Thoughts of a Negative Poster

[Oldfan]

Yeah we're on the same page, that's what I was saying there. To flesh out my thoughts though, I do think that there is some wiggle room on realistic assessments...

Agreed. Some of my favorite posters made appearances in this thread. We often disagree on what constitutes a realistic assessment, but we don't doubt the other's commitment to try to be fair and realistic.

[Mad Mike]

I would clarify my wording if there were not several posters who understood me perfectly. I'm not in the least concened with opponent's twisting my words every which way in order to create strawman arguments. That's expected on Internet debates.

It actually would be instructive for someone impartial to read both parts of that exchange. But in the hands of a biased critic like you, it's deceptive.

The homer I confronted was typically whining about fellow members who, unlike him, had the gall to post negative comments about his team.

Here's the quote that you replied directly to...

...But just look at the threads filled with positive thinking... they have to actually put a disclaimer either in the title or the OP itself. "Sorry for being optimistic, but...", or "Forgive me, I know I sound like a blind homer but I just wanna say...", etc...

NOTHING he wrote was as disparaging to others as the garbage that spews from your mouth. He voiced his opinion and you didn't like it so you felt the need to "confront" him. The thing that really gets me is that you had the nerve to enter that thread and say "i realize that some people just have to satisfy their need to feel superior. But, please, do it in your own threads, not in mine."

Pot... Kettle.... black

My conclusion seemed to be clear to several others. Here is is again:

I write this to encourage more negative voices in this forum. I'm not referring to those who enjoy second guessing every coach's decision that fails or those who trash players beyond reason. I'm encouraging those who try very hard to be realistic and fair to speak up and be heard when you don't agree with the decisions of Redskins management. Don't worry that your opinions won't be popular with the homer crowd. Take solace in the fact that, so far in the Snyder era, the homers have been consistently wrong.

Now, if that wasn't clear to you, then my subsequent posts denying other positions should have made it crystal clear. So, why do we still have posters griping about being confused?

So because about %10 percent of the posters here said they understood you (some only AFTER you "clarified"), the other 90% are "twisting your words"? Try telling that to a creative writing teacher and see what they say.

Dude. You have issues. I suggest a long... LONG, look in the mirror.

[Oldfan]

i think its just the same things others have said. maybe its just how individuals define 'negative' and 'realistic', that combined with the timing of the thread. i'm sure it didnt come off the way you intended, but the timing and wording makes it hard to understand (for us retards....i keed, i keed)

If I had posted this thread when the team was 3-6, the extreme homer element would have griped that I was piling on. There was plenty of negative posting at that time.

SOME homers (not all or even most) just don't want to ever hear that they aren't superior fans. For them, the timing of a thread like this is always bad.

[KDawg]

He voiced his opinion and you didn't like it so you felt the need to "confront" him.

Sort of like what many here, including you, are doing?

Here's the gist of what he was saying in the OP:

I believe, fully, that negative was more of a way to say something such as "umpopular" or "grounded", He is encouraging folks to speak about opinions that they may have, as unpopular as they may be. I do agree, to an extent, that the majority of posters just agree with something because the majority agrees with it, and they don't use their brain to formulate their own thoughts. How do I know this? I, too, am at times guilty of it. I like to believe I have a critical mind and I form my opinions on everything on my own, and for the most part, I'd say that's accurate. But there are times where I read a post from someone I respect, or someone in the media and I have my opinion altered somewhat before even really delving into the issue.

The challenge is to be unafraid of branching out and thinking for yourself, and challenging not only yourself but others to think critically on a topic. Take a look at some of the threads that the ES "swarm" jumps on. Sometimes even innocent questions get trampled. A guy the other day made a thread about the term, "starters". His wording, admittedly, stunk. But he was completely raked over the coals for that statement. I happen to think he had a point with that thread.

Thinking outside the box should be encouraged. That doesn't mean you completely dismiss your previous thoughts, but it's important to understand all aspects of an issue when determining a point of view.

[Oldfan]

...Dude. You have issues. I suggest a long... LONG, look in the mirror.

