.

Congrats!


I'm not even sure he was annointed "moderator". Seems to me he thinks he's "king" or something.


I wish I knew what axe I had to grind.

I also wish I were an admin, so I could say whatever I wanted when someone was dictating to other members what is "appropriate" for the forum and being an a.......

Oh wait, I am an admin. That means I can discuss what the recourse in this situation would be and post accordingly, like I did today! Whoopie!

im curious...which of these are preemptive strikes...and which are done to deescalate the situation.....which ones are preventative....are any of these gray area??? would they be considered civil just disagreeable????

the simple fact that the mods have chosen to handle this all on the open forum versus privately might lead one to believe that its not me whos trying to turn this into something that its not....

suggestion...if u dont want things to become tense or lacking civility....throwing gasoline where u perceive there to be fire might not be the best idea.....and i cant help but think handling this in a private manner wouldve been much more effective....and im disappointed in that...considering ive had multiple conversations privately with both u jay and hicks as well....btown is a different story....and since his comments pretty much speak for themselves...i wont even address them...

Kstat
07-18-2005, 05:27 PM
Is there a way to crate a "shout-shout box", for threads that get more out of hand here?

Diamond Dave
07-18-2005, 05:31 PM
Is there a way to crate a "shout-shout box", for threads that get more out of hand here?

It would need round the clock observation and guards to keep everyone safe. :laugh:

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 05:38 PM
Even though this is already all here on this page, I'll repeat it one last time. The premptive strike was:


Was that necessary?

You do realize that you're just about the only one on here setting "rules" for threads and other posters, by the way?

A fairly harmless comment to keep your inflammatory words to DD00 from setting off a firestorm. That was followed by you telling me to re-read the title of this thread. As if the thread title somehow justified your rude comments?

So I asked you what was your point, and instead of explaining yourself, or stopping, you proceeded to tell DD00 your "rules" for participating in this thread, even though he had done nothing wrong. Sometimes, we like to be "transparent" here so that everyone knows the limits. There was nothing to censor or ban, no reason to PM somebody and make them feel threatened. This should have all stopped here after my gentle "nudge."

So I said,


DD00 was talking about basketball. Heck, he was talking about a player he wouldn't take for JO. Seems to me that (1) he was on topic, and (2) even if he wasn't totally on-topic, we go on tangents all the time around here and that's fine.

You can feel free to stop telling other people how to post at any time.

And you said,



:finger:


And then all hell broke loose.

Now, had I known you'd respond like that, I would've handled it privately. I thought I could subtly let you know that your comments were unneccessary and that you'd keep it from further escalation. I guess I was wrong, so I'm sorry. Next time, if you'd prefer, maybe we'll just overreact and censor your post or give you a "vacation" without giving you an opportunity to maintain the conversation with a more civil choice of words.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 05:49 PM
Even though this is already all here on this page, I'll repeat it one last time. The premptive strike was:



A fairly harmless comment to keep your inflammatory words to DD00 from setting off a firestorm. That was followed by you telling me to re-read the title of this thread. As if the thread title somehow justified your rude comments?

So I asked you what was your point, and instead of explaining yourself, or stopping, you proceeded to tell DD00 your "rules" for participating in this thread, even though he had done nothing wrong. Sometimes, we like to be "transparent" here so that everyone knows the limits. There was nothing to censor or ban, no reason to PM somebody and make them feel threatened. This should have all stopped here after my gentle "nudge."

So I said,



And you said,



And then all hell broke loose.

Now, had I known you'd respond like that, I would've handled it privately. I thought I could subtly let you know that your comments were unneccessary and that you'd keep it from further escalation. I guess I was wrong, so I'm sorry. Next time, if you'd prefer, maybe we'll just overreact and censor your post or give you a "vacation" without giving you an opportunity to maintain the conversation with a more civil choice of words.

thats ur version...the way u see it....which is far different from the way i see it....

not unlike many things that can take place on here....

funny how we both think our own actions were gentle nudges and harmless....while the other one caused things for all hell to break loose....

trust me....u think they broke loose when :finger: happened....but in my estimation they had already done so...and that was my response....

and for the record...there would have been no firestorm....as i have indicated and DD00 has indicated.....a fact that somehow u seem to want to avoid....

the only ones that seemed to think there was a potential firestorm was u....and evidently btown, though im not sure about him....all i know about him is his disparaging remarks to me seem to be a nonissue.....far be it from a poster to degrade another poster-in the mods eyes....but having a mod call a poster names and degrade him....well thats ok...interesting...

