Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Siouxphan27

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,849

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    48

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Siouxphan27

  1. Siouxphan27
    I reserve that kind of language for Canadians
  2. Siouxphan27
    roll ponies!!!
  3. Siouxphan27
    .....and a nodak logo will automatically be an old timer hick.... funny tho.....once you put that old fashioned looking guy on a Shetland pony, suddenly you have the epitome of badassery! Bully ridas! :-)
  4. Siouxphan27
    post of the year, Fetch!
  5. Siouxphan27
    I think the simple answer as to why we were left with these finalists, is the committee completely ignored the criteria. Instead of sitting around in rube-like fashion, eliminating 95% of the names in the first few hours together solely based on their method of needing one or more person to speak up and say they liked a certain name for it to remain, they should've started by eliminating every choice that did not meet the criteria. Then, they could've had meaningful discussion on the remaining names so everyone understood why those names remained, and their significance to North Dakota and UND. And then, start whittling down the choices. But obviously that ship sailed months ago.
  6. Siouxphan27
    absolutely, I realize that Eric. I didn't mean all Roughriders supporters in my post/posts.
  7. Siouxphan27
    read the fine print, chief. I said the "condensed version." I've given my reasons on here several times before. I do find the pompous attitude of roughrider supporters quite interesting to put it mildly. There were 5 choices. One out of 5 people voted for roughriders. (which, for the mathematically challenged, also means 80% didn't like roughriders enough to vote for it.) yet, there's an expectation here that everyone should just rally around roughriders because, you know, YOU like the name. Lol thanks for the "great" idea! After months of ridicule for our preferred choices, we'll be happy to join you now! said no one ever. Go Nodaks! Or if not, Go Fighting Hawks!
  8. Siouxphan27
    haha excellent point.
  9. Siouxphan27
    It sure is confusing, isn't it? At one time I recall hearing Sundogs could not be voted for because B.R.I.D.G.E.S. supported it. But, now it sounds like it's ok to vote for Roughriders even though Ron His Horse is Thunder is a fan of the name. I guess I'll take the really weird, unconventional approach and continue to vote for the name I like best.
  10. Siouxphan27
    records vary- somewhere between 1 and 3.
  11. Siouxphan27
    don't you ever read my posts? Lol lol heres a condensed version of reasons: 1. It sucks. 2. See reason #1.
  12. Siouxphan27
    I'd much rather see another vote if none reach 50% in round 2. (Or better yet take nodaks off right now since it finished third.). But if the new name is chosen without a majority, it would be a fitting end to this entire long debacle; minority opinion + political correctness resulted in loss of our nickname, so why not have a minority opinion determine the new name? augh!!!!!
  13. Siouxphan27
    if you read my sentence in its entirety, you would notice I said the logo would be our own. I was not talking about the name itself; that wasn't the topic of my post.
  14. Siouxphan27
    I agree. If fighting hawks is chosen and this is the type of logo wanted, we can make enough changes to a profile of a hawk and call it our own. The supposed "confusion" of these "uninformed" college students voting for hawks solely based on a logo seems a little contradictory. All kinds of already owned, unusable roughriders logos have been all over this website for months in an effort to pump up enthusiasm for roughriders. Go figure. There is no way of knowing if there are more hawks supporters who think that specific hawk logo is usable, than there are roughriders supporters who think any of the roughrider logos floating around are usable. And I thank those roughriders supporters who are stuck in circular logic/groupthink mode in advance for the ensuing thumbs downs.
  15. Siouxphan27
    on this site, yes. But as we just saw in the actual election, the thoughts on this site didn't really hold true to the general und population's vote. it would be interesting to poll everyone on this site that voted for nodaks originally, and see how they would vote now if fighting hawks and Roughriders were the only two options
  16. Siouxphan27
    IMO you may be overestimating the hatred for Hawks. I'm guessing some voted For nodaks because they were not enamored with any of the four other choices. So if this would've played out like it should have, I don't think the ratio of original Nodak voters switching to RR would be much larger than those switching to Hawks.....
  17. Siouxphan27
    I give up. Is that Wilford Brimley cutting and shocking an oats field?
  18. Siouxphan27
    exactly. what happens if during the run off vote, all three names finish within 116 votes of each other? do we just say "You're all Winners!" and move forward with three nicknames? we can't even define a "winner" or a "loser", without fear of offending some of those losers who were good tryers and came so close to winning! modern day academia at its finest.
  19. Siouxphan27
    I figured since this is strictly an email election, there really couldn't be any error. it's not like there's hanging chads, or someone screwed up the rest of their ballot while voting for county sheriff and their entire ballot got rejected, etc. he's mucking up the process. the sad part is he doesn't even realize it.
  20. Siouxphan27
    thanks ericpnelson. I respect the original process laid out for the voting. Not following the plan just adds another level of frustration and skepticism for the passionate fans/alumni/donors.
  21. Siouxphan27
    Yes...... but, people will complain regardless.... but in the case of Nodaks, any complainers wouldn't have a leg to stand on.... Nodaks got third most votes, so it's out... well, I figured since you're mafia and all you'd appreciate some Italian.
  22. Siouxphan27
    I had the same thoughts. it's unlikely, but these current percentages could be meaningless if a bunch of new voters got involved.
  23. Siouxphan27
    what are people's thoughts on voter turnout for round 2? will round 2 result in thousands more people voting? (doubt it) will fewer people end up voting, based on their original choice being eliminated and they couldn't care less now? (maybe) will fewer people end up voting, because the process has been changed and they're turned off? (maybe) should 1st round Sundog voters even be allowed to vote after demonstrating such poor decision making skills?
  24. Siouxphan27
    true, but after the second round, people will claim their choice lost because nodaks voters would've switched to FH if they're a FH supporter, or RR if they're a RR supporter. it will leave more people frustrated than if the rules would've been followed IMO.
  25. Siouxphan27
    you're missing the point. 20% more voters would need to change their vote to one of the top two if the rules and integrity of the process was followed. now, they don't.
×
×
  • Create New...