In a way, I do that in all my threads. I look at the posters who have respect for me and I look at the posters who don't. When I compare the two groups, I think I must be doing fine.

[Chachi]

Personally, I don't care for oldfans posts. Not the negative aspects of them, but the pseudo intellectual diatribes that lean heavily on statistics (even though he admits statistics are "bunk") that are pulled seemingly, from the posterior region. I also can't stand the fact that his posts are not meant for discussion (this is a discussion board after all), because a discussion consists of two sides with differing opinions arguing various points of merit. Try exercising this with OF. Please. You'll be shot down, belittled, and called various names like "homer". He clings to his ideas without the slightest intent to move one inch from them. After all, he is one of the "intellectual fans". In debates, we were taught that these types of arguments quickly can degenerate into strawman tactics. They become pointless after a while. You might as well be shouting into the wind. I stopped reading and replying to his posts long ago. I don't know why I am now except that he hits a nerve with me. Maybe that's really his intent?!? In any case, having a differing (or negative) opinion with regards to how this team is run is the right of any responsible fan, but being negative for the sake of negativity is just exhausting. What do I know, I'm sure ill be summarily dismissed as an uninformed homer.

Chachi-

No reply to this from OF tells me that:

1) there is a lot of truth to it

2) he only goes after those that he perceives aren't up to his "intellectual standard".

Typical bully mentality. I for one am sick of it.

[elkabong82]

There is a middle ground between negative and homer. You can look at things realistically and know there are always options. You can then decide either to believe in the positive options or believe in the negative options.

Those who typically lean positive will continue to do so just as those who typically lean negative will continue to do so.

The others who pointed out that pessimism is easier because it is more likely to come true are correct. Those who are always pessimistic will never enjoy the teams' successes at the level of the believers.

I'm all for more grounded, reasonable posts, but titling a thread encouraging such and attributing it as automatically having a negative context, combined with the common tone of a lot of your threads, Oldfan, may be indicative that you have a negative bias and therefor are yourself currently incapable of doing what your own thread asks.

As others pointed out, the timing is terrible. The Redskins are in the playoff hunt for the first time in a half-decade, with an exciting QB who is leading in ROTY considerations, and this thread comes off as trying to reign in that optimism. Combine that with the seemingly negative tones of each weekly Oldfan thread and you get backlash and the actual good sentiment of the thread, the context of which could have been better-named and delivered, is lost.

Personally I think it would have been better received had the context of the current playoff run been considered and implemented. Such as "I know we are in a playoff run and optimism is high, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves, let's stay reasonable" and such would be a great attempt also at curbing the windfall that would come if we don't make the playoffs.

[Mad Mike]

Sort of like what many here, including you, are doing.

The difference being, I didn't go into someone else's thread to ***** and moan about posters who don't agree with me and in the next sentence tell them they shouldn't enter a thread I started and do the same thing. And tha's saying nothing about his puffed up ego and the way he dismisses large groups of people as stupid "homers".

I agree that thinking outside of the box is good. And I have no problem with critical thinking. If he had encouraged people to simply think for themselves or simply stated "I write this to encourage more *REALISTIC* voices in this forum, he would not have received the negative backlash from so many people here. But he chose his words poorly, and then, rather than simply admitting he could have worded it better, he chose to berate others for not understanding his poorly written post. THAT is the issue.

---------- Post added December-13th-2012 at 07:50 PM ----------

In a way, I do that in all my threads. I look at the posters who have respect for me and I look at the posters who don't. When I compare the two groups, I think I must be doing fine.

Meanwhile one post below this one....

---------- Post added December-13th-2012 at 07:53 PM ----------

No reply to this from OF tells me that:

1) there is a lot of truth to it

2) he only goes after those that he perceives aren't up to his "intellectual standard".

Typical bully mentality. I for one am sick of it.

Ding.