Kstat
07-18-2005, 05:53 PM
Don't make me stop this car. Because I will, you know. I'll do it.....

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 06:04 PM
-snip- and for the record...there would have been no firestorm....as i have indicated and DD00 has indicated.....a fact that somehow u seem to want to avoid....

the only ones that seemed to think there was a potential firestorm was u...

I've acknowledged that was probably true in this instance. However, it doesn't really matter.

From: The Rules of Pacers Digest


1. Don't be a jerk. You have no right, at any time, to deny anyone on this forum the right to have a positive experience and/or conversation on this forum. Intentionally acting rude, insulting, flaming, belittling, name-calling, hateful or insensitive to anyone or their friends, family, or where they live is not acceptable. We will not always agree with each other, but show some respect. If you do one of these things, it will be edited. If you continuously do it, you will be asked to stop, and if you fail to stop after talking with us about it, you will be dealt with in whatever way we feel is appropriate. If what was said is particularly obscene, you will be banned.

Every situation is different, and depending on how we or the person(s) being verbally abused takes your post, it can affect the severity of our response.

If what was said is viewed as light-hearted, or there was a simple misunderstanding, it might be OK and no harm is done. On the other hand, if what was said is viewed as particularly bad, we have the right to bypass a warning and immediately ban you.

What is seen as "particularly bad"? That depends on the situation, but generally speaking, if we believe what was said was blatantly racist, hateful, or otherwise mean-spirited/obscene/offensive, you will most likely be immediately dealt with.

Be sure to read this if you feel you are being accused or punished over a simple misunderstanding:

If you feel that you were in no way intentionally trying to insult anyone, and it was a simple misunderstanding, you must go out of your way to explain yourself. This is critically important to avoid any further misunderstandings, unfair treatment, or needless animosity.

If you offend somebody, responding with a :rolleyes: and "I was just joking" doesn't cut it. You have to explain yourself.

Joking around is fine, but it helps if you make it known you're fooling around. Nobody can read your mind here.

Los Angeles
07-18-2005, 06:11 PM
As much as I like watching train wrecks, maybe this one should get the old Masterlock treatment.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 06:14 PM
As much as I like watching train wrecks, maybe this one should get the old Masterlock treatment.

better watch it...u will get comments like who annointed another mod...or we werent aware there was another mod annointed....or a king even....;)

foretaz
07-18-2005, 06:21 PM
I've acknowledged that was probably true in this instance. However, it doesn't really matter.

From: The Rules of Pacers Digest

lol...hmmm...at the risk of sounding aloof...

yea...and??

i know the rules...

and u just said "it doesnt really matter"

how in the hell cant it matter??????

if DD00 isnt offended..and has no beef with me...and i was talking to him...

how can that not matter???????

ill tell u how it cannot matter...

cause then all this other stuff is bs....shouldve never happened...

maybe the mods shouldnt be so quick to determine whos being offended and whos not....

in all of DD's comments i never saw anything that made me think he was offended.....that we disagreed????yep....now thats gotta be the first time thats happened on a message board....

you cant say that it doesnt really matter.....because it does....

and the rules that u quoted clearly indicate that it DOES matter....

and im curious....since i was offended by btowns remarks....what happens with that????

able
07-18-2005, 07:23 PM
let's put this to bed now shall we?

foretaz if you have a problem with a mod, you pm hicks, or if that is not "it" in your eyes another mod you d ohave some faith in, if you have faith in none then there are two options: one you adept your "behaviour so as to not get into "trouble" or two, you give up alltogether, which would also be a shame.

relax, chillout, catch a breather and forget it

move on.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 07:33 PM
I wish I knew what axe I had to grind.

