What the h*ll is going on around here?

[E. Wolf]

By quote I mean something someone wrote a year or more ago. Ie really taking tabs on what is written beyond just scrolling up.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You guys are actually quoting me. How often do people quote you?

Quite a bit, actually, since you asked. While I would not go so far as to call you a narcissist in any clinical sense of the word, I would point out that's a narcissistic statement that is irrelevant to your argument.

There's some borderline name calling for you.

 

[HardRightEdge]

By quote I mean something someone wrote a year or more ago. Ie really taking tabs on what is written beyond just scrolling up.

We all are unique snowflakes, however you're not special on this count.

When folks make claims about past predictions, THX is pretty adept at fishing out old posts.

Every once in awhile he'll demand proof of a prediction. I hate when he does that. A month or so back I felt compelled to search the archive for on of my old posts and quote myself. Does that count?

 

[PFanCan]

HRE - Did you just call me a "unique snowflake"? Offensive! I am NOT unique.

Mods, lock this thread.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

HRE - Did you just call me a "unique snowflake"? Offensive! I am NOT unique.

Mods, lock this thread.

Sorry, I`m too busy killing myself !

 

[Half Empty]

As soon as some of the more recent posts started giving examples of what is OK and what isn't, it became (if it wasn't already) obvious that moderating is subjective, just like discussing all things Packer. However, locking a thread, disciplining a poster, moderating in general is an all or nothing event - it's either done or it isn't. Advice, warning and the like should be offered, but unless there is a clear mandate to just let folks post whatever they want, there is going to be a point where something is over the line. Ultimately, someone is paying for this, and others are giving their time to try and control it, so if you want to be over the edge, there are other forums, at least one of which nauseatingly (is that a word?) allows anything, and I mean anything (except quoting the post immediately preceding) - haven't posted there in 5 years but still lurk for the occasional bit of news. If it's OK with the mods (as I'm subject to their control), PM me and I'll send you the link.

 

[054123]

Just to get us back on track, if you're grumpy whilst hungry, i believe the correct term is 'hangry'.

Not to be confused with 'humpy'.

 

[OCBP]

Thank you.

IF a visitor comes here shooting crap "Have at it", they will be booted very quickly but if they are polite and have a valid argument, we ASK for the sake of the forum to keep it polite, nothing more.

I've been personally attacked in the site and almost thrown off for commenting "Burp".

What about that?

 

[054123]

Maybe they couldn't stomach your post?





Sorry, I'll get my coat.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

I've been personally attacked in the site and almost thrown off for commenting "Burp".

What about that?

Read your warning(s). Same offence TWICE. If you have an issue, please feel free to P.M. the moderators with details and we`ll discuss it. Cheers !

 

[longtimefan]

Any one read the rules that says mods can alter any post as they see fit?

 

[longtimefan]

I've been personally attacked in the site and almost thrown off for commenting "Burp".

What about that?

Aug 5 2014 warned for trolling behavior

Then Dec 5th 2014 same thing

Not banned not even told you would be banned

From your actual warning page

Content:
Post in thread 'Uyy Karumba...Brett announcement coming'
Given By:
longtimefan, Aug 5, 2014
Details of Warning:
I have asked you once to stop the trolling with the BURP--it leds to defensive postings..contribute with intelligent replys

 

[longtimefan]

Boy I am really having to hold my tongue here. There are so many things I want to say but I cannot. No matter. I am sure you will be able to discern what they are by your miraculous supernatural abilities in telepathy. It is almost too easy.
Be that as it may, I will make this easy even for you.
See this thread, this one right here:

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/welcome-pat-fans.56588/#post-584200

It is the thread I referenced in my first long submission to this thread which I objected to. I asked for a reason why it was locked, based on rules and guidelines (as opposed to an arbitrary, capricious whim). Your response was no personal attacks. There are no personal attacks here. He said the Patriots and their fans have been losers when not cheating, which is pretty much a true statement, or at least a fair one.
Here is the comment by the moderator:

Way to show how friendly our forum is

Thanks

Btw that was a sarcastic statement for 2 of you

Not locked for personal attacks. Locked because some do not receive fans of teams they do not like Fred Rogers in his wonderful neighborhood.

I like how you ask a mod what happened that didn't lock it

This was my post and my thread I created...

See how it says you will be treated with respect?

We want to welcome you to our Packer forum....You will be treated with respect as long as you show us respect to start with.

Good fun teasing is never an issue, but when it turns ugly, that is when mods will step in.

We want a good game, no injuries, and a Packer win.

Good luck!!!

legaliz stepped in with in 6 posts and disrespected the fans that we wanted to welcome....Then pats fans had to defend their stance

I frankly do not care what you think about the rules saying you have to be or dont have to be friendly to opposing fans.

The thread was meant to talk about the game that was being played THEN...

