jimdahl

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.

It honestly didn't strike me as particularly bad when I first saw it; whether the game is on TV or not seems an on-topic discussion. In pondering it a bit more, you're right that point of it was probably just to aggravate so it is just trolling. We'll try to keep a closer eye on that. The football forum is especially tough for us, because so many posters in this forum think we should just ban anyone who isn't a UND fan, which hasn't ever been our philosophy. But, anyone who is solely here to try to aggravate other posters shouldn't be here.

Makes sense, that was also dependent on the forum login, which apparently changed. I'll remove the link for now to avoid confusion, but see if I can add some sort of user submission back into the new news page that's coming soon.

I know this is the dumpster fire thread, but your posts aren't even remotely about football. Keep it about the game, please.

I know it's tough when one of the big groups in the news calls itself "black lives matter", but please try not to delve into racial politics. Thanks.

Sorry about that, I assume you edited it in the last day? I've been playing with the settings to see if I could reduce them to two lines (as discussed above), but it turns out not to affect the ones people already have, but limits them to two lines when they make edits.

It's also much more obvious how to turn them off now, with the little x in the upper corner of every signature. Before you had to find the right spot in your personal preferences.