Boss_Hogg Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 But as Mr. Carey noted, every time the R-word is used, something disrespectful is happening. We hope Mr. Snyder and the NFL will acknowledge that truth sooner rather than later. In the meantime, we’ll do our best not to contribute to the disrespect. Yeah that's not backhanded at all. /sarcasm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Just to make a few things clear, the reason I'm not posting the unnamed newpapers articles is a personal decision, not an Extremeskins decision, not a Mod decision or a board decision. I just don't feel that providing the unnamed newspaper with additional revenue when they do not support our team is something I need to do. I am not calling for a boycott of them, anyone that wants to read their articles, please feel free to do so. The link to their sports section isn't that hard to find. I found it years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 This has been the credo for UnWise Mike and his name changers. Which is ironic, considering he bullies or bans anyone who disagrees with him, but don't let hypocrisy get in the way of believing you're in the right. (Aimed at UnWise Mike, not the ES membership) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I just don't feel that providing the unnamed newspaper with additional revenue when they do not support our team is something I need to do. That's exactly how I feel. I haven't read the WP for quite a while because of their one-sided, beat you over the head with their opinion, and not state the facts tactics. So, I don't mind not seeing their items posted in the ES news sections. They're never supportive of the team. If they got rid of Reid and Wise, half their problem would be solved. I actually like Steinberg and Maske, if only because they often just report the facts (more so than any of the others), but their newspaper seems hell bent on the downfall and creating a constantly negative view of my favorite sports team. Not my favorite NFL team, or football team, but my favorite sports team. The Skins are the only team I actively root for. Why would I continue to support an organization who wants them to fail, as has been plainly obvious. I even remember Reid and Wise sitting there on WP Live when Maske asked the question of reporting positive news stories and Reid and Wise said, "Well, shucks of course we'd report good things if there were good things to report. Yeah, by all means our stories would be different." Lavar was shaking his head the whole time and just said, "Nope. No you wouldn't," and neither of the others denied it, they just kind of looked at the floor like they'd been caught. Lavar works with these guys, he should know what their real intent is. And he himself reports tons of negative Skins news, so that says something as well (that at least he was being honest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sikbug Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 A brief pictorial salute to those noises in your noggin: While your right this isn't exactly the same, I do get that overall feeling from this site and why I mostly just lurk and stick to posting in the photography thread. The thought that an official message board would actually bring up baning a publication, regardless who brought it up seems to echo on those feelings. However coming from a board that also doesn't allow curse words, I'm not super surprised. Don't get me wrong, I've modded on message boards before, it's not easy, even more so at this level, I just think things are taken a bit far sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I vote yes, and I'd love to see it as an official policy of the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Just to make a few things clear, the reason I'm not posting the unnamed newpapers articles is a personal decision, not an Extremeskins decision, not a Mod decision or a board decision. I just don't feel that providing the unnamed newspaper with additional revenue when they do not support our team is something I need to do. I am not calling for a boycott of them, anyone that wants to read their articles, please feel free to do so. The link to their sports section isn't that hard to find. I found it years ago. As a volunteer that's certainly your choice HapHaszard. With all due respect for the tremendous work you put into the section, just know that your decision to not include articles from the team's primary hometown paper diminishes the utility of "Bubba9497's Redskins Breaking News" as a comprehensive news gathering place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 As a volunteer that's certainly your choice HapHaszard. With all due respect for the tremendous work you put into the section, just know that your decision to not include articles from the team's primary hometown paper diminishes the utility of "Bubba9497's Redskins Breaking News" as a comprehensive news gathering place. No, it doesn't. Plenty of other places to get manufactured controversy and negative agendas. Local paper is bringing nothing original and you know just as well as I that if Bubba were around he'd be right on board with Hap. In fact, I'll say that Hap's decision INCREASES the utility of the Breaking News section because it will no longer be bogged down by biased tripe nor will it be assisting in generating site hits for a paper that has an obvious anti-team agenda and supports employees who label us fans as racists. Plus 80% of the board feels differently and, as has been pointed out, you can always go to that terrible site if you so choose and it hasn't been banned from the Stadium so if they do muster something worthwhile you'll still see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 No, it doesn't. Plenty of other places to get manufactured controversy and negative agendas. Local paper is bringing nothing original and you know just as well as I that if Bubba were around he'd be right on board with Hap. In fact, I'll say that Hap's decision INCREASES the utility of the Breaking News section because it will no longer be bogged down by biased tripe nor will it be assisting in generating site hits for a paper that has an obvious anti-team agenda and supports employees who label us fans as racists. Plus 