When it started to be not about the game, but other crap I locked it...I wasnt going to have our posters and guests to sit through endless pages of arguments, when all we wanted was a thread to discuss the game.

I dont care if you think guests is the wrong word to use here, but this is OUR house and people who visit --are guests..

 

[longtimefan]

By quote I mean something someone wrote a year or more ago. Ie really taking tabs on what is written beyond just scrolling up.

Now a quote is only valid after a year?

Where is that in the rules?

 

[longtimefan]

wolf--

you been here almost a year

But from your 1st days you showed all you wanted to be

https://www.packerforum.com/threads...e-retired-this-year.53113/page-10#post-561481

posters even started to tell you to relax

Some one posted this to you

First of all, I write this with the upmost respect: Dude, take it easy before you put yourself into an early grave.

It doesn't matter because everyone has the right to root for whoever or whatever team they want to for any reason.
The sooner you realize this and are OK with it, the sooner your stress levels will go down.

You replied with this gem

Yeah and I and others have the right call them out for the despicable subhuman tirncoat vermin that they are.

not sure why you think that should be allowed here...

so I will start to follow the rules exactly how you want..That is a personal attack , and if we see anything similar from here on out, you will be warned..

I know this is a year old but hey-----according to you something only matters after a year..Like a quote?

 

[longtimefan]

To show I am not worried what you say, I can un delte your post E.Wolf if you want?



I posted the rule already

Mods have the right to edit any post they feel is warranted

But since your pm mentioned rules and your so stuck on them, I am going to post every rule you say doesnt exist

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/full-list-of-rules-must-read-for-members.29585/

You broke this one in your 1st week ( might have been 1st day but I wont dble check) and in case you forgot

here is what you said

Yeah and I and others have the right call them out for the despicable subhuman tirncoat vermin that they are.

Personal Attacks:
We have had a rash of situations pop up that should be addressed again.

We are not going to tolerate name calling or personal attacks on other people just because you disagree with their point of view.

A preponderance of negative ratings directed at a poster will be viewed as a personal attack.

Rating posts that are over two months old in an attempt to incite the poster will be viewed as a personal attack.

If you disagree with a post and then follow it up with a post explaining your point of view, it will not fall under this guideline.

Should have been warned but I dont think you were

Trolls:
At the end of the day, this is a PACKER site. So any members who sole purpose is to create chaos and smack talk will find their stay SHORT LIVED. Sorry, but I just don't care about what you stand for. My main concern is about the Packers and the members of this site. However, you will get at least ONE warning to see if you can clean up your act. After that, bye bye for good.

While you are a Packer fan, your need to make personal attacks does not make you immune to this rule


And this one

We reserve the right to edit and or delete posts from members when we feel it is warranted.

 

[Poppa San]

My point is the "rules" are applied so inconsistently as to appear capricious, if not random.
Thread after thread wanders off topic, with which I personally have no problem, but they are shut down on a random basis. Shutting down a thread because posts "add nothing new" was truly unique. If those two rules were consistently applied, there wouldn't be many threads getting past page 1. Yet they do.

Real life has finally slowed down enough for me to properly address this point. For those without a program, the highlighted phrase is in:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/defense-fewer-plays-more-adjustments.60673/
IMO, that thread was turning into a rehash of the last 5 minutes of last season's NFCCG. The thread had started as a discussion on the upcoming seasons defensive plans. Under a liberal interpretation of this section of the rules

Stop Making Duplicate Threads, USE SEARCH:
Stop making new threads on stuff that is being discussed already. I am tired of merging threads. We have a fire MM thread. We have a special teams thread. We have a thread with everything you want to discuss. Take the extra 2 minutes and find them. This is a serious one since it takes a lot of time for the moderators to continuously merge threads that have been duplicated over and over again.

I decided to not let the thread be hijacked any further. We already have:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/official-studs-and-duds-seattle.58068/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-meltdown.58076/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/3-plays-killed-the-packers.58132/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-cost-us-the-game-poll.58135/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/the-morgan-burnett-int.58170/
and several others which disect that game almost any way you can think of. I saw nothing new in the first mentioned thread being added to the existing discussions. <and no, I won't take the time to go through several hundred posts to correlate and cite specific statements> The conversation then moved on to hijack another thread
https://www.packerforum.com/threads...erly-adrian-hubbard-feels-some-mm-love.60758/ which I attempted to steer back on topic. That failed and the title was changed somewhat tongue in cheek to reflect the hijack. note: I did not see any POV there that was not previously discussed not more than 8 months ago.
My options boiled down to ignoring, deleting, or closing. If there still had been a discussion going as to the thread title, I probably would have ignored and I typically (not always) delete only offensive material.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Real life has finally slowed down enough for me to properly address this point. For those without a program, the highlighted phrase is in:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/defense-fewer-plays-more-adjustments.60673/
IMO, that thread was turning into a rehash of the last 5 minutes of last season's NFCCG. The thread had started as a discussion on the upcoming seasons defensive plans. Under a liberal interpretation of this section of the rules I decided to not let the thread be hijacked any further. We already have:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/official-studs-and-duds-seattle.58068/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-meltdown.58076/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/3-plays-killed-the-packers.58132/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-cost-us-the-game-poll.58135/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/the-morgan-burnett-int.58170/
and several others which disect that game almost any way you can think of. I saw nothing new in the first mentioned thread being added to the existing discussions. <and no, I won't take the time to go through several hundred posts to correlate and cite specific statements> The conversation then moved on to hijack another thread
https://www.packerforum.com/threads...erly-adrian-hubbard-feels-some-mm-love.60758/ which I attempted to steer back on topic. That failed and the title was changed somewhat tongue in cheek to reflect the hijack. note: I did not see any POV there that was not previously discussed not more than 8 months ago.
My options boiled down to ignoring, deleting, or closing. If there still had been a discussion going as to the thread title, I probably would have ignored and I typically (not always) delete only offensive material.

