Detroit87 Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Maybe this board should be a private board since so many members do not like different views? Quote
krangodance Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Maybe this board should be a private board since so many members do not like different views? i think sharing different views is a big part of any message board. are you suggesting that if it was made private, administrators would kick anybody off for not having a specific opinion on each matter? maybe you should go start your own private board where you can share your opinions with the world and only allow those who agree with you to join your community. leave this board alone. Quote
jimdahl Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Just to clear up any misconceptions... this board is private. We choose to let anyone read it because we think that allows it to provide the best service to UND athletics, but to post requires agreeing to abide by the forum terms and rules. Those terms and rules were also constructed with the goal of best serving UND athletics. To that end, they encourage different points of view (e.g. explicitly permitting people to criticize a team), but explicitly prohibit some particularly destructive behaviors that have proven to make the board a less welcoming place (e.g. personal attacks and defamation). We've tried to gather a lot of input about how you all think the forum can best do that and foster a UND fan community, and the rules are the product of that feedback over the years. We're always willing to have discussions like this in this forum. The rules are subject to change as the culture and legal environment of the forum changes, but abiding by them is a requirement for posting. Quote
sprig Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Maybe this board should be a private board since so many members do not like different views? Most of us don't really look at rules when we register, much like reading and accepting software limitations before installing. In this case, following is an excerpt from the rules you should read You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. Quote
Detroit87 Posted February 4, 2010 Author Posted February 4, 2010 i think sharing different views is a big part of any message board. are you suggesting that if it was made private, administrators would kick anybody off for not having a specific opinion on each matter? maybe you should go start your own private board where you can share your opinions with the world and only allow those who agree with you to join your community. leave this board alone. They do kick people off if they are against the logo. The rules are not followed if attack is against someone who is against the logo. They are free game for the supporters. Though if an anti-logo does the same to a pro-logo they are gone. Quote
Stromer Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 They do kick people off if they are against the logo. The rules are not followed if attack is against someone who is against the logo. They are free game for the supporters. Though if an anti-logo does the same to a pro-logo they are gone. Well I have yet to see a nickname opponent come on here without attacking everyone from the local postman to Ralph himself to Ra, the egyptian sun god. So I think their bans are probably well deserved. Quote
nodak hockey fanatic Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 jim is fairly tolerant, and a majority of posters here support the sioux nickname and logo, but people who are not are not kicked off because of that belief. now if they do something worthy of being banned, and they are nickname opponents, does that mean that jim and ss.com are discriminatory against them? i am not sure why you post on this board detroit, as you seem to be very negative about this site and board and its rules, but the rules apply to everyone. opinions are welcome... as jim stated, difference of opinion can be a good and productive thing if kept civil. Quote
krangodance Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 They do kick people off if they are against the logo. The rules are not followed if attack is against someone who is against the logo. They are free game for the supporters. Though if an anti-logo does the same to a pro-logo they are gone. do you have an example? or are you just having a rough day and thought stirring the pot over at ss.com might cheer you up? Quote
Oxbow6 Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 They do kick people off if they are against the logo. The rules are not followed if attack is against someone who is against the logo. They are free game for the supporters. Though if an anti-logo does the same to a pro-logo they are gone. Dude, did you just have a colonoscopy today? I have read some of your posts today on various threads...wow! We all have bad days, but... Quote
Goon Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Dude, did you just have a colonoscopy today? Now that is funny. Quote
Goon Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 They do kick people off if they are against the logo. The rules are not followed if attack is against someone who is against the logo. They are free game for the supporters. Though if an anti-logo does the same to a pro-logo they are gone. I would say that is highly inaccurate a few of the anti-logo people didn't behave themselves and I believe that Siouxcia had a problem with one skippy. Fact remains if they were banned or suspended they probably deserved it. Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 I think Jim is way more tolerant than some other forums are of minority opinions or controversial viewpoints. And the rules cover common sense things that are unacceptable just about everywhere in society at large. Anyone who has a problem with how this forum is administered is way too sensitive and is just asking for anarchy, which is bad for everyone. Quote
Sioux-cia Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 I would say that is highly inaccurate a few of the anti-logo people didn't behave themselves and I believe that Siouxcia had a problem with one skippy. Fact remains if they were banned or suspended they probably deserved it. I did but that's not why he was banned. AND, he was not banned because he was against the logo. He had a long term relationship with this community until he hacked into my account, posted defammatory, hateful things about his own tribe while pretending to be me. He couldn't get any SS.com member to post what he was accused us of 'how you really feel about the Sioux', so he made it up. Jim was great during that incident, did a great job with 'forensics' and cleared my name. If the other poster had not done those things, I believe he would still be allowed to post his opposition the the Fighting Sioux name and logo. Having said that, I don't miss him. Quote
The Whistler Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 Maybe this board should be a private board since so many members do not like different views? I'm sure that people who don't like the way Doogie runs this board could just go start their own. Quote
redwing77 Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Detroit is partially right. I'm not sure the last time a pro nicknamer was kicked off the board. However, all the anti nicknamers that were kicked off the board violated the rules of the board so it didn't matter what the stance was. I don't recall fourwindsboy being kicked off the board. I do recall GrahamKracker though. He did some stuff that were questionable legally. Quote
jimdahl Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Detroit is partially right. I'm not sure the last time a pro nicknamer was kicked off the board You're falling into the same statistical trap as Detroit In all seriousness, I usually ignore the conspiracy theories because they're a waste of time to refute, but they also usually come from far less reputable circles... so, I will take this opportunity to refute the implied nickname-based litmus test (as redwing well knows ). Quote
farce poobah Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 I applaud the Siouxsports.com administrators. They walk a tough narrow line, and do it well. The result is that this board is way more interesting than other sites / boards sponsored by other teams. Proof that this board is interesting? Compare the thread counts, posts, views to any other board, and it shows it works. Quote
redwing77 Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 You're falling into the same statistical trap as Detroit In all seriousness, I usually ignore the conspiracy theories because they're a waste of time to refute, but they also usually come from far less reputable circles... so, I will take this opportunity to refute the implied nickname-based litmus test (as redwing well knows ). Well, maybe I am. Quote
Goon Posted February 8, 2010 Posted February 8, 2010 I applaud the Siouxsports.com administrators. They walk a tough narrow line, and do it well. The result is that this board is way more interesting than other sites / boards sponsored by other teams. Proof that this board is interesting? Compare the thread counts, posts, views to any other board, and it shows it works. I think Sioux sports is run a lot better than the USCHO.COM. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.