jimdahl

You're right, it's definitely a little difficult in certain browsers. Clicking the "source" button in the upper left to get to the actual HTML always work if you're comfortable working in the HTML, but if you mess up things can go horribly wrong. The creator of the software seems aware, and they intend to make additional editor improvements in the next version: https://community.invisionpower.com/blogs/entry/9739-ips-community-suite-41-editor-update/

I'm always surprised how much people do use non-forum pages on the site. I think I'm fooled because the rest isn't particularly interactive so I feel like that stuff is unused, but people come out in force when I try to cut something, and then I check the stats and realize how much they're read.

Right. The site used to automatically find stories from blogs but let users submit individual news articles (two separate pages/feeds). But users weren't submitting much news, and the line between blogs and news was becoming blurry. So, going forward, blogs and news will be on the same page and the site will try to automatically find both, so there should be no need for users to submit individual articles.

A different news page is coming soon, but with no good definition of soon. At first it won't have user-submission, but eventually might. I think the issue with your stuff is that we were crawling the blogs but not the hockey writers because I (arbitrarily) deemed that one to be news. In the new design, there won't be any attempt to differentiate between blogs and news and the spider/crawler will pull feeds from both; so, I'll just make sure to crawl all of your (and other) relevant news/blogs. So, your need to submit individual articles should actually go away.

I was starting to think I was the only person who doesn't like that Blackhawk/Fighting Hawk mockup. But, since I know there's no chance of that actually be the logo, I haven't worried about it too much.

The thread links on the main forum listing page automatically take you to your most recently read post in that thread.

So, trying to summarize the arguments for and against each name (I'm going to try to put together a blog post on the topic), here's what I see going through this thread. What did I miss? Roughriders State unofficial motto (Rough Rider state, Rough Rider award) Used by local (GF) high school Is a person/human Strong logo possibilities Concerns about sexual connotation/condom brand Unique in NCAA, though used in other leagues Nodaks Variation on "just North Dakota" Has been used in the past Concerns about it in full name "University of North Dakota Nodaks" Phonetically awkward ("no ring to it", "sounds a bit hick", etc...) Doesn't add a marketable brand Fighting Hawks Non-unique; ______-hawks is a frequent choice of school's changing names Tough, fierce animal Strong logo possibilities "Fighting" retains some "Fighting Sioux" heritage North Stars Unique in NCAA Tied to region Minnesota state motto Former Minnesota pro hockey team SunDogs Unique in NCAA Weather phenomenon related to North Dakota's unique climate Originally proposed by anti-Sioux groups (BRIDGES) as a name sure to offend no-one Not seen as tough/fierce Questions as to logo (will we make it a dog, or a weather phenomenon?)

In short, the forum's new editor is trying harder to correctly interpret the HTML that you're pasting in. So, coming from Word, the first thing I would do is try to make sure that Word doesn't think each line is a new paragraph. I think a future version (next few weeks to month) is going to introduce the option to paste as plain text (no formatting), which might also help with such problems.

Hitting report is a more effective way to bring a post to the moderators' attention than posting a complaint here. In fact, complaining about the moderation is considered an off-topic post -- such discussions should take place in the admin forum. Thanks.

Can't speak for the other mods as we haven't discussed it. But, I've considered it, but there are a couple legitimate post-game conversations still occurring (the injury, in particular.) But, as you can tell, we're all closely watching it

Not bad, not bad...

I'll take a defensive improvement and some garbage points: 13-39

waynenelsongf NDSU 24, UND 3, halftime; 241 yards for NDSU, 5 for UND. 14 First downs for NDSU, 0 for UND. 9/19/15, 5:00 PM

Game's not over, wait until you see what adjustments we make at the half

It seems like that number can only go up

NDSU forgot to hold in the backfield on that return

Can't complain about giving up 3 on that drive. Ugh.

UND held NDSU on their first possession, got a field goal on UND's first. UND 3, NDSU 0. 10:33 to go in 1st. Would have been nice to get 7 off that 54 yd punt return.

In cleaning out a profanity-laden tirade, I messed up the continuity of the thread a bit by removing some posts. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Let's try not to get so personal, thanks!

Some report that deleting quotes can be a little strange in some browsers. A workaround is that hitting the source button in the upper left to switch from rich text editor to code gets you to the raw source that you can then delete (or modify if you're comfortable with the code). Then you hit the button again to switch back.

You have to be careful with computer rankings this time of year. If you were to just go by results to date in 2015, most reasonable systems would say UND is the better team. But that's probably not right, so all of the rankings guys bootstrap with historical results. So, what you're quoting is something resembling the probability of last year's NDSU team + 2 games of this year's beating a similarly constructed UND team. That's definitely more useful and overall more predictive than starting each season by assuming everyone is equal, but can't really be counted on for individual predictions, particularly if there's reason to think a team's quality has changed. I think most UND fans who claim there's a better than 2% chance of winning are optimistic that the teams' respective qualities have changed since last year. You might not agree with that optimism, and indeed it might be wrong. But citing those models as disproving it is incorrect.

I cleared out the forum and thread follows (that would send you an automatic notification for a new post) because an absurd number of them were obsolete and often leading to email bounces. If there's a forum or thread you want to follow, please go follow it again. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I appreciate them.

Majority don't seem to want them, and those that are "ok" with them don't seem to strongly desire them. After going a month without them and now a few days with them, I agree that they add a little personality, but they also really mess up the flow of reading a thread. So, back off for now.