My bad on the Adrian Hubbard title change. IT WAS an attempt to make a point, not make light of the situation. I apologise for my part.

 

[longtimefan]

For those that think we are horrible

please apply to be a mod..

Season is up coming and we may need to add one or two mods..

 

[HardRightEdge]

Mods, lock this thread. [/QUOTE]

Real life has finally slowed down enough for me to properly address this point. For those without a program, the highlighted phrase is in:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/defense-fewer-plays-more-adjustments.60673/
IMO, that thread was turning into a rehash of the last 5 minutes of last season's NFCCG. The thread had started as a discussion on the upcoming seasons defensive plans. Under a liberal interpretation of this section of the rules I decided to not let the thread be hijacked any further. We already have:
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/official-studs-and-duds-seattle.58068/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-meltdown.58076/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/3-plays-killed-the-packers.58132/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/what-cost-us-the-game-poll.58135/
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/the-morgan-burnett-int.58170/
and several others which disect that game almost any way you can think of. I saw nothing new in the first mentioned thread being added to the existing discussions. <and no, I won't take the time to go through several hundred posts to correlate and cite specific statements> The conversation then moved on to hijack another thread
https://www.packerforum.com/threads...erly-adrian-hubbard-feels-some-mm-love.60758/ which I attempted to steer back on topic. That failed and the title was changed somewhat tongue in cheek to reflect the hijack. note: I did not see any POV there that was not previously discussed not more than 8 months ago.
My options boiled down to ignoring, deleting, or closing. If there still had been a discussion going as to the thread title, I probably would have ignored and I typically (not always) delete only offensive material.

If there were 5 threads already covering the same topic, why didn't you close 4 of those?

Further, I challenge you to find discussion dissecting the Shields blitz and it's implications anywhere near that level of detail in any other thread. As for it being off-topic (which is not against the rules, by the way), the fact the Packers, in my opinion, schemed to have a cornerback handle a read-option run blitz goes directly to the topic.

It was an out-of-the-blue one-off decision. There's little consistency is how this stuff is handled.

 

[HardRightEdge]

For those that think we are horrible

please apply to be a mod..

Season is up coming and we may need to add one or two mods..

If I were a mod I couldn't call this stuff out from the outside. You have your role, gadflies have theirs.

 

[longtimefan]

If I were a mod I couldn't call this stuff out from the outside. You have your role, gadfly's have theirs.

And in the end, flys are swatted by horse tails..

Relax, its a joke and not fishing

 

[HardRightEdge]

And in the end, flys are swatted by horse tails..

Relax, its a joke and not fishing

It didn't sound like a joke. There was some name calling and a threat there. Perhaps you should be put on notice.

Relax, it's a joke.

 

[Poppa San]

...
If there were 5 threads already covering the same topic, why didn't you close 4 of those?

There are many more, several closed and I don't know how many merged. Basically too many too fast. Any volunteers to help next season?

Further, I challenge you to find discussion dissecting the Shields blitz and it's implications anywhere near that level of detail in any other thread. As for it being off-topic (which is not against the rules, by the way), the fact the Packers, in my opinion, schemed to have a cornerback handle a read-option run blitz goes directly to the topic.

I can't find the discussion now. Is that the one in the thread about a practice squad linebacker? It would be a lot easier to find in a thread labelled something like "Shields' duties on the read-option run blitz."

It was an out-of-the-blue one-off decision. There's little consistency is how this stuff is handled.

This is a football board. You are acquainted with how pass interference and offensive holding are officiated. This is in the same vein IMO. You usually get vindication by instant replay but occasionally you get a Fail Mary.

 

[longtimefan]

a certain q/b's forum has this rule

Public posts debating these rules and/or moderators' enforcement of such, will be removed without comment. We encourage feedback however and invite you to contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

We can use that rule here too


Relax, its a joke