I also wish I were an admin, so I could say whatever I wanted when someone was dictating to other members what is "appropriate" for the forum and being an a.......

Oh wait, I am an admin. That means I can discuss what the recourse in this situation would be and post accordingly, like I did today! Whoopie!


ultimately able...i have no problems with u or hicks at all....i think u both know that....and with jay, i think this was just a big misunderstanding where we both got a little too testy with one another....thats ok when talking about artest....but not when this sort of thing happens....i for my part, wished things wouldve not gone down this road....and wished i wouldve pmed jay-because i kept hoping he would do the same to me....i like jay...and he knows it....despite how it might seem....and this sort of thing doesnt change anything with that regard, at least with me...but as u can notice, im not the type to be called out and not respond...that doesnt make it right....hows the line go??? thats how i lead my life, lets move on.....

i do have a problem with btown...the snide remarks and what have u...i accept...ive made em...we all have....

this post however, crosses the line, in my eyes...

i try and think i do a relatively successful job of avoiding calling people names...no matter the situation....

to be called an a______ by anyone, let alone a mod...well...what would happen if i wouldve called btown an a______??

and i wont even go into the pseudo "im a mod, hahaha" banter...quite unbecoming if u ask me....

when u start holding posters to standards that the mods are not expected to meet....well...

Hicks
07-18-2005, 07:50 PM
I must be blind. What name did btown call you that you seem to think results in what we don't allow? If the answer is "mod", you're really reaching.

foretaz
07-18-2005, 08:00 PM
I wish I knew what axe I had to grind.

I also wish I were an admin, so I could say whatever I wanted when someone was dictating to other members what is "appropriate" for the forum and being an a.......
Oh wait, I am an admin. That means I can discuss what the recourse in this situation would be and post accordingly, like I did today! Whoopie!

the last bolded comment

Hicks
07-18-2005, 08:19 PM
OK I see what you're talking about now.

ChicagoJ
07-18-2005, 08:47 PM
Okay, but I never read it that way until now.

Harmonica
07-19-2005, 01:37 AM
I think if you called btown a bunghole, he would simply shrug—nay, laugh it off.

Harmonica
07-19-2005, 08:57 AM
I understand you're desire to explain yourself. But the first rule of communication is "The message you send is never exactly the message that is received." Meaning: readers often interpret words to mean something outside the original intent of authors.

I didn't know there was a definitive "first rule" of communication so I did a google search. There wasn't a lot to go on, but from what I did find, it appears there is no agreed upon or absolute first rule of communication.

From this site we get:

http://www.vacancycentre.com/resources/articles/articles_personnel_5.htm

The First Rule - Listen

I've heard this one before.

From this site, we get:

http://www.aafp.org/fpm/980300fm/commskills.html

The First Rule of Speechmaking: Keep Your Audience Awake

Heard this one, too.

And from this site we get:

http://www.johnfishbein.com/communication.overview.htm

1. Be Kind.

Huh, never heard that one before.

Ah, now this site appears to confirm that the first rule of communication is indeed "The message you send is never exactly the message that is received."

http://www.mindpub.com/art196.htm

1. There are many slips between the other person's ears and your lips. The message you want to convey may be garbled, distorted, camouflaged or completely lost by more dominant messages. This happens because the recipient interprets your message by his or her brain, not by your brain. To avoid this, think about the possible ways in which your message can be misunderstood or distorted by a recipient who is not on the same wave length or of the same orientation that you are.


In summary, there appears to be many "first rules of communication."
1.) Listen.
1.) Keep your audience awake.
1.) Be kind.
1.) The message you send is never exactly the message that is received.

All are fine first rules of communication. And I think we can agree on one thing: We'd all get along much better if we kept these rules in mind when we post. Or when we read others' posts.

Hope this was as fun and informative for you as it was for me. ;)

Los Angeles
07-19-2005, 11:43 AM
You crack me up, Harmonica. :)

I LOVE the "keep your audience awake" bit, BTW. It should go on my office wall for all clients to see.

Knucklehead Warrior
07-19-2005, 01:07 PM
My rule of thumb, and it's not an original observation --

Disagree without being disagreeable.