TK Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Recently I've received several messages, texts, & phone call discussions (along with it popping up in the actual Name Change thread) about how ES should adopt a boycott policy for media sites that have been pushing their agenda for changing the name. As usual, when there's the thinking of a major change in board operation like this, we always like to see what you guys think of the idea. Personally, I can see both sides of it, & would be happy if the idjits would just stop posting Bleacher Report nonsense articles. So, simple poll. vote either YES or NO. Doesn't mean we'll initiate either way, just taking the pulse of the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I wouldn't buy their paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I voted "no", but I'd love it if we did something similar when talking about the WP lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattermind Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 "Hail yes!" - Jordan Reed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I vote that if for some reason they have some piece that is relevant or quality, we can post it, full text, with no link. Otherwise ignore their bull****. And can someone please light a flaming bag of crap on UnWise Mike's doorstep? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted August 23, 2014 Author Share Posted August 23, 2014 I voted "no", but I'd love it if we did something similar when talking about the WP lol... Ooooohhh THAT can be arranged much the same way that "Easter Egg" was done when you mention a certain Dallas QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Here, here, boss. Can we also add "BR doesn't rate it's own thread" to the mix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted August 23, 2014 Author Share Posted August 23, 2014 Here, here, boss. Can we also add "BR doesn't rate it's own thread" to the mix? 3rd paragrapgh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cumberland Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I'd like to say yes but qualify it by saying, only those articles that are in regards to the team name issue... keep them out of the stadium, as has been done... other than that, sometimes, there's good football related info there... wp insider already said they'd continue using the team name - only the oped's would not use it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
“Misdirection” Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 The more they bring up this name change nonsense, the more clicks they'll get from all over the place. So if this is their move, I'm all for speaking with our clicks and cutting out some ad revenue.Edit: I feel as if the information we get on this board whether through other news outlets or from our own valued and well-spoken posters is more relevant and thought-provoking than anything they post anyway. For most of us on this board, the things they write about are things that we already all know (or have discussed many times before), but would be news to some lesser involved fans.I don't think we'd miss a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 i'll have to get another paper for my parakeet to poop on. besides that, hell with them. ive lived in this area for nearly 30 years and even in my teens, i would read some of these bomb throwing, race baiting 'journalists' and wonder how the hell they stayed employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Ooooohhh THAT can be arranged much the same way that "Easter Egg" was done when you mention a certain Dallas QB. There ya go lol...add UnWise Mike' name to the list as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I keep seeing this 90% thing... Does this mean we win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I'd say no to the Post. You can't have your hometown paper come out that blatantly against the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I don't really read it now, not missing much. And **** UnWise Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted August 23, 2014 Author Share Posted August 23, 2014 There ya go lol...add UnWise Mike' name to the list as well. UnWise Mike has been added. Almost went with it being changed to "UnWise Mike sits to pee". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 We've already made this decision. No WP articles in our news forums on BGObsession. Hope you guys will follow suit. As TK mentioned was his position, we are not prohibiting members from posting WP articles if they desire, but we're not having ANY site-sponsored uploads of WP content on our site. We're done directing traffic, hits, and readership to a media outlet that expends most of it's energy trying to denigrate, critique, and badmouth the team we love. I hope you guys will follow suit, and start talking to others about doing the same. No Redskins fan site should be supporting the Washington Post at this point. Unite the Clans! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Absolutely YES. Enough is enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Seems extreme, to me. Kinda like, if we do that, then we're reflecting badly on the team. But then, I also have to observe that many of the name changers don't have a problem calling for boycotts, to bust their agenda. I'm not aware of any rule saying it's immoral for the majority to do what the minority is doing. I can see both arguments, but think I'm gonna vote Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I wanted to vote no, because it seems petty. Like we're buying into their attempt to make the name thing a "Big Deal". It feels like we should be better than them and not acknowledge that it's even a legit topic of discussion. This feels like escalating it, somehow. But I voted yes, because I'm in the mood to be petty. It's some serious bull****. Let's do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 There's nothing extreme about communicating your displeasure as a consumer by voting with your wallet. The Washington Post spends a ton of money and time trying to denigrate and attack a team most of us have followed for decades. Why should they benefit continuously from our fandom while simultaneously (and hypocritically) heaping scorn, derision, and negativity on the same team and fanbase that is it's lifeblood. It's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Might need to add NBC, we'll see what they pull tonight. I know this, many NFL fans are up in arms about it, the more people I talk to, the more common the response, That is some bull ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 This looks like a PR mistake to me. Dan Snyder has done enough media fighting as it is, having the teams official forum start banning articles from the WashingtonPost seems like it's approach that has won nothing for this team. This move will look bad if the media reports it, especially with the team getting in bed with the Times. It also begs the question, why stop there? The Post is obviously not the only media company that favors the team change the name. An example: Might need to add NBC, we'll see what they pull tonight. I know this, many NFL fans are up in arms about it, the more people I talk to, the more common the response, That is some bull ****.I voted no.Edit: wanted to add, UnWise Mike is a self righteous jackass. I don't want my stance confused with support for that windbag. I'm also a well known hater of Wilbon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 You think the media coverage can get worse Destino? The point (in my mind) is that there's only one thing that's going to lead outlets like the Washington Post to conclude that they should focus elsewhere - and that's if fans say 'enough' and stop supporting their product. I think it's absolutely disgusting that the Post trashes the fans and team that are their very livelihood. Fans ought to start holding them accountable for it. With that said, good luck guys - I'll move on back to my usual waters. But I hope you join us (and actively work to get other large groups of Redskins fans to say 'enough!'). Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.