80% of the board feels differently and, as has been pointed out, you can always go to that terrible site if you so choose and it hasn't been banned from the Stadium so if they do muster something worthwhile you'll still see it. Thanks for you feverish reply. I've always viewed the Breaking News section as the best single go-to place that compiles all pertinent Redskins news. When we start elimating sources because we don't agree with an editorial stance they've taken, it diminishes the utility of the section. It absolutely does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huly Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I do appreciate and understand a lot of what you said about your views on your role as a member and on the site, Thinking Skins. Members posting fairly productive content, consistently over time, and who really take "ownership" or "investment" in the site are a meaningful thing to me. I personally respect it, independent of agreement/disagreement on any specific issue. We have more than a few long time members identified with quality posting who don't always agree with how all things done here by staff (or by their fellow members, certainly). Nothing wrong with that at base, nor should anything less be expected. Of course, not all members (even with early join dates) may be as highly regarded by a majority of others as they think they should be, but that's hardly odd on the interwebz. For the record and OT, per the Stadium & ATN, ES'ers like bubba (miss ya amigo), Huly, Pez, TK, and MTH (for his Fed Ex expertise and help to all), are "very extra special" to me (not making any point, just throwing out my sentiment). They put it a "helluva lot more work" to make ES what it is than even the typical long-time quality poster (another role with which they are all credited). Doesn't mean their views are regarded as superior to others as a result, so no one needs to read that into my comments. Awe thanks! We all work together to make ES awesome So what are my special privileges? Please don't say having TK stay at my house? No honestly for me this became more than just a few writers against the name. I honestly have a hard time when reporters attack fans. I am sorry but that is WRONG! It just keeps getting bigger and bigger with them trying to push their agenda down on us. This was not easy for me so please do not think it was an easy thing. I am friends with Dan Steinberg, DC Sports Bog. I have unfollowed him on twitter since his twitter is WP. Now his personal FB page and I are still friends and I have talked to him about this. It was hard hitting "unfollow" to someone I consider a friend or redskins family but I can't support that paper any longer. The main thing that runs through my head is how can I support someone or something that 1. will flat out call me a racist or 2. believes all redskin fans are racist? How can I be racist against my own heritage? Oh and if you try to have a healthy debate (like we do here) or help educate someone they DON'T care! They will not talk to you if you are a NA Redskins fan, they don't want any part of our world. They want only their agenda to make a name for themselves and $$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 As a volunteer that's certainly your choice HapHaszard. With all due respect for the tremendous work you put into the section, just know that your decision to not include articles from the team's primary hometown paper diminishes the utility of "Bubba9497's Redskins Breaking News" as a comprehensive news gathering place. I look at as more that papers decision has resulted in my actions. Basically they have created the situation not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 As for the diminishment,maybe by number of articles available in the ATN sure,but overall quality and quantity it should be barely noticeable unless one goes there for Redskins news specifically from the Post,at which point in time going there directly is a good option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 As a volunteer that's certainly your choice HapHaszard. With all due respect for the tremendous work you put into the section, just know that your decision to not include articles from the team's primary hometown paper diminishes the utility of "Bubba9497's Redskins Breaking News" as a comprehensive news gathering place. I used to love the Post, I grew up with the likes of Shirley Povich, Tony Kornheiser, and Boswell. Now they have jagoffs like UnWise Mike, Jason Reid, and Jenkins. I dropped the hammer on the Post when one of their employees (Wise) accused me of being a racist because I cheer for the Redskins. **** UnWise Mike, he needs to take his hateful ass back to San Francisco or wherever the hell he came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rdskn4Lyf21 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Yes, yes, and YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 As for the diminishment,maybe by number of articles available in the ATN sure,but overall quality and quantity it should be barely noticeable unless one goes there for Redskins news specifically from the Post,at which point in time going there directly is a good option. Actually the number of articles has not diminished, the last day I posted their articles was the 24th there were 28 posts on that day, the next day the 25th, I posted 31 articles without their articles. I normally do not post a lot of duplicate articles, usually picking 2 on the same subject to give different viewpoints. The loss of their articles was more than made up by other news locations posting the same information. So I really do not see a lot of lost information by not adding to their hit count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 And there you have it,(off to go read said articles. ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warskins65 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I fail to understand how some of us still want to give the Post a voice when they have allowed their staff to attack everything Redskins, from the owner, to the team, to us, The Fans. As most of you, I have been avoiding the Post for a few years now. I have no problem with a web sight built by Redskin fans, for Redskin fans, that wants to make a little statement like We will no longer be putting Post stories on breaking news because this paper has pulled its support for the Redskins and has verbally attacked and slandered its fanbase. If the Mods where saying no posts from the W Post are allowed here, anyone who does so will be banned, that might be a bit much, but no one has even come close to suggesting that (and no, I am not). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I would say yes but only for jackhole columnists like Reid, Jenkins, Wise. Posting anything from John Feinstein is an immediate, permanent, irrevocable, lifetime ban...and possible stoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 They are not anti-Redskins. They just believe that the name is offensive. They certainly employ writers who are, without question, anti-Redskin (name and entity). That said, no boycott. Exposing their lunacy works better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Thanks for you feverish reply. I've always viewed the Breaking News section as the best single go-to place that compiles all pertinent Redskins news. When we start elimating sources because we don't agree with an editorial stance they've taken, it diminishes the utility of the section. It absolutely does. My "feverish" reply? Gee, that doesn't seem like a good way to start off a reply from someone who is advocating not tuning out others for taking different stances. But thanks for not addressing any point I made and just repeating your own stance over again. Maybe the similarities between your style and the paper's is why you seem so fond of keeping it around. As Hap has pointed out and as I did, yet you ignored, the stuff the paper does provide is covered by many other sources, and anything they have that is different that matters will undoubtedly be in the Stadium. Heck, since you seem to care so much you can even be the one to do it. But poor you, from now if a relevant article is actually mustered up by the local paper you'll have to click on the Stadium instead of breaking news. That stinks since you never go in there, as evidence by your low post count. If the paper provided anything unique or interesting then something may be lost, but they don't. They provide an agenda and manufactured controversy. Any game coverage or team coverage is provided by many, many other sources. And simplifying the decision to being solely over an editorial stance, along with the rest of your position, just tells me you're not appreciating the full stance of those you disagree with or understand the entirety of what the paper has been doing. The goal is to significantly reduce site clicks. There is no outright ban. But please, if you want to keep reading about a BS QB controversy, or how RG3 is an egomaniacal diva, or how the team backstabbed Shanny, or how us fans are insensitive racists only leaning on tradition, or how Snyder still secretly runs the show, or repetitive articles on the name change that don't address the actual issue, or vanilla team coverage not about how they are doing but about who is or isn't there, and much more bland crap aimed to incite not to inform, then just go to the site directly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Well considering that the WP is now owned by Bezos, the guy who started and runs Amazon, pretends to be a libertarian while in fact is a total PC nutcase I'm not surprised and for added effect I will no longer make purchases from amazon.com unless I have no other option. It's not like their shipping is fast anymore anyway unless you pay out the ass for it. It's already been suggested that Bezos might use the WP for his own political views: "But Bezos could potentially use the Post's editorial page to push his political views Indeed, it's hard to imagine what would induce a fabulously wealthy businessman like Bezos, who's not in the newspaper business, to jump in besides vanity and the chance to influence debate." http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/the-politics-of-new-i-washington-post-i-owner-jeff-bezos/278385/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy Smith Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 A boycott?!?! Absolutely not. The only reason the name controversy continues to get bigger and bigger is because of the Redskins organization's embarrassingly strident response to it. This would be an even more ridiculous continuation of that trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cumberland Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 i commented already but i feel i need to reiterate my feelings... for me, i believe it's ok to post post and other site's articles/tweets/links if not related to the name thing, which i believe this is all about.... keep those in the tailgate which we already do... otherwise we may not be able to provide stories specifically about our team, which we all want to hear/read.... obviously it's more than a yes/no future rule to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 You'll probably want to read Hap's response to me above.. Post #190. It deals with that particular concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Another thing to consider with a decision like this - and this poll which brings it to light - is how this will reflect on the organization and Mr. Snyder if anybody in the media - Deadspin, City Paper, Dave McKenna, WP columnists, etc - decides to run with this and cast it as another example of Daniel Snyder's pettiness in responding to the media. Everybody here knows that this board runs independently of the ownership, but that fact gets lost when the media writes about it. It's happened before with Extremeskins. There will be no nuance about volunteer posters and moderators in the story of how the Official Message Board of the Washington Redskins has banned the Washington Post from its news section. So what you end up with is that the truth of the matter - a personal decision by a hard working volunteer to boycott WP articles - gets chewed up and spit out as another example of the owner's petulance. We will know that's not true, but the truth often doesn't see the light of day when an alternative spin fits a pre-ordained media narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.