[SkinsWarrior81]

I am still unsure how this thread hasn't been closed / people have not been banned. Had a vast majority of posters made this thread and then turned it into a bait and switch for them to argue and make fun of others, they would have been banned a long time ago. This is a common theme with threads from OldFan. I am not a Fan and it is getting Old.

[Oldfan]

There is a middle ground between negative and homer. You can look at things realistically and know there are always options. You can then decide either to believe in the positive options or believe in the negative options.

Okay, let's test this approach with the example I used in the OP. Your brain tells you that the Jason Taylor trade is likely to fail, but you can choose to believe that it is likely to succeed. Is that right?

The others who pointed out that pessimism is easier because it is more likely to come true are correct.

Do you mean because Dan Snyder picks poor managers? It doesn't have to be true in a good organization.

Those who are always pessimistic will never enjoy the teams' successes at the level of the believers.

You just switched positions from realistic pessimism when appropriate to consistent pessimism which no one advocates.

I'm all for more grounded, reasonable posts, but titling a thread encouraging such and attributing it as automatically having a negative context, combined with the common tone of a lot of your threads, Oldfan, may be indicative that you have a negative bias and therefor are yourself currently incapable of doing what your own thread asks.

I don't have a negative bias and a quick look at my recent thread history should prove that to impartial minds. My threads are negative when I feel there is good reason.

As others pointed out, the timing is terrible.

This thread is intended to skewer that minority group of homers who regard themselves as superior fans. They are as obnoxious right now as they have ever been.

[Chachi]

I am still unsure how this thread hasn't been closed / people have not been banned. Had a vast majority of posters made this thread and then turned it into a bait and switch for them to argue and make fun of others, they would have been banned a long time ago. This is a common theme with threads from OldFan. I am not a Fan and it is getting Old.

+1 close the thread. I'm going to go back to my previous routine of skipping his threads/posts in the future.

[elkabong82]

Okay, let's test this approach with the example I used in the OP. Your brain tells you that the Jason Taylor trade is likely to fail, but you can choose to believe that it is likely to succeed. Is that right?

Do you mean because Dan Snyder picks poor managers? It doesn't have to be true in a good organization.

You just switched positions from realistic pessimism to consistent pessimism which no one advocates.

I don't have a negative bias and a quick look at my recent thread history should prove that to impartial minds. My threads are negative when I feel there is good reason.

This thread is intended to skewer that minority group of homers who regard themselves as superior fans. They are as obnoxious right now as they have ever been.

First off, I was against the Jason Taylor trade because of his age and what we gave up. It was a knee-jerk reaction to injuries. However, I chose to be optimistic that he would do well because he was DMVP not that long ago. There were reasons for optimism and pessimism, but nobody knew what the likelihood would be at first, not even you. All we had were guesses. Nobody could have reasonably guessed that not only would we use him completely wrong, but that also a guy with no injury history would get an injury that was life-threatening. Plus, JT had a good season after leaving us and being used correctly again. Maybe your brain said he was likely to fail, but I think that is based more on your own biases than the evidence that was at hand. I didn't like the trade but that is because I thought he was a short-term solution. He was still talented and only the very pessimistic would have thought he would completely fail. Pessimism was more warranted when he was put at LDE, but that was not announced until a bit after the trade.

Pessimism is easier in all cases because the ultimate goal in the NFL is Superbowl, and only 1 in 32 will get accomplish that in a given season. Every team has reasons for pessimism, and in the case of all but team, those pessimistic fans will be right, even if their reasoning is wrong.

You have said before that the team will never win a Superbowl under Snyder's ownership, correct? If so, then that is consistent pessimism. Besides, that point about consistent pessimism was meant only to show a consequence of that POV. I realize that you weren't advocating that and was pretty clear in my entire post that I got that you were advocating reasonable/grounded perspectives.

I seem to recall weekly threads calling out the offense, and even when you made a thread where you changed opinion and said to keep Mike Shanahan for RG3's development, I believe you still said in there that we won't win a Superbowl with Snyder as owner nor with Mike as HC. You can't reasonably know that, it is pessimistic tone whether you admit it or not, and very recent threads aren't enough to trump trends and perceptions. Already having failure as a foregone conclusion on your opinion of the head coach is a negative bias.

