Chiefinonhaze Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Stop talking out your ass. When I speak of things like member user notes, it's info you don't even have access to, only some of which is culled form every post relevant. Did you read all 1000? Like hell you did. But even if you had, you don't have the rule violations recorded as we do and those alone were sufficient grounds. Not to mention I made it clear he actually HAD been given much slack, but not because of his number of posts which means that angle is just more of your ignorant prattle on this matter. And how the hell do you have any idea of who brings how much traffic? That's right--you don't. But we do. And the rest of your comments are equally ignorant and incorrect. I am left to wonder why I don't just help you move on to a board that's moderated more to your liking. And since in your post you too violate rule 18 to the point where you qualify for a boot, I'm even harder pressed to tolerate your nonsense.Plus, you violated rule 11 too in your post. :doh: So, your saying there is no correlation between post count and the amount of traffic a poster brings? That sure seems like a false statement. And don't get me wrong, I love this forum and would hate to be banned. But to say my post has no validity makes me question whether you really read my post. ---------- Post added August-20th-2011 at 02:53 AM ---------- I'd also like to say that I would rather be on a forum that is over-moderated than one that is under-moderated. I still stand my my statement that this forum can be over-moderated at times. It's my opinion. I hope I didn't violate any rules on this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTillIDie Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Don't forget Adam Carriker. We had 5 defensive starters out, rather than the 1 the original article claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 So, your saying there is no correlation between post count and the amount of traffic a poster brings? That sure seems like a false statement. And don't get me wrong, I love this forum and would hate to be banned. But to say my post has no validity makes me question whether you really read my post. You might be able draw a statistical correlation if you tried hard enough but it would be flimsy at best. Causation is what's really important, anyway... and that's only if you continue to assume that the moderators primary goal is to maximize traffic to this web site. It's actually a rather poor assumption to make, if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 You're not even making any sense. And you're going to question my knowledge of this board? Unreal. But no, there's no correlation. And if there was, wouldn't it make more sense to you that people who did little posting (like 1000 posts vs 5-10,000 plus as many other posters have done) over the same stretch of time were logically LESS involved in conversation and "creating traffic" to use your line of thought? Jeezuz. And I think it's safe to say that, oh, I dunno, say 9 out of 10 of us love this place . Some of the guys love it so much they donate a lot of time and energy to join the staff when invited and help make it what it is. Since you seem to be deeply invested in channeling your inner lemming and have continued this nonsense, here's the deal: ain't gonna perma-punt you which you qualify for, but am going to give you the more standard time out anybody might receive for the two rule violations (18 & 11--and 18 is even more commonly for any length of time the mod desires) and allow you a couple weeks off to think about this stuff and see if any lights come on. We'll find out if they do upon your return. Ok, I saw your edit, and the fact is i don't really want to ban you at all, but you're leaving little choice if I'm to be consistent with our rules and guidelines. Read them--especially #18! I'm gonna forget about the two weeks off, but you need to get back to talking football and stfu about board management in here--as I have pointed out you have indeed violated several rules so far, and if you read those damn rules you'll also see that there is a procedure described for giving your feedback if you feel it's necessary. And you ****ing question my knolqwedge. Dude, I had a major hand in writing the damn rules as they stand today and like the other mods here I have logged in ca few thousand hours of some real work here for free because WE love this site. :helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefinonhaze Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Stop talking out your ass. When I speak of things like member user notes, it's info you don't even have access to, only some of which is culled form every post relevant. Did you read all 1000? Like hell you did. But even if you had, you don't have the rule violations recorded as we do and those alone were sufficient grounds. Not to mention I made it clear he actually HAD been given much slack, but not because of his number of posts which means that angle is just more of your ignorant prattle on this matter. And how the hell do you have any idea of who brings how much traffic? That's right--you don't. But we do. And the rest of your comments are equally ignorant and incorrect. I am left to wonder why I don't just help you move on to a board that's moderated more to your liking. And since in your post you too violate rule 18 to the point where you qualify for a boot, I'm even harder pressed to tolerate your nonsense.BTW, you also violated rule 11 too in your following post. :doh: Another reason why your logic is flawed... You assume that because your "access" to Redskins related information is superior to the "access" that I have to Redskins talk, that your opinion is superior to mine. Well, Shanahan has 10X the Redskins "access" that you do. Does that also mean that every opinion of theirs is superior to your opinion on the Redskins? ---------- Post added August-20th-2011 at 03:10 AM ---------- You're not even making any sense. And you're going to question my knowledge of this board? Unreal. But no, there's no correlation. And if there was, wouldn't it make more sense to you that people who did little posting (like 1000 posts vs 5-10,000 plus as many other posters have done) over the same stretch of time were logically LESS involved in conversation and "creating traffic" to use your line of thought? Jeezuz. And I think it's safe to say that, oh, I dunno, say 9 out of 10 of us love this place . Some of the guys love it so much they donate a lot of time and energy to join the staff when invited and help make it what it is. Since you seem to be deeply invested in channeling your inner lemming and have continued this nonsense, here's the deal: ain't gonna perma-punt you which you qualify for, but am going to give you the more standard time out anybody might receive for the two rule violations (18 & 11--and 18 is even more commonly for any length of time the mod desires) and allow you a couple weeks off to think about this stuff and see if any lights come on. We'll find out if they do upon your return. You just proved my point. A person who has a total post count of 1000 vs a person who has a post count of 10,000, is generally bringing less traffic to the site. The person who brings less traffic to the site is not as valuable as the person who is on the board 24-7, like myself. From an internet marketing standpoint, I would rather have a poster who is frequently visiting/posting on my site than a poster who barely visits. Even if some of the posters opinions/posts are flawed, I would welcome him/her to the board if he/she gave the website more views. Just like youtube. Are you telling me that the moderators on Youtube will remove a video because they don't personally enjoy the video or agree with it? No, they will allow the video to remain on their website as long as it is bringing heavy traffic. For example, Rebecca Black's song "Friday". This was a horrible song, that many people hated. Yet it continued to get views on Youtube, so it remained on the website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Another reason why your logic is flawed...You assume that because your "access" to Redskins related information is superior to the "access" that I have to Redskins talk, that your opinion is superior to mine. Well, Shanahan has 10X the Redskins "access" that you do. Does that also mean that every opinion of theirs is superior to your opinion on the Redskins? ---------- Post added August-20th-2011 at 03:10 AM ---------- You just proved my point. A person who has a total post count of 1000 vs a person who has a post count of 10,000, is generally bringing less traffic to the site. The person who brings less traffic to the site is not as valuable to a person who is on the board 24-7, like myself. From an internet marketing standpoint, I would rather have a poster who is frequently visiting/posting on my site than a poster who barely visits. Even if some of the posters opinions/posts are flawed, I would welcome him/her to the board if he/she gave the website more views/posts. I never said anything like that stuff I highlighted in green---and as i said there isn't a correlation, but even if there was (as I also said before) post count has nothing to do with rule violations and enforcement of those rules. Mother of God. It's like you're on another planet. Now for the final time, I advise you to read my edit and heed it (and read the rules carefully too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefinonhaze Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 I never said anything like that stuff I highlighted in green---and as i said there isn;t a corraletion and even if there was (as I also said before) psot count has nothing to do with rule violations and enforcement of the rules. Mother of God. It's like you're on another planet. Now for the final time, I advise you to read my edit and heed it (and read the rules carefully too). Honestly, it's so hard to debate you. You won't acknowledge any of the points I've made, even though I feel some of them are valid. I'm not going to lie, its hard to debate you when you keep bringing up these rule infractions. It confuses the **** out of me. I've been on this board for a long time, and I've yet to grasp all the rules. This is harder than the tax accounting class I took in college. And trust me that had a LOT of rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Honestly, it's so hard to debate you. You won't acknowledge any of the points I've made, even though I feel some of them are valid. That could be because very little of what you said adheres to any sort of underlying, coherent logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sekhmet187 Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 So, your saying there is no correlation between post count and the amount of traffic a poster brings? That sure seems like a false statement. And don't get me wrong, I love this forum and would hate to be banned. But to say my post has no validity makes me question whether you really read my post.---------- Post added August-20th-2011 at 02:53 AM ---------- I'd also like to say that I would rather be on a forum that is over-moderated than one that is under-moderated. I still stand my my statement that this forum can be over-moderated at times. It's my opinion. I hope I didn't violate any rules on this post. I don't think post counts really have anything to do with traffic, considering just because someone posts a lot it doesn't mean people are paying attention to what they're saying. Some guy with only 50 posts could start a thread that gets 2,000 hits if its on the right topic at the right time. And either way, that doesn't really have anything to do with mods since they're just around to try and keep people from flaming, over trolling and breaking rules. I could be wrong and I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, but I don't really think there is any correlation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 CHIEF PLEASE STOP!.... this isnt gonna end well for you .