Scoop vs Scout

[brewcity77]

Brew. I am sincerely sorry that you got banned. I know that you were essentially defending me and I feel bad because of that.

I do take solace in the fact that I was obviously right in describing him in that manner though.

I find it wildly ironic that I broke out the Voltaire quote "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" and was subsequently dealt Internet death. Don't sweat over my banning. What's the point of being a member of a discussion forum if the moderator doesn't allow discussion?

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Brew - try signing up under the name "Hoopaloop."

[real chili 83]

Brew - try signing up under the name "Hoopaloop."

Too funny!

[Rubie Q]

I find it wildly ironic that I broke out the Voltaire quote "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" and was subsequently dealt Internet death. Don't sweat over my banning. What's the point of being a member of a discussion forum if the moderator doesn't allow discussion?

Wanna write for a blog?

/ reads brew's signature line

Aw, hamburgers.

[NersEllenson]

Brew. I am sincerely sorry that you got banned. I know that you were essentially defending me and I feel bad because of that.

I do take solace in the fact that I was obviously right in describing him in that manner though.

Yeah, too bad for Brew...yet I suspect you were pretty much to the point where you were fine being banned over there with starting a thread calling Dodds a thin skinned kitten!!  Thankfully you aren't aghast at being banned there, as Chicos/Hoop has been here that others haven't been banned (like me) yet, I never ask the mods here to ban me, beg them to ban me, crap talk them as Chicos did in his final days here.  How could you not expect to be banned, right?

[lab_warrior]

Yeah, too bad for Brew...yet I suspect you were pretty much to the point where you were fine being banned over there with starting a thread calling Dodds a thin skinned kitten!!  Thankfully you aren't aghast at being banned there, as Chicos/Hoop has been here that others haven't been banned (like me) yet, I never ask the mods here to ban me, beg them to ban me, crap talk them as Chicos did in his final days here.  How could you not expect to be banned, right?

That thread was the "Costanza trying to get fired" of threads.  Fantastic.

http://www.youtube.com/v/yngq9NmOnFw&fs=1&source=uds

[MUMac]

Quote from: brewcity77
John, from the last day of the first thread and into the creation of the second thread, Nukem2, Murf, nickthedribbler, pbiflyer, BuzzWilliams4Prez, Xpert, and more all posted in the two threads. If the topic was dead, why was there so much interest? And how is talking about a new Marquette arena not talking about Marquette basketball? Saying there was no interest other than you, Sultan, and myself is at best wholly inaccurate. If you want to close it, fine. But to say there was no other interest flies in the face of the facts.

You ask why I take issue if I agree with you. It's basic free speech. The classic Voltaire quote comes to mind: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". Just because I agree with one side or the other doesn't mean I don't want to hear what the opposite side has to say.

Then you again question my use of bully, but follow it with "I don't think you shouldn't post here anymore". So because I express my opinion, you want me off your site? And you don't understand how I could call you a bully?

As far as why I care about your opinion, it's the same reason I care about Sultan's opinion, or Murf's, or ddsam's, or Young's, or Xpert's, or zerg's, or anyone on the site. Because I find that all of these people can put forward valid and valuable arguments. By the same token, I've heard some of them spout some absolute nonsense. But just because I find some of their assertions to be nonsense (and undoubtedly they the same of mine) doesn't make the discussion not worth having.

I really don't think my argument is nearly as convoluted as you seem to think it is. I think people should be allowed to express their opinions. I think this site has merits and also think it has flaws. And I think that when you get amped up, you would rather shut down a discussion than let it continue. I made a few suggestions as to how I have seen sites better moderated in the past, but I definitely wouldn't want to be part of the moderation here. While I think we have had some good discussions, I think when things get heated, you and I can be a bit like oil and water, and don't think that would make for good moderation for either of us, but more so for the rest of the members of the site.

Also, the "hobby" argument is getting a bit tired. Last I checked, a hobby is something one does for pleasure, not profit. If you are going to profit off this site, you owe it to the paying members to make this as worthwhile an experience for them as possible. And if it truly is only a hobby, where's the harm in letting some of your more dedicated users share the burden of moderating? There's a reason some have left the site completely and others only frequent the Insider's Club.

Finally, while I want what's best for Milwaukee, I don't agree that this arena should be built to spur the economy. I want it built because I want Marquette's basketball team to play in the best facility possible. That's my only motivation for seeing this thing get done.

When I finally left that site, that was the point I made to dodds.  The only benefit of the premium site was that murff did not post on it.  Other than that, it was a waste of money.  No original content, no articles from the site itself, no interviews with recruits ...  Without IWB or Mark Miller, it really had negative value.  Since I left, two years ago, I have not been back.  I hit the site twice, by mistake, when clicking a link.  I can say that I have not missed it at all.  I suspect jd is still p!ssing in his cheerios about how poorly brett favre was treated.

I know you were banned.  I am sure you, just as I before you, will not miss it.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I stopped paying after the Brad Forrester flap with Newbill. I was pretty upset as to why the site would suppress the video reports but allow personal attacks on a guy who was banned. I thought that his main tenet was one who posts by their given name can present an argument. That was not true and and not only that attacks were allowed discrediting a person who could not post to defend themselves.  Not willing to to support that.

[warthog-driver]

Maybe I don't understand "anarchy". I'd say you can make the argument that Dodds is way too strict,a totalitarion. On the other side of the spectrum, total free speech, insult anyone and everyone (including the mods) in the name of free speech = anarchy.

You go away for a weekend and all hell breaks loose. I did get a chance to read the thread before Dodds parked it in the "Premium" area. Sultan was actually spot on in terms of presenting some independent third party empiricism. Dodds was little more than a rant until he started the second thread and posted analysis that discredited his own position (he must not have read far enough into the study.)

Brew was quite balanced in what he posted, challenging Dodds for being close-minded, petulant, etc...In the end he got nuked by the King Geek who evidently banned Brew. Dodds is such a woman. How dare he ask anyone to "sack up." He's the one who really needs to grow a pair. I guess selling insurance all day bleeds off your testosterone.

[mu_hilltopper]

Ok, we've officially jumped the shark, people, probably 8 pages ago.

And yes, I realize the galactic irony of locking the topic about .. censorship.  Move along.

[rocky_warrior]

Just because I can, and it seems fitting, I'm going to end this by calling mu_hilltopper a kitten!

[mu_hilltopper]

Meow