sioux fan in phoenix

Gophers without a doubt. But remember at the start of last season? Potulny was injured right away & the team looked like a chicken with its head cut off; makes me wonder if they're thin in the leadership department. As soon as he returned they started to roll again. If they stay healthy, they'll probably win the WCHA by a few points but not in a runaway fashion. I wouldn't mind if the Sioux were bridesmaids this year; winning the McNaughton seems to take a toll on players-CC's a good example as they fizzled at the end of last year. Just my opinion. I'll say Tech "wins" the last-place race as they have a new coach again & it would be almost impossible for UAA to have the same awful luck 2 yrs. in a row.

I sometimes wonder if Dean is that liberal or if he's just catering to these groups for votes. Homosexuals number about 6% of the population & add in another 2% or so of other fringe wackos & that ain't much. Doesn't seem very politically savvy, but then again these groups do have powerful lobbies.

My fun fact for the day & a bonus math lesson, too: 7>5 Consider that hockey karma, WPoS

It sounds like there are a lot of defenders of common sense on this board & that's good to hear. Standing up for one's beliefs & throwing their warped logic back in their faces is what it's going to take. The Fighting Sioux name is probably going nowhere but one can never rest on his laurels, especially when it matters.

Thx a lot, Jeff, for answering my questions--appreciate it!

I was thinking that if the moderator had the ability to remove the "New Topic" feature from a particular forum it would eliminate a lot of useless topics. A poster could submit a request via PM to Jim that he would like to start a new topic & Jim could could say either yay or nay. Regarding people having too much time on their hands, there would be no one forcing you to go to such a forum, Scott. It would be separate from the places you like & wouldn't be "in your face". But we'll never know until it's polled, probably in the hockey forum, where 80-90% of people here go. From the responses thus far, it sounds like 3 are pro & 2 are con--3 & 3 if Jim is considered

I'm sure learning a lot re: this webcast. For those of you who get dialup like me these were my statistical results when viewing the Sioux demo game: "The network or Internet connection is: 31.7kbps." "The content is currently being received at: 26.0 kbps." Promising thing is, I didn't notice that much skipping & REA, Inc. stated that the upcoming games would be better. My questions are: 1) Does having a fairly fast processor (2.0 GHz Intel 4 Pentium) help make up for my slow connection speeds & give me a realistic shot at seeing the game somewhat well? 2) What do "buffering" & "rebuffering" mean? 3) If I have a 56k modem, why the heck is my Internet connection a lot slower than that?? For example, I have a 56k modem, it says that my current speed is 40kbps as I type right now & when I view the demo it says that the connection speed is 31.7 kbps. Why the dropoffs?

I was wondering if there was a way you (moderator) could control what threads are created? In other words, if there were a cafe could you have the final say on whether or not a certain thread is created beforehand? For example, someone wants to start a topic discussing "When Harry met Sally" but you turn it down for obvious reasons . But if someone wants to talk about Ralph Engelstad or the upcoming N.D. primaries you give the o.k. Just wondering if this is possible as I thought this would filter out a lot of nonsensical, flammable topics.

I think Quebec has only 2 divisions: The major junior division where guys like Crosby go & the "Oh my God, our little Pierre's not very talented & we have to send him to a regular college" division. If the Sioux lay an egg in this one, I'm going to either launch my PC into orbit or stand in oncoming traffic. Shouldn't be close & won't really benefit the Sioux players at all. These games are usually only good for Sofie & others who don't get regular playing time during the season.

Nice talking with you on this subject. I try not to sound like the incarnation of Gordon Kahl, but it's kind of hard not to with all this rampant liberal lunacy. I'm just hoping the political pendulum starts its swing back to the right after being on the left for the past 40 years. For the sake of this country, I certainly hope so. The more I think about this subject the more tense I get. Thank goodness for Sioux hockey-a healthy stress outlet & a lot better than drinking myself under the table.

I agree, this is a relevant topic directly effecting students' abilities to see games.

Very nice post, mk, & very relevant. Your sentiments & opinions mirror mine to a great degree. Others who read this thread might think it's spun off topic into a political theme; but to understand a pro "name changer", one also has to understand their agendas & political leanings. There's much more to them underneath the surface. I also don't want others who read this to think I'm anti-Democrat. I value the 2-party system & feel it's essential for a democracy; I just have humongous issues with the radical liberals--many of whom are camoflauged socialists to the nth degree. For those of you who think radical liberals are harmless annoyances, think again. These are the same people who brainwashed us into thinking that separation of church & state was a fundamental Constitutional clause. Guess what? There is no such wording therein. The Constitution strictly forbids the establishment of a national denomination but says nothing about prayer & the pledge in public schools as being illegal. And if you've seen the news lately, you've seen that a federal judge has banned an Alabama Supreme Court judge from having a monument of the 10 Commandments in his court plaza. Ridiculous! The judge's name is Roy Moore & if I've ever seen a modern-day patriot, he's the man. Thank goodness he's gotten national airtime as this has gotten him some much-needed support. Radical liberals also want us to redefine our concept of marriage. For two thousand years, Western civilization has rationally rejected same-sex unions on the basis that they offer no substantial & moral benefit to our future. Now socialists want us to reconsider & allow gays the same benefits & legal privileges that Christian heterosexual couples have always enjoyed. Why do you think past generations rejected the sexual whims of a tiny minority? What's next, the legalization of polygamy & pedophilia? I've said it b4 & I'll say it again. Political Correctness is a tenet that was conceived in post-revolution Russia by Stalin. It's also a tool used by modern-day Cultural Marxists in their attempt to turn the traditional white, Christian, pro-God power structure on its head by advocating anything & everything its opposite. mksioux, I've got what I think is an excellent link that defines Cultural Marxism. You stated you've been interested in this topic a couple years & I thought you might like it. William S. Lind Edit: I know what you mean, mk, when you talk about the UofM. Here in AZ, I had a work colleague who was trying to get her BA in psychology at one of the ASU branches. One of her instructors in a prerequisite anthropology course was a lesbian who would get on her soapbox & preach about the merits of homosexuality & denounce all heterosexual relations as useless. If true & I trust this source, what a sham! If I were her student & I heard that crap, I would have raised my voice & done my best to shame her in front of all her class. Would have told her stuff like,"I don't pay good money to hear about your personal opinions" & anything else that would bring negative attention on her. Of course I'd probably get an "F", but it's all about principles, right?