Homers have reason to be optimistic right now. Consistent homerism is not superior, but believing in the team so long as they are not mathematically eliminated, despite reasonable evidence they won't succeed, requires faith. That faith is the mark of a superior fan IMO and yes, it is easier to be pessimistic than it is ti maintain that faith. 2005 and 2007 those playoff stretches required faith. The playoff run we are going for right now required a lot of faith before the Philly game and even now still requires faith. But so long as it is possible, superior fans have faith. You can have doubts, but you should always believe in the possibility rather than being pessimistic and assuming a conclusion of failure based solely on your perception of likelihood. The whole point of being a fan is to cheer for your team and believe in them. What is the harm in saying "I have my doubts, but the possibility of success still exists?" That is a reasonable stance, whereas "the team will never win under this head coach or owner" is not reasonable/grounded, though it is a much easier perspective to employ because the odds are with it.

Tempered expectations would have been a better thread title, but you said your intent was to counter rampant homerism. It's the holidays, we are in the middle of a playoff run, why play spoil sport? Let people have their Christmas goose instead of trying to say "bah-humbug."

[B&G]

+2. I'm wondering about the ban as well. Its perfectly ok to float an idea or an opinion. It isn't ok to antagonize and disparage your fellow fan(s), at least in my view. The OP uses the (very familiar) discredited method of demonizing those who disagree with him. Very unpleasant and in some cases, simply obnoxious.

[Oldfan]

First off, I was against the Jason Taylor trade because of his age and what we gave up.

For me, that weighed more heavily than any other factor. You label my decision the result of a negative bias. But, a bias is something that throws the decision off its true course. I stuck with what my brain told me was a realistic appraisal. You were the one to allow a bias to throw your appraisal off course. Why did you do that? It's not as if either of us was going to alter the outcome.

My theory on the Homer Phenomenon is that fans confuse hopes and expectations. I could expect the Jason Taylor move to fail, but still hope that it somehow worked out for the best. Others don't seem to be able to do that.

Pessimism is easier in all cases because the ultimate goal in the NFL is Superbowl, and only 1 in 32 will get accomplish that in a given season. Every team has reasons for pessimism, and in the case of all but team, those pessimistic fans will be right, even if their reasoning is wrong.

Okay, I see what you mean. But I don't consider a move a failure as long as there is progress being made toward the goal.

You have said before that the team will never win a Superbowl under Snyder's ownership, correct? If so, then that is consistent pessimism.

Superbowls are unlikely but possible. This is my position: I want to replace the Patriots as the number one franchise. I can't see a Snyder team achieving that goal because there has been no evidence that he has that goal in mind. So, yes. As to that goal, you could label me a consistent pessimist. But, it would be unfair to label me that way across the board.

Homers have reason to be optimistic right now. Consistent homerism is not superior, but believing in the team so long as they are not mathematically eliminated, despite reasonable evidence they won't succeed, requires faith. That faith is the mark of a superior fan IMO.

You think of that fan as superior. I think of him as sorta stupid. You are confusing hopes with expectations. At 3-6, a fan can always hope that his team beats the odds. That's what all good fans should do. But to expect that his team will beat the odds is to deny reality.

Tempered expectations would have been a better thread title, but you said your intent was to counter rampant homerism. It's the holidays, we are in the middle of a playoff run, why play spoil sport? Let people have their Christmas goose instead of trying to say "bah-humbug."

I'm not really concerned with spoiling Christmas for the superior homers in our group. My message to them is: There is no Santa and you aren't superior.:evilg:

[KCClybun]

I can't wait for the Oldfan thread after we win a Super Bowl where he complains about how in reality, we weren't good enough to win a Super Bowl and how it won't ever happen again under Dan Snyder.

[pimpumd]

I can't wait for the Oldfan thread after we win a Super Bowl where he complains about how in reality, we weren't good enough to win a Super Bowl and how it won't ever happen again under Dan Snyder.

