RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Interesting this article suggests the Chiefs have their own version of the OAF. I still do not understand why there is no OAF website. Some see it as a callous move on Snyder's part, but it could do some good. How long does it take an organization like the Redskins to create a website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 . It's probably the only example in human history of one group so "honoring" a group that was systemically annihilated by the first group. That doesn't make it not odd. You meant "race" but said "group". Words change. But "groups" can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Redskins PR doesn't learn http://instagram.com/p/poWTQrPR7c/?modal=true That one on the left. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearfeather Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I still do not understand why there is no OAF website. It's been up since the announcement. http://www.washingtonredskinsoriginalamericansfoundation.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 That one on the left. lol Well it may be an accurate depiction of the cheerleaders of the 30s (with a significantly raised hemline). It's been up since the announcement. http://www.washingtonredskinsoriginalamericansfoundation.org/ That contains the announcement letter, and a we will update this website soon statement. Where is a "contribute here,here is what we have done", etc? Add: letter is dated March 24, how many negative stories since then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Socrates, did you really post that poll in defense of your position? Why did you do that? There is a better argument on your side. That is not it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearfeather Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 That contains the announcement letter, and a we will update this website soon statement. Where is a "contribute here,here is what we have done", etc? Allen mentioned some of the things that had been done since then, in his letter to Reid. Why they haven't been added to the website? I don't know. I agree they need to let the fans know how they can get more involved, but I think you stated twice that there is no website. There is, and there has been. Click the contact the foundation link, and ask them. 02.10.14 Community Voices 02.17.14 Community Voices 02.24.14 Community Voices 03.03.14 Community Voices 03.10.14 Community Voices 03.17.14 Community Voices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Socrates, did you really post that poll in defense of your position? Why did you do that? There is a better argument on your side. That is not it. It was part of a cumulative argument in reply to a flippant assertion that 90% of Native Americans don't care. The poll is surely flawed, but is the margin of error 57% because of those flaws?As you say, the view that the redskins should change the name doesn't hang on that poll either way. I'm not attached to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 That one on the left. lol Dan's PR geniuses at work. It was part of a cumulative argument in reply to a flippant assertion that 90% of Native Americans don't care. I'm not attached to it. That assertion is backed up by a poll done by a reputable polling agency. You refuted it with a junk poll, see my post above and answer why q 3 results not included, sampling criteria, etc. Ask yourself why neither side has reproduced the Annenberg poll. My guess is the 90% has moved to 85 to 80%, which neither side would benefit from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 It was part of a cumulative argument in reply to a flippant assertion that 90% of Native Americans don't care. I'm not attached to it. I'll just leave "cumulative argument" alone. . (BTW, I will note that I did actually ask if you had any support that all those groups did actually say the name was offensive. Even pointed out that I'm pretty sure that one of them did. (I just don't remember which one)) And it was in response to the documented, demonstrated, FACT that the one and only time any reputable agency has actually ASKED actual Natives if the name offended them, 90% of them (plus or minus 2%) said "no". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I take it back about the hemline and 30s, more like the Mad Men era:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/25/pocahottie-pride-redskins-cheerleaders-arent-getting-memo-either-155480 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 It was part of a cumulative argument in reply to a flippant assertion that 90% of Native Americans don't care. The poll is surely flawed, but is the margin of error 57% because of those flaws? Annenberg quetion: “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?” Your poll question: The Redskins team name is a racial or racist word and symbol (racial captures a lot of positives, I agree it is racial) Ommited Question results from your poll: Professional sports teams should be allowed to use racial terms and names like Redskins . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I don't think it was a coincidence they choose women of color to represent the majority of models in that pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Yeah, I'm surprised 100% don't find it "racial". Cause, to me, that means "refers to a race", and yeah, the name of the team really does refer to a race. I don't see how anybody could say it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Since we're in the business of poking holes in polling methodologies now, we might point out a few problems with the Annenburg poll. 1. It was conducted by telephone, but around 50% of people on reservations lack telephones. 2. The poll is over 10 years old, opinions may have changed. 3. The only criteria for categorizing somebody as Native American was that they self-identify as such. 4. The question was leading, ending with ". . . or does it not bother you?" Am I now free to regard this as a "garbage poll" and be completely dismissive of it because of its flaws? Or should we just cite the polls that can be used to support our own positions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Ya, Socrates. It's a terrible poll. I expected you to rip it to shreds, honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Since we're in the business of poking holes in polling methodologies now, we might point out a few problems with the Annenburg poll. 1. It was conducted by telephone, but around 50% of people on reservations lack telephones. 2. The poll is over 10 years old, opinions may have changed. 3. The only criteria for categorizing somebody as Native American was that they self-identify as such. 4. The question was leading, ending with ". . . or does it not bother you?" Am I now free to regard this as a "garbage poll" and be completely dismissive of it because of its flaws? Or should we just cite the polls that can be used to support our own positions? Now you're just being obtuse. No way in hell you believe what you are saying. Your retort has been cut and pasted from the internet since it cane out, btw. It was ridiculous then, and moreso now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearfeather Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Since we're in the business of poking holes in polling methodologies now, we might point out a few problems with the Annenburg poll. 2. The poll is over 10 years old, opinions may have changed. 3. The only criteria for categorizing somebody as Native American was that they self-identify as such. Am I now free to regard this as a "garbage poll" and be completely dismissive of it because of its flaws? Or should we just cite the polls that can be used to support our own positions? 2. ... or they might not have. 3. If you were being polled, would you ever identify as something that you were not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I would posit that social media allows a small number of people to make a lot of noise.How does something gain popularity in social media? I thought it was based on likes, shares, retweets, etc.Why don't other minority opinions (e.g. Scientology) gain the same political momentum via social media? Look at the pictures of the demonstrations at games. Typically there are perhaps 10 to 15 people.I think this anecdote misses a few things:1. Most Native Americans live far west of DC. 2. Most Native Americans are poor. 3. Native Americans make up a very small percentage of the population. Honestly I'm surprised anybody showed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Since we're in the business of poking holes in polling methodologies now, we might point out a few problems with the Annenburg poll. 1. It was conducted by telephone, but around 50% of people on reservations lack telephones. 2. The poll is over 10 years old, opinions may have changed. 3. The only criteria for categorizing somebody as Native American was that they self-identify as such. 4. The question was leading, ending with ". . . or does it not bother you?" Am I now free to regard this as a "garbage poll" and be completely dismissive of it because of its flaws? Or should we just cite the polls that can be used to support our own positions? lol, address my issues with your poll and I will address your issues with the Annenberg. Actually I addressed 2 and 3, I think 4 is BS, and 1 is pretty hard to deal with, don't you think? Add: Anecdote? Show me I am wrong, Google is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Now you're just being obtuse. No way in hell you believe what you are saying. Your retort has been cut and pasted from the internet since it cane out, btw. It was ridiculous then, and moreso now. So instead of replying to what I said, you opt to accuse me of being obtuse and tell me what I believe?My points about the Annenburg poll are my own, although it would not surprise me if others came to the same conclusion. It took only a little thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Can you tell me why I should dismiss all this? Dismiss is a strong word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 How does something gain popularity in social media? I thought it was based on likes, shares, retweets, etc. Why don't other minority opinions (e.g. Scientology) gain the same political momentum via social media? I think this anecdote misses a few things: 1. Most Native Americans live far west of DC. 2. Most Native Americans are poor. 3. Native Americans make up a very small percentage of the population. Honestly I'm surprised anybody showed up. 1)Some of those demonstrations were in Green Bay and Arizona. 2)The civil rights protesters were poor 3)There are millions (not to mention supporters of other races) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 lol, address my issues with your poll and I will address your issues with the Annenberg. Actually I addressed 2 and 3, I think 4 is BS, and 1 is pretty hard to deal with, don't you think?You might deal with 1 by going to the res, something that the "garbage poll" I cited did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Add: Anecdote?Are you suggesting I've used the word incorrectly? What do you think that word means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.