Thx for the clarification.

Amen & right on. Most Americans don't realize the dangers these radicals pose due to a lot of outside distractions: tv, sports & other "opiates" of the masses. Meanwhile, their agendas are passed via judicial mandates while we sleep. Some of these "name changers" are just misguided, kooky liberals while others are socialists who want a welfare state. I know that's a big leap calling pc'ers card-carrrying socialists; but if their political affiliations are revealed I'd bet you wouldn't find (m)any Republicans or even centrist Democrats in their ranks. They need to be engaged in debates & exposed for their true intentions. Rarely do their "solutions" fit the needs of the majority-- When's the last time you remember them championing the rights of the straight white American Protestant male? Not gonna happen with them. Ask yourselves which direction our country is headed & why it's headed in that direction. Then ask which groups are behind this spearhead to alter American culture. That's how I came to my conclusions. I know I went off on a huge tangent here but I'm just trying to frame these "name changers" into a larger perspective so people can hopefully understand them better.

With Foyt added, does that make 8 defensemen with or without Bina?

Definitely, the pros & cons must be weighed before any format changes are made. Pros: Many ancillary or peripheral events happen outside Sioux athletics, but at the same time are closely tied to UND. The passing of Ralph Engelstad is a good example. When he died, I'm sure many posters on this board wanted to discuss what he meant to UND & share their sentiments; perhaps doing this in a separate chat forum aside from topics like Zach Parise & the current goaltending woes would have been more suitable. The flood of '97. God forbid, if this or something similar strikes the region again, there would be no appropriate forum to discuss this. But it is an issue relevant to Sioux fans, current students & alums. Where would it be discussed? In the hockey, football or basketball forums?Other current events could be discussed there, as well. Also, Fighting Sioux Fan made a good point. It's very difficult to get to know other Sioux fans on this board considering the current format & virtually impossible to do so on USCHO. If I were to start a "Meet & Greet" thread for Sioux fans there, in an hour it would be overrun with flamers calling my subject lame, filling it with comments like "Sioux suck" & talking about UND's weak "cupcake" schedule. But you already know that. Cons: More content=more flamers. But I don't necessarily see this "Cafe" addition as opening the door to a lot more troubles. Most hardcore & dyed-in-the-wool flamers are content with staying at USCHO & I don't see a massive exodus of them here if you were to start this. You're always going to have dubious posters regardless if you add this or not. The question is, are you going to have A LOT more. IMO, I don't think so. You could institute a 3-strike policy where you make it well known to everyone that appropriate behavior is mandatory & 3 interventions on your part means being banned from this board in its entirety. It would be nice if members were polled to determine if this is wanted. And like FSF said previously, you could do just a trial run. If it's a headache, dump it; if it's manageable & you don't have to act like a babysitter, then keep it. I just thought that a niche little chat room called "Ralph's Corner" or something would be a nice place for Sioux fans to get acquainted in an informal setting. Thanks for your consideration.

Also, if space is an issue, the topics Division I-AA & Sioux Name are already "Cafe"-like topics & would be relevant points of interest in such a forum. Posters could share insights on various issues & you, dear moderators, wouldn't have to chime in every hour telling us to stay on topic.

I like this forum very much in the short time I've been using it: good topics, knowledgeable fans, etc. I was wondering, though, if you could perhaps change your format a little. Would it be possible to maybe add a "Cafe" section like USCHO where users can chat on a variety of topics? I mention this because during the summer months there's only so much sports one can discuss & the threads seem kinda flat. Maybe your control panel doesn't allow for more content but, if it does, could you poll current users to gauge their level of interest? Thanks & keep up the great work...

Wasn't he quoted a few months ago in a Herald article as saying that he planned on staying at UND 4 years to fine-tune his game? Not that there's any guarantee he'll stay, but it'd sure be nice. Gritty & Fast? Kinda sounds like Jason Blake...

What I'd like to do with those PC'ers:

But you'd think they'd want more & not less...

These left-wing fringe groups are pretty effective in pushing their agendas down the majority's throats because they're so much more vocal. Their radical ideas would never be approved through normal channels (like voting), so they resort to judicial means. I wouldn't underestimate these knuckleheads. If one school is forced to change its name, it's obviously going to snowball & effect everybody. "Ooooh, I'm sooo offended with a public institution using an indian logo & nickname that I'm depressed & can't sleep at night!" Next thing you know, animal rights activists will be barking & want any school affiliated with an animal name to change its image. The sad thing with these groups is that they won't stop at just Native American names; they'll always find a "cause" to rally around.

Kind of ugly to look at, but this ol' barn is where Sioux hockey all started. My how times have changed. Don't think we could have persuaded Zach with this

Right on, WPoS. I know this is a hockey forum but I just had to add something: Political correctness is much more than a catchy phrase--the concept was first started in Stalinist Russia in 1923 with the intent of prohibiting free speech. It's now prevalent in American universities & elsewhere... Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. Great news that Zach could be around 2 more years.

Thx a lot, mksioux, hadn't thought of doing that