dagies

nice one!

Seriously, I think that would be great.

ted2you, it's only because you used the quote box. It appeared that you were quoting someone else's material without including a link to the original source. Not the first time that's happened, nor will it be the last, but if doing that, then one should provide the link to the source material. In the future, just eliminate use of the quote box and we'll all understand that what you are writing is your own.

ted2you, psssst......from the Forum Guidelines: http://forum.siouxsports.com/guidelines/

I would just like the record to show that I turned mine off voluntarily a few days ago

Which is a pretty cool logo IMO

I could have gotten behind that

Again, being one who was an offender, I agree with those who feel it's cleaner and easier to read without the signatures and I'd vote to just leave them off

keep the profanity off the board.

EXACTLY

Honestly, I know I'm an offender and I actually agree that not having signatures made things kind of easy to read. I'd be willing to turn them off, or just leave 2 lines or 140 characters or something like that. But the cleanliness of turning them off completely is understandable and that would be fine by me.

IMO the worst part of this whole process was not managing the "no nickname" thing better. I'm guessing Kelley thought it would just go away as the process played out but it really didn't. But he should have had the balls to just pull the trigger from the get go and eliminate any chance that it turned into a cause. Bad mistake.

Hi Jim, I feel silly but for some reason can't figure out how to change the signature that attaches to my messages. Can you point me to where I can make those changes? Thanks

I think you nailed it

Congratulations Brad Berry! Nice first committed recruit (I think?). Kind of set the bar a little high, though. :-)

i imagine just like any other population group

Here's the heading under the Community Forum: This topic has tip toed that line from the beginning. I'm not exactly sure where that line is in this conversation, but let's all be mindful of it. We can kind of see, already, why this rule is in place. I'd quote to Forum Rules if I could only find the link now that the UI has changed :-)

Not really accurate

Bombers

First off, Goon, great job actually asking somebody this question. Why hadn't the Herald asked this question and received a reply long ago? At least this shows that many of us were correct....selecting no nickname would not be a violation of the agreement. That said, the NCAA is moving into territory that is even more out of bounds, IMO, than where they have been in the past. Now they can instill sanctions based on the actions of fans. Nice. Clearly, Kelley has the leverage he needs to make a final decision to remove "no nickname" from the list of acceptable nickname options.

agree with you here

Maybe we can get this guy to move to UND (it's only one letter different) First, read this: http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6697 Then read this: http://unh.edu/unhtoday/statement-unh-president-mark-huddleston-bias-free-language-guide

Thanks for your insight. It's interesting to hear from others who have gone through a similar process. Though I will say, I actually dig the Locomotives idea, but maybe that's because one of my suggestions for this process was the Iron Horses :-)

Agree, CMSioux.

It really is JUST THIS SIMPLE