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Honestly, it's so hard to debate you. You won't acknowledge any of the points I've made, even though I feel some of them are valid. I'm not going to lie, its hard to debate you when you keep bringing up these rule infractions. It confuses the **** out of me. I've been on this board for a long time, and I've yet to grasp all the rules. This is harder than the tax accounting class I took in college. And trust me that had a LOT of rules Funny how the vast majority of folks here have little problem. As for me and debate, if you actually knew much about this place, as you're acting you do, you'd know something about my posting history here, my knowledge of this place, and my participation level in that style of discourse (debate). And you have not been here a long time. And since you keep ignoring my instructions and continue on with repeated violations of rule 18 (as I have told you several times now) you will not be adding to your time on ES. Too bad you didn't take the undeserved free pass I gave you. Now I am putting you out of my (and anyone else's so affected) misery and wishing you much happiness on the next, and hopefully better, board for you. Let's get this thread back on topic. (lord knows I tried joeknows) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 nm, falling on deaf ears now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sekhmet187 Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 BTW, I also clicked the ESPN article, basically just to see the stats and box scores (and the opinion of how the Redskins did) and was also miffed that the author originally pointed out that the Redskins were "only" without OJ Atogwe, and completely dismissing Landry's absence as well as all the other starters who didn't play. Not that I think it makes a big difference on the point he was trying to make (which I still disagree with anyway but thats neither here nor there), but I think it does show how little you would have had to pay attention to the game if you didn't even notice that a pro-bowler wasn't on the field for the Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 its ok jumbo... god knows yall have kicked my ass about the same thing a few times lol. i was just warning him from experience.... but nows a good time to be vigilante and sort us out...... now that everyone is waking back up to football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Hey Birdlives, May I buy you a beer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 ok ill give my opinion on the op too ... what the hell.... yo bird, dont sweat these chumps.... you did a good thing by representin the B&G... so... dont sweat the haters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 The funny thing is that when I read the game recap at ESPN, I thought to myself that the sentence about Washington's missing starters looked like a last second edit. It was just sort of thrown in there. Here is a link, since I have not seen one yet: http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=310819011 I commend the OP for calling this to the editors' attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Diesel Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Stop talking out your ass. When I speak of things like member user notes, it's info you don't even have access to, only some of which is culled form every post relevant. Did you read all 1000? Like hell you did. But even if you had, you don't have the rule violations recorded as we do and those alone were sufficient grounds. Not to mention I made it clear he actually HAD been given much slack, but not because of his number of posts which means that angle is just more of your ignorant prattle on this matter. And how the hell do you have any idea of who brings how much traffic? That's right--you don't. But we do. And the rest of your comments are equally ignorant and incorrect. I am left to wonder why I don't just help you move on to a board that's moderated more to your liking. And since in your post you too violate rule 18 to the point where you qualify for a boot, I'm even harder pressed to tolerate your nonsense.BTW, you also violated rule 11 too in your following post. :doh: Who gave this guy the ban button? This is the way moderators talk to members here? Im sure I just violated rules 23-37 or so. Feel free to quote them to me ad nauseum. Or just ban me. I really don't care. Its sad whats happened to this board over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 I am thinking that arguing with the mods is a bad idea. Jumbo did warn him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Diesel Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 I'm thinking the mods (at least the one in this thread) are ban happy power trippers. The only person in this thread thats done anything ban worthy is Jumbo. Name calling, language, insults. Unreal. Probably my last post here, but I've been around a lot of message boards over the years....and I've been at this one longer than most....and what I've seen from the moderator in this thread is an absolute joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Birdlives, I just wanna say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 I've been on this board for a long time, and I've yet to grasp all the rules. This is harder than the tax accounting class I took in college. And trust me that had a LOT of rules I know this is long after the fact but this is a real WTF?'er here. Apparently I need to spend some time looking for all these hard-to-grasp rules 'cuz I can't think of any right offhand. I must have been seriously not paying attention, hard to believe these oppressive powertrippin' Nazi mods haven't reamed me yet. Bird, nice work :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Stay away from ESPN conversations. In fact, stay away from ESPN.com in general when it comes to news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins island connection Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Would it be possible for Obama to outsource ESPN to China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 these constant cries of "no respect" sound like the fat girl crying because no one will dance with her. Want respect? Stop being a loser. Pretty simple. glad you corrected them, but the fact is we don't deserve praise, respect, or even notice until we earn it. And you don't earn it in preseason. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.