tnt
-
Posts
9,164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
35
Everything posted by tnt
-
I was going to ask him to find out from them what a closeness of the vote will allow for this time? Where would have that threshold been in the last round? Kind of arbitrary isn't it?
-
Sounds like a good way to handle it, but that means that it won't be done. When given a chance to wrap this up in one vote and bring about a little more fair play in the final outcome, you would think they would jump at it. The fact is that Kelley just doesn't seem to care about the consequences behind his off the wall decisions. It is apparent that he is content to leave his legacy as a nickname that doesn't have a consensus legitimacy.
-
Perhaps, but there was a Thunderhawk, and that may be the reason that was left off. At least that would have differentiated us a bit, as we could have been T-Hawks for short. Don't think we'll be the F-Hawks for short.
-
O.K. since they can make variations to the names given, are there any variations that would entice those not enamored with Rough Riders because a high school has it, to vote for an offshoot like Range Riders or something of the sort? Then you would be calling one Rangers for short, and the others Riders for short. I know, too late in the game for it, and the powers that be would be the ones making any variations anyway.
-
Like I said, you shouldn't have that dilemma to deal with. You should be able to vote your conscience and have another vote if nobody reaches 50 percent.
-
Tim Hennessey said he was going to vote for Fighting Hawks but said he would just shorten it to Hawks. Hate to listen to him during a Frozen Four with U Mass Lowell Riverhawks and Miami Redhawks if he is going to shorten them.
-
Just said that he appreciates the feedback. Didn't get anything back from Kelley though.
-
On second thought, he wouldn't squirm. It would just be business as usual for him with his making it up as he goes along philosophy.
-
I'm thinking Kelley would have been inclusive if it were even in the 200+ range, but you're right, it would be nice to watch him squirm in that scenario.
-
I wrote this on the other thread, but why don't we do a vote, assigning points to your top two picks. It would at least give some idea how the Nodak or Roughrider crowd would vote if it came down to Fighting Hawks and one of them.
-
You have a lot more faith in them than I do. If they want to get it down to one more vote, then have each person pick their top two favorites in the order they like them, then assign points to them. If Hawks had a lot of first place votes but just as many 3rd place votes, it would be a better representation on how a third vote would go.
-
The problem with this whole thing is that you either wouldn't have to make that decision if they did things the way they said they would, or you shouldn't have to make that decision in the next round. Since they have already made the decision to allow Nodaks in the vote off, they should have the decency to allow people to vote their conscience, and allow for another vote if nobody reaches the 50 percent threshold.
-
I can't believe that someone in Kelley's position doesn't understand the premise for getting down to a two-nickname runoff? The goal is to get a name that the majority of the people support at this juncture, and that may or may not be achieved, depending on how the votes split. Fighting Hawks may very well get the 50%, but if they don't you never know how those other votes would split.
-
If the new nickname is Hawks, I take my Sioux gear and replace the name Sioux with patches that say Hawks. Take that NCAA and Robert Kelley!
-
I would prefer Wilfred as arm patches and the horse as the primary if it came to that, but it appears as though it will be Hawks.
-
This is what others think as well. Is this what we want, the blandest and most boring name? This should have been a major warning for us about the committee process. Let's face it, nothing creative was going to come out of that process, even though that is what they were spouting as wanting.
-
Here is the article about those changing Native American nicknames and picking birds or colors. Why are we as a proud institution going to be lemmings and follow down the same path as everybody else. http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/education/3705294-qa-sociologist-suggests-flickertails-und
-
That is why you didn't just take the winner of the Final Five. I can't understand how he doesn't understand the Ross Perot effect.
-
If you think it needs to be flexible, I suppose you agree with the outrage by many, that a third vote is warranted. Guarantee you that won't happen, even though it should. There is a reason we wanted to narrow it down to two-- to get the name that the majority wants. That may happen, but it's possible you won't know for sure with three names.
-
Yes it needs to be flexible at the whims of one individual! That my friend is how you get the conspiracy theories. When you've got people who have defended vehemently a choice that happened to be third, and they are saying stick to the process, you know the process has been unacceptable.
-
Maybe they need to hire another consultant to see how to mend all of the fences being broken. The Grand Forks Herald told us long before we hired a consultant what our name would consist of, and sure enough, the consultant along with Kelley ran roughshod over this process to give us what the Herald said we would be all along. Congratulations on being the 400th bird name! Really used all that criteria we were told for providing suggestions, that they had no plan on using themselves. Thanks for wasting all of our time and energy in this process while sowing discontent.
-
What is the traditional margin of error needed before a recount in an election? It seems to me over 100 votes is a lot for how many votes were cast between Roughriders and Nodaks. The question needs to be asked where was he going to draw the line. Kelley just continues to cause dissent in the UND fan and Alumni base by his lack of foresight.
-
It sure would have been nice if at the end of the Boston University game last year at the Frozen Four if someone had said you came back just about all the way and were so close we decided to give you an extra 5 minutes to try and catch up. You simply can't change the rules at the last second. This isn't a dictatorship!
-
Then that should have been foreseen before they made the rules. They could have said there could be up to 5 names in a vote off if they all fall within a margin of error. The fact they didn't cover all bases when they had already pissed many people off beyond belief, well, is just beyond belief!
-
.. which doesn't appear to hold their fans' interest. Nice try though.