Hey you homer! You are not superior to the "realistic" folks around here who can use their unbiased brains. Who do you think you are?

[Oldfan]

I can't wait for the Oldfan thread after we win a Super Bowl where he complains about how in reality, we weren't good enough to win a Super Bowl and how it won't ever happen again under Dan Snyder.

You are expanding your horizons. You have been making up dumb positions for me that you can ridicule. Now, you are projecting them into the future.

If you could master straight-up debate as you've mastered strawman creation, you'd be tough to handle.

[DogofWar1]

Superbowls are unlikely but possible. This is my position: I want to replace the Patriots as the number one franchise. I can't see a Snyder team achieving that goal because there has been no evidence that he has that goal in mind. So, yes. As to that goal, you could label me a consistent pessimist. But, it would be unfair to label me that way across the board.

I think Snyder definitely has that goal in mind, he just had no idea how to go about it, and made some poor decisions. Snyder is, and has been, a fan, the problem is he ran the team like a fantasy football squad and not a long term organization with very specific systems. If you're a fantasy football owner, it makes perfect sense to get the best guys at their positions and just build a team from them, but in the real world you have to take age, cap, scheme fit, etc. into account. Before Shanahan, Snyder might have known about the difference between a 4-3 and 3-4, but he probably couldn't tell you exactly how the personnel were different (might still not be able to). I think he's probably seen the light, and realized from that that he is woefully unskilled in the art of roster building, which is why he's leaving it to professionals now.

Of course, he also had to go get the right professionals. Shanahan, Allen, and some of his other coaches, I think, have the potential to be the right professionals for the job. They might not pull it off, but they have that potential.

I'm not really concerned with spoiling Christmas for the superior homers in our group. My message to them is: There is no Santa and you aren't superior.:evilg:

Well now you're starting to sound like the Krampus.

[daveakl]

Superbowls are unlikely but possible. This is my position: I want to replace the Patriots as the number one franchise. I can't see a Snyder team achieving that goal because there has been no evidence that he has that goal in mind. So, yes. As to that goal, you could label me a consistent pessimist. But, it would be unfair to label me that way across the board.

Just so I am clear. You do not think that Snyder has a goal of being the number one franchise in football? (I am guessing you are talking about success and the patriots and not value like the cowboys)

[Chachi]

You are expanding your horizons. You have been making up dumb positions for me that you can ridicule. Now, you are projecting them into the future.

If you could master straight-up debate as you've mastered strawman creation, you'd be tough to handle.

At the risk of getting banned...

Seriously dude, shut it already. You are obviously a troll and have been allowed to get away with your b.s. for way too long. Why the mods haven't muzzled you by now remains a mystery. I guarantee that you could probably count at least two dozen insults, put downs or belittlements within your OP and commentary. And that's just this topic! You talk about this being "your thread"... EXCUSE ME - this is a GROUP discussion board not a totalitarian dictatorship where you get to control the conversation. Since we are voicing our opinions: my opinion is that you are a petty, bitter egomaniac. Get over yourself. If you have to get off on making yourself feel better about your "intellectual superiority" on a freaking football message board, then you need a life. I know you care more about the attention you are receiving rather than having an actual conversation. I've met people like you before. They are generally sad and lonely and compensate for their unhappiness by trying to bring people down to their level.

I picture old fan looking like the emperor from return of the Jedi LOL!

[Mahons21]

I've stayed out of this thread for the most part, because I'm well aware OF can defend himself, and probably do so better than any attempt I could make at defending him.can

But this last post Chachi, you've got to cool it buddy. Mods, my apologies if I'm over stepping my bounds, but this has reached a level of absurdity.

We get it buddy you don't like OF. So please do the entire board a favor and take your personal vendetta elsewhere.

OF has continuously brought interesting discussion to the board. It's no surprise that majority of the worth while posters on this site, enjoy his posts majority of the time. KDawg, DG, MartinC, SIP, and GHH to name a few (my apologies if I left out any of the other "heavy hitters")

[KCClybun]

You are expanding your horizons. You have been making up dumb positions for me that you can ridicule. Now, you are projecting them into the future.

