yababy8

This is a magnificent personification of the very reason we should have refused to have our name raped from us. As this atrocity transpired over time good people like you and I were perpetually chastised by those who do not respect the value of the preservation of the principles perscribed in this essay. As we decried the bigger picture loss of freedom we were told to "get over it", to " move on", that it "just a nickname", that we can't affort the costs of punishment and that the NCAA is a "private organization" hence our rights don't apply. All along we could feel the irie unsettling presence of the loss of many things, the things of which this professor speaks, more than our name being stolen from the shirt on our back and the flag that we fly- part of our identity. And the lesson we learned is that we should not complain and if we do we are nothing more than whinning children whom people are "tired" of hearing from and having to "deal" with. Learned that lesson we have did. Next time maybe we will comply with a little less salt? Freedom is lost one step at a time I reckon. And it seems logical that within each step there would lie justifications and assertions of "get over it" and "Its just" s among other sentiments we have endured.. Oh, am I whinning again?

Interesting that we were discussing the history of the name change on the other thread... I recall Grant Shaft as being very anti name but I cannot remember the role he played. There was point when the SBoHE had the call on the name issue and didn't Shaft shaft us? Does anyone recall that?

yes you have accurately, and with good pros I might add, stated my position. I do agree with your assertion that it is not relevant to the present situation and where we go now. However, just because it is not relevant to the present situation does not make it irrelevant. Aside from how we move forward now, independently, it is very relevant as it is-or shall I say it speaks of- the historical record of a wrong that was committed. It was wrong that we had to give up the Sioux name and when a wrong has been committed I believe as most do that keeping an accurate and fair historical understanding of all of the events that transpired is imperative. It really comes down to the value of history in society or humanity and I think if you ask anyone that has a respect for history they will tell you of its importance. If not for any other reason than those invested parties who were wronged may have an opportunity to heal a little better with the knowledge that history is not lying about thier wrong. I think it's very important.which is obviously why I chose to so vehemently object to 82's post. For the record I have also read several news articles recently which site that vote in a manner that simply suggest the people of North Dakota voted to get rid of the name. To characterize the vote in that way is nothing short of reprehensible. So again, although it is not germane to the current situation and the events which need to transpire regarding the name now, it is still a worthy topic which should be discussed and when I saw 82 play that card (a card that I told him he and others would play back in 2012) I chose to jump in and call him on it.. Hopefully moving forward we can all do that. Remember the Alimo' Remember the blackmail vote'vote' Ha!

I definitely can and will. I've been working on a little essay so to speak. Its a little more work than a simple post so give me a bit. I plan to have it up here in the next week. Hopefully you as well as others will look at it with an open mind. I do believe it addresses something many people have been missing in all of this and I don't think it has been said...

I hear the point you're trying to get across and I don't disagree with that at all. I think you are correct in what you say. but please understand my original post yesterday when I drove into this thread was an objection to what 82 had posted regarding the 2012 vote. We all should have a huge problem with anyone on here or in the media who attempts to assert from the results of that vote anyone's support or lack thereof of the use of the Sioux name. it is simply wrong and way way out of line for someone to assert that. and it is our responsibility to not allow that truth to be manipulated. we all know why people voted to retire the name in 2012. so you and I are posting about two different things and I do not disagree with yours. what say you about mine? because it would make me feel a lot better if I started to hear some other people on here reinforcing the value in what I'm talking about when it comes to this 2012 vote.

there's something you're missing here. something significant.

I hear ya brother, im done posting from my phone.. This new UI had some bad glitches too. I would let Jim know but posting more sounds like work right about now.

IIra, I did sense although I did not know(because you are correct you did not reference me specifically, however you chose to mention name calling in a post right in the middle of a back and forth regarding name calling. hence the sense that it was directed at me at least somewhat) however I chose to respond the way I did to your text because in the end whether or not you are speaking about me was not germane to my point. I was making a broader point which addressed the in general and overtime perpetual assertions(including the one you made in your post, which if it didn't reference me it applies to what I'm saying here) by the "get over it" crowd that the "name at all costs" crowd resorts to name call as well as other pejorative characterizations of our character, such as crying and whining, etc, etc, etc. I think this had been nothing more than a manipulation by the get over crowd as I do not believe this has been the case with the people who have supported the Sipux name and now support the North Dakota option. it has become so pervasive by the get over crowd that Tom Miller felt comfortable basically calling X su athletes babies. I plan to address that later in more detail. but as a point here it has been perpetual that's a good overcrowd has name called and unjustly defined those whodo not support or believe in giving us another nickname other than North Dakota(the current front line). I know it would be easy for you or anyone else to say that both sides have done their fair share of name calling and less than admirable behavior. I just don't think this is true and the series of posts are a great example of that just read through the post and see,.I have been called a name, and I have been incorrectly accused of calling people names and needing to calm down too. It's hilarious the way a group of people on here attempt to undermine the views of the majority of the people invested in the nickname controversy. regarding your request to compare the tenor of my post vs Cheweys, my posts were across a range from expressing ire of a post which manipulated the meaning of the 2012 vote to defending myself against false accusations.so I think it's a little unfair of you to compare what I've been saying today versus what someone else talking about something else is saying. it's a little bit apples and oranges.

saying calm down as a response to my post makes absolutely no sense. Regarding your bold highlights, I can only infer what you mean by that. My guess is that you are suggesting I am indeed calling people names in the same breath as a say I am not. Of course I most certainly am not and my guess is that is why you chose the vague method of doing nothing more than highlighting text. I'm uninclined to go through an language lession when you have not specifically made any sort of assertion about those words and phrases you lighted. I will say two things,; I loved my asimilie and the "get over it" as a label for those who have perpetually said "get over it" is nothing short of completely appropriate (their words). you know come to think of it the name for the other side of the fence is of course we all know, the "name at all costs" crowd. what's really super funny about that is that label(labels are not name calling) was created by the "get over it" crowd. So effectivly the get over crowd created both labels. Funny! ...yet you highlight my words and attempt to make me the guy who calls names by highlighting apropos labels. it just doesn't stop. absolutely relentless rhetoric. relentless. keep saying it, keep highlighting the words. someday it will be true that I have called names. I guess I just need to accept that. sorry I didn't clean up this post, I used text to voice on my phone. too lazy to clean up. you all are wearing me down. ha, pretty soon I'll end up getting frustrated and I'll have to call someone a name. ...ahhh now I get it....

So after two posts of accusing me of name calling, when I call you on the fact that I did not name call, you respond by saying everyone needs to calm down? Impressive.. And then after I point out the false accusation, IraMurphy post more rehototic accusing people of name calling? Where is all of this name ccalling?? Is that what this clan of "get over it" activists does? Just simply make things up to paint the picture which serves them best? My post which started the last several posts was simply to point out that 82 was incorrectly portraying history. Almost all of the negative responses that you all have come up with have revolved around name calling and not being able to get over the debate about the name. It is truly truly amazing how you all manipulate a debate. The one constant I see is that you all always make it about something else: Name calling, crying, not giving up on a fight, belittling, yada yada yada. You all just making stuff up as you go. Again, I was challenging 82 on his assertion that the 2012 vote indicated the Sioux people's position regarding the use of their name. That's all. That's it. Nothing more. And I have called no one a name. Further and to be clear, I have zero interest in debating with you all about the value of our name -The Sioux- or the unjust events which have occurred or who did or didn't do something to prevent this rape (look it up spellckeck 83) and assassination of our name. I have been down that road and the character of the "get over it" team who post like rabbits hump on this board has been clearly revealed to me. Like I have said about 8 times now. I am simply calling out 82 on being manipulative in his B.S. accounting of history.

You must be one of tthose, 'if you say it enough it must be true' fellas huh? Still looking for the name calling?? ...Did you report SSioux83 to the mods yet??

I am not in same boat as a person who aims to manipulate the truth. '82 citing the 2012 vote as having any reliance to the people's support or lack there of is tantamount to revisionist history as it has ever been revised in the history of man. And my outrage at such asinine rehototic is well founded and placed as there is nothing more rought with evil and dispair as one who aims to assaninate the truth of our history. Do not pretend to suggest that the truth of the desires of the Sioux people through this whole identy rape is anything less than historically relevant. Not just what Murphy did with his two faced deciet but what the Sioux people said to those who would listen. Certainly not the "move on" crowd. They never listened at all. Too busy working their agenda. You say, 'let's not break out the name calling"? You must be talking about Sioux83?, "So we can tell people to f*ck off now, like bigbaby did above? Mods let us know what goes." Bigbaby sounds a little like name calling. I assume you were talking about that correct? No?, you meant me??? Oh, I guess I missed that? Where was it that I called someone a name??

Nice try 82. I told you and F.S.F. and scottm on here back in 2012 when you were demanding I give one good reason why one should vote to keep the name that that "one hood reason" was so that people wouldn't be able to say B.S. like what you just said We all know what the Sioux as a majority wanted. That was clearly demonstrated in the polls before 2012. They like everyone else voted that way to protect UND from sanctions as the aggressive media campaign said they should. Even Hak said it. So F.off with your petty B.S. manipulations of that vote. You know the truth! The Sioux wanted and still want by majority to keep their name.. You're truly the worst kind of cancer to this whole situation. The fact that anyone listens to your rhetoric is beyond me.

So here is a technical question for the folks at nchc.tv. I've noticed that the web version quality of the picture of the replay highlights shown on productions like coaches corner or UND sports zone are very clear HD, yet the full game replay is that of the original feed. While I realize that there is a limit to the quality of the feed when you're dealing with real time I'm wondering if the folks at NCHC TV / und sports could provide a replay option which has comprable quality to those clips we see on the sports shows which I mentioned?

Did the UND Facebook page get 60,000 likes in a day? Think a little...

Bingo!! Maybe the missed opportunity for courage was circa de here... But who is asking irrational logo loving ex athletes. Well except Phil Jackson or any other 'move on' former athlete. Then it's all about how they get it why don't you? Just laughable. All of this... Laughable!!

What ever buddy.. We all get it. Just a logo... And a name you forgot to mention that. Ooops!!! Inadvertent oversight I'm sure.. And if you want to be honest it's an identity too right? But who in the 'move on' group has really ever been honest about anything...

I noticed Murphy hasn't landed anywhere yet? Maybe he will give it a think and decide to come back and give it the old college try. Maybe he could come back after xmas or even next year. I was really liking how he was playing the game the last month of the season. His positioning and tenacity were noticeable he had good instincts and got to good spots but it seemed he just couldn't get that first one to go. I realize that as fans we don't have the whole picture but the man scored 70 points two years ago in the BCHL(That is more than Jost!). Maybe he could go work for Frattin's dad for the fall then come back in January. ha!

How much coverage has the Fargo Forum given the Spirit lake Sioux through their process of suing the NCAA for taking away their name?

I thought we already covered how much of a weakly thought out comparison a highschool vs. a major college was with respect to this issue? I love the, "if you say it it makes it true" aspect of the sky is falling crowd on this forum. I would love for junior to explain the rational behind this one. Just how exactly is the schools nickname issue holding us back? Disallowing us to focus on being top notch? Is it that the committee's focus would otherwise be attending to somthing else like perhaps the acquisition of an internatonal cancer research grant? Maybe its chairman would have had more time to spend with McIntire and he might have made two more saves in Boston? Of course if I keep saying this stuff it makes it true right? OK, I'll try some more. UND will NEVER have the Sioux nickname again. Wow now that is a fact. This is so amazing... I'll keep going. If we change our name to the Sundogs we will win a national championship in 2017, 2018 AND 2020. BUT if we change our name to the North Stars we will not win a championship until 2026( three years after we move the program to North Dakota State and change the name from the North Stars to just the Stars, being in fargo and all.)... International success is a coming, go Aviators!! I do hope that our Aviation program doesn't fall on rough times after we change our name to the Aviators. Oh wait a minute, I'm now one of you. I can declare the future. Sweet!! If we change the name to the Aviators we will become a preeminent international aviation program training 63.5% of all airline pilots in the world. However, I will tell you that if we pick the Roughriders our Aviation program will diminish as pilot training will become out-sourced in large part to the Philippines and India.. That's a FACT. so get over it and move on Junior! ...ahhh so fun....

SIOUX!!

oH thanks for filling me in on that. Gone.. Got it... Oh wait, there it is^^. It's back. Weeew!! I thought it was gone.. Oh my? Maybe it was just back for a second? Oh wait again, there it is again vv !!

SIOUX

nice !@#$ analogy Ricky! I guess that makes the NCAA our parent huh? standing firm for what you believe in especially in a case where you know that those who attempt to change what you believe in are not acting with integrity is not the same thing as a three year old temper tantrum. Unless of course that three year old is throwing a temper tantrum because you have a knife to their hand and are about to chop it off. Then what say you about said temper tantrum? I could go on all day with an analogies exemplifying the pathetic truths of this whole sham but it won't convince any of these fear mongering self righteous know more than the rest of us about what is good for the school lunatics of anything they haven't already been unable to grasp.

I'm not sure your dissatisfaction should be directed toward Spirit Lake. They voted for the name in due time and followed with s law suite against the NCAA. As far as Standing Rock goes, it was never really appropriate to include them in the settlement agreementgiven their distance from the university and their lack of governmental structure. you can't blame them for being who they are. they really just never cared and really never had any impetus to care.I think any fair analysis of the history of this whole debacle would only place dissatisfaction squarely on Kelly and the University of North Dakota administrations. Kelly should not be the president of the University of North Dakota at this time because of that. I can think of no stronger truth in the entire universe.