If you could master straight-up debate as you've mastered strawman creation, you'd be tough to handle.

This isn't debate. There are no set rules or parameters, and it is damn near impossible to debate with someone who constantly changes the parameters of debate, and then says "it is not important how the person debates!" as an excuse to make up for the fact that every time he comes across an argument he can not defend, he moves the goal post.

These threads are designed to cause strife and arguments. There's literally no reason for this thread at this point and time. None. Zero. The only reason it exists is because someone posted something in another thread you disagreed with, it made you grumpy, and you decided to white knight for the poor negative posters who you felt were victimized in Jumbo's "Screw off, you quitters" thread. Which was really just you getting pissed at something thesubmittedone said that wasn't even directed at you specifically.

You are entitled to your opinions. Just don't get indignant went there's people who don't treat said opinions as "outside the box" and more like "the pessimistic rantings of a grumpy old man".

[Oldfan]

...Of course, he also had to go get the right professionals. Shanahan, Allen, and some of his other coaches, I think, have the potential to be the right professionals for the job. They might not pull it off, but they have that potential.

Just so I am clear. You do not think that Snyder has a goal of being the number one franchise in football? (I am guessing you are talking about success and the patriots and not value like the cowboys)

Very briefly:

1) *You don't hire two men with a decade of mediocrity on their resumes to take you to Number One;

2) Both by actions and in words, we know that the plan is to win-now and build at the same time; IMO, that's a sure-fire plan for mediocrity;

*(I am referring to Shanahan's record in Denver with full control as he has now (1999 - 2008)

[Chachi]

I've stayed out of this thread for the most part, because I'm well aware OF can defend himself, and probably do so better than any attempt I could make at defending him.can

But this last post Chachi, you've got to cool it buddy. Mods, my apologies if I'm over stepping my bounds, but this has reached a level of absurdity.

We get it buddy you don't like OF. So please do the entire board a favor and take your personal vendetta elsewhere.

OF has continuously brought interesting discussion to the board. It's no surprise that majority of the worth while posters on this site, enjoy his posts majority of the time. KDawg, DG, MartinC, SIP, and GHH to name a few (my apologies if I left out any of the other "heavy hitters")[/QUOT

I agree that this has reached absurdity. I also agree that I probably put my toe over the line. That was kind of the point. it's not a personal vendetta at all - you misunderstand that part. Im illustrating a point that I'm tired of OF getting away with calling people stupid, unintelligent, homer...etc not to mention the thinly veiled insults that he casually throws around. Yet he gets away with it why? Because that's just OF? Or he contributes content that some find value in sometimes? That's not enough for me in my book. Either respect the rules of posting and commenting (despite who you are) or get out. Simple as that.

[LoudMouth12thMan]

I am one of the more negative posters on this board, so I hope you'll take this as...well, constructive criticism...if you will. This is not a call out post by any means.

Problem is Oldfan, I don't think I've ever read a well thought out post of yours that was largely positive. Your a sharp guy, but your posts are well thought out negative posts on the whole.

Most of the time you're battling it out with other posters b/c you're taking a hardline stance on one of your posts. Often, in my opinion (for whatever that's worth), your position is flawed in spots but you don't ever back down. That's cool, but it shows your a bit of a hardhead.

Why be a fan of any sports team or franchise if you're going to piss and moan or point out flaws 99.9% of the time?

Learn to enjoy the positives. There are MANY with this 2012 Redskins team. I'm not going to state what I believe they are b/c that's not what this post is about.

You may be one of those folks who thrive on negativity. Keeps you busy....kinda like the old lady on the porch who's always complaining to the passerby about her creaky knees and old age. Hey, it gives her someone to talk to, right? No. We don't need that around here.

What we need is a more educated fanbase, not more negativity.

Smile brother It's good to be a Skins fan right now.

Remember, this is coming from a guy (me) who doesn't cut this team or franchise much slack. Ask the mods :evilg:

:2cents: