Media Stories on the Sioux Name

[PCM]

First, "Gothmog" actually comes from the books of JRR Tolkien. He may, or may not, have gotten the idea from the tribe to which you refer.

It doesn't matter. As long as one Goth descendent is offended, you must give up your name.

Your efforts to convince people that the NCAA is wrong, hypocritical, stupid, silly...are all in vain.

Certainly my efforts to convince you are in vain. However, I don't believe that your thinking is representative of most Americans, let alone most American Indians.

[Gothmog]

It doesn't matter. As long as one Goth descendent is offended, you must give up your name.

Certainly my efforts to convince you are in vain. However, I don't believe that your thinking is representative of most Americans, let alone most American Indians.

Well, there you go with the false analogies again. But if you can find a Goth who objects, I'll gladly change my name.

How sure are you that YOUR thinking is representative of most Americans, or Native Americans?

[PCM]

How sure are you that YOUR thinking is representative of most Americans, or Native Americans?

I'm sure that the only independent scientific polls conducted on the issue support my position, not yours.

[Chewey]

First, "Gothmog" actually comes from the books of JRR Tolkien. He may, or may not, have gotten the idea from the tribe to which you refer.

Second, You certainly can complain to the NCAA about anything you want. My point is that the NCAA's hypocrisy is completely irrelevant to the question "Does UND have the right to use the nickname 'Sioux'." That's why this lawsuit is such a waste - it simply cannot resolve the issue. Win or lose, as long as Native Americans generally object to the nickname, UND has a problem. No amount of whinning about the big bad NCAA will ever change that. Your efforts to convince people that the NCAA is wrong, hypocritical, stupid, silly...are all in vain.

They certainly have the legal trademark right to use the name and the "policy" of the NCAA is interfering with that right. This is most likely one of the reasons the lawsuit was brought (i.e. to enforce/protect contract and trademark rights). While this is not the whole basis for the lawsuit, the lawsuit itself is certainly not a "waste." To label it a "waste" indicates that it has no basis in fact or law which is not correct. This is the same trite line of reasoning that the name change advocates are so wont to employ. The whole "wast" and "irresponsible employment of resources" argument is very tired indeed. What really is wasteful is the employment of resources and time and money (including UND's money) by the NCAA to ramrod social engineering policy ad hoc fiats it has no business conceiving let alone "enforcing."

[PCM]

From The Dartmouth:

The Absurdity of Mascot Boycotts

No matter how one may feel about this Native American mascot issue, it is important to understand the positions of the other schools. The schools that choose to continue to use Native American mascots do not do so to offend anybody, but because they do not view the issue in the same way. No matter how one may feel about any issue, each side must demonstrate a mutual respect for the other. We cannot refuse to associate with anyone who disagrees with us.

Racial tensions mar Fall term, activists respond

Students and administrators reacted to a series of racially-charged incidents Fall term, a fervor that took place while key leadership positions in the College's two primary diversity groups -- the Office of Pluralism and Leadership and the Office of Institutional Diversity and Equity -- remained vacant. Controversies, such as a Dartmouth Review cover depicting an Indian holding a scalp, attracted national media attention and elicited strong responses from administrators and campus leaders.

[SiouxMeNow]

as long as Native Americans generally object to the nickname, UND has a problem. No amount of whinning about the big bad NCAA will ever change that. Your efforts to convince people that the NCAA is wrong, hypocritical, stupid, silly...are all in vain.

thanks for taking off your hood Gothmog! It was suffocating your objectivity...

Can you define "generally?" You can't say "generally" without knowing how every native american in ND feels (even members of other tribes!) "GENERALLY" is usually decided by a democratic VOTE...

Want to talk hypocrisy? The NCAA smiling all the way to the bank with a +/-$10 million dollar check from Pontiac while winking at FSU's "mascot" chucking a flaming spear into the turf in front of 40,000+ "tomahawk-chopping" fans just because they have "tribal approval?"

you REALLY have to ask who's being played for the fool here GothMog? the NCAA can make an "example" of UND but still keep the BIG cash flowing by giving a pass to other schools and businesses that have, frankly, far MORE offensive Native American "imagery"

UND is the patsy in this deal...you might feel better by supporting the NCAA but really you should feel worse because NOTHING is being done by the NCAA to "preserve" the dignity of the Native American....you're like a rube on the carnival midway...they just want you to give them another dollar in hope of winning a "prize" - PT Barnum said..."there's a sucker born every minute!"

[redwing77]

SiouxMeNow-

Actually, it is my impression that it isn't the NCAA's job to preserve or destroy Native American anything. Whether it is supporting or going against UND's name, it isn't their place. NCAA doesn't have to like our name. If they want it changed all they have to do is convince the member institutions to pass a by law requiring none of that type of imagery. Of course, Utah, CMU, and FSU would have to change their names too, but I don't see that as a problem if this issue truly is as bad as Brand has decided it is.

[PCM]

SiouxMeNow-

Actually, it is my impression that it isn't the NCAA's job to preserve or destroy Native American anything. Whether it is supporting or going against UND's mascot, it isn't their place.

UND doesn't have a mastcot.

[redwing77]

UND doesn't have a mastcot.

EEP!

I knew that. Changed.

[Gothmog]

thanks for taking off your hood Gothmog! It was suffocating your objectivity...

Can you define "generally?" You can't say "generally" without knowing how every native american in ND feels (even members of other tribes!) "GENERALLY" is usually decided by a democratic VOTE...

Want to talk hypocrisy? The NCAA smiling all the way to the bank with a +/-$10 million dollar check from Pontiac while winking at FSU's "mascot" chucking a flaming spear into the turf in front of 40,000+ "tomahawk-chopping" fans just because they have "tribal approval?"

you REALLY have to ask who's being played for the fool here GothMog? the NCAA can make an "example" of UND but still keep the BIG cash flowing by giving a pass to other schools and businesses that have, frankly, far MORE offensive Native American "imagery"

UND is the patsy in this deal...you might feel better by supporting the NCAA but really you should feel worse because NOTHING is being done by the NCAA to "preserve" the dignity of the Native American....you're like a rube on the carnival midway...they just want you to give them another dollar in hope of winning a "prize" - PT Barnum said..."there's a sucker born every minute!"

You mind explaining the "taking off your hood" comment? You're on very thin ice.

[Gothmog]

They certainly have the legal trademark right to use the name and the "policy" of the NCAA is interfering with that right. This is most likely one of the reasons the lawsuit was brought (i.e. to enforce/protect contract and trademark rights). While this is not the whole basis for the lawsuit, the lawsuit itself is certainly not a "waste." To label it a "waste" indicates that it has no basis in fact or law which is not correct. This is the same trite line of reasoning that the name change advocates are so wont to employ. The whole "wast" and "irresponsible employment of resources" argument is very tired indeed. What really is wasteful is the employment of resources and time and money (including UND's money) by the NCAA to ramrod social engineering policy ad hoc fiats it has no business conceiving let alone "enforcing."

Gee, that's a Non-Sequitur.

My point was that the lawsuit is a waste because UND's problem isn't really with the NCAA, it's with the Native Americans who object to the nickname. Win or lose, UND will still face the exact same problem. A problem that, in my opinion, can only be resolved by changing the name.

Your comments about trademarks, etc. may, or may not, be correct. However, they have no relevance to the questions I raised.

[Riverman]

You mind explaining the "taking off your hood" comment? You're on very thin ice.

Yeah "walking barbarians" or "barbarians walking" = Gothmog's.

Have feelings you know!!

[Gothmog]

Yeah "walking barbarians" or "barbarians walking" = Gothmog's.

Have feelings you know!!

OK, whatever you say!

[PCM]

My point was that the lawsuit is a waste because UND's problem isn't really with the NCAA, it's with the Native Americans who object to the nickname. Win or lose, UND will still face the exact same problem. A problem that, in my opinion, can only be resolved by changing the name.

You are wrong. The lawsuit is not a waste of time because the NCAA has breached its contract with UND. If it can do that to UND, it can do it to any other member of the association.

Is that really a precedent you want established? Do you really think it's a good idea to allow a small committee of the NCAA to rule by fiat in direct contradiction to the organization's constitution and bylaws? Perhaps you don't think that's important, but there are many people within the legal community who disagree. I prefer to rely on their judgment rather than your opinion.

While you are correct that the current problem with the tribes will remain even if UND wins its lawsuit, by acting as a surrogate for the tribes, UND has no choice but to deal with the mess the NCAA has created for itself. That was the NCAA's choice, not UND's.

You are also incorrect that the only way UND can resolve the problem is to change its name. I have no doubt that there's a committed and very vocal minority of a minority that will never change its position on the issue. They might eventually prevail or UND might convince the majority that it's to their advantage to work with the university rather than against it. Other options remain open.

[Gothmog]

You are wrong. The lawsuit is not a waste of time because the NCAA has breached its contract with UND. If it can do that to UND, it can do it to any other member of the association.

Is that really a precedent you want established? Do you really think it's a good idea to allow a small committee of the NCAA to rule by fiat in direct contradiction to the organization's constitution and bylaws? Perhaps you don't think that's important, but there are many people within the legal community who disagree. I prefer to rely on their judgment rather than your opinion.

While you are correct that the current problem with the tribes will remain even if UND wins its lawsuit, by acting as a surrogate for the tribes, UND has no choice but to deal with the mess the NCAA has created for itself. That was the NCAA's choice, not UND's.

You are also incorrect that the only way UND can resolve the problem is to change its name. I have no doubt that there's a committed and very vocal minority of a minority that will never change its position on the issue. They might eventually prevail or UND might convince the majority that it's to their advantage to work with the university rather than against it. Other options remain open.

No, you are wrong, the time has come to just change the name.

Your first point is basically a very weak slippery-slope argument that if the NCAA prevails on this issue they will inevitably impose some sort of politically-correct tyranny. There is not one bit of evidence to support that. The Native-American nicknames issue has been with us for decades, and the NCAA's position on the issue, whether you chose to admit or not, has the support of the majority of native tribes, educational institutions, and civil rights organizations throughout this country. No other even remotely comparable issue exists. The NCAA is not a malevolent institution, and this is not an enormous conspiracy against the University of North Dakota. The NCAA is simply trying to do the "right thing" by finally bringing closure to a divisive issue. If you're really seeking to establish a legal precedent, would you accept the same policy if it had been passed by a majority of the NCAA's membership? I think not. This is not about UND's altruistic interest in curbing the NCAA's power.

As far as UND, someday, convincing the majority of tribes to "work with" the university. UND has had 30+ years to do just that. There is absolutely no reason to believe that it will be able to do so in 30 more years. Do you really want decades more of this?

[redwing77]

As far as UND, someday, convincing the majority of tribes to "work with" the university. UND has had 30+ years to do just that. There is absolutely no reason to believe that it will be able to do so in 30 more years. Do you really want decades more of this?

Just a quick question, If UND regardless of the nickname has no hope to work with the tribes over the next 30 years, does that mean the University is wasting money on those 30 Native American only programs they fund?

If so, I could really think that the University would be best suited by removing that funding and putting it into a general scholarship fund for anyone and everyone qualified to earn financial aid. You know, it would help people of all ethnicities, backgrounds, and all handle the growing and overwhelming costs of collegiate education.

Please, if you are blind to what the University is doing to help the Native Americans of North Dakota and even Minnesota, then you truly are wrong. Those programs alone (and I'm sure there are more than just those programs) are a standing testiment to UND's stance in the education of Native Americans. I think their INMED program is absolutely top notch! Let's get to being more realistic: We know you are anti-nickname. We know that there is nothing we can say or do short of changing the name to change your mind (something that has already been admitted). We know that this issue will never go away (let's face it, it is impossible to make everyone happy. That's why majority rules came about. Sure, it has its problems, but whatever makes the MOST people happy is the policy everyone seems to strive for. And that means there will be a minority that may not necessarily be happy about the outcome. However, pleasing the minority to the disregard of the majority's opinion is rather backwards and even more damaging) even if we do change the name.

My return question to you is: How much longer do you want to disregard the majority's opinion to forward the minority (even if it is the minority of a minority) agenda? Is there a voice of the majority in this? I mean, obviously, if the board's members voted on whether or not they liked "gothmog" as your nickname and all but 2 liked it, does that mean that, because those two don't like your nickname that you must change your nickname? Are you serious about that type of resolve? Talk about a slippery slope!

[Gothmog]

Just a quick question, If UND regardless of the nickname has no hope to work with the tribes over the next 30 years, does that mean the University is wasting money on those 30 Native American only programs they fund?

If so, I could really think that the University would be best suited by removing that funding and putting it into a general scholarship fund for anyone and everyone qualified to earn financial aid. You know, it would help people of all ethnicities, backgrounds, and all handle the growing and overwhelming costs of collegiate education.

Please, if you are blind to what the University is doing to help the Native Americans of North Dakota and even Minnesota, then you truly are wrong. Those programs alone (and I'm sure there are more than just those programs) are a standing testiment to UND's stance in the education of Native Americans. I think their INMED program is absolutely top notch! Let's get to being more realistic: We know you are anti-nickname. We know that there is nothing we can say or do short of changing the name to change your mind (something that has already been admitted). We know that this issue will never go away (let's face it, it is impossible to make everyone happy. That's why majority rules came about. Sure, it has its problems, but whatever makes the MOST people happy is the policy everyone seems to strive for. And that means there will be a minority that may not necessarily be happy about the outcome. However, pleasing the minority to the disregard of the majority's opinion is rather backwards and even more damaging) even if we do change the name.

My return question to you is: How much longer do you want to disregard the majority's opinion to forward the minority (even if it is the minority of a minority) agenda? Is there a voice of the majority in this? I mean, obviously, if the board's members voted on whether or not they liked "gothmog" as your nickname and all but 2 liked it, does that mean that, because those two don't like your nickname that you must change your nickname? Are you serious about that type of resolve? Talk about a slippery slope!

I think we all understand the concept of representative democracy. The plain fact is that the overwhelming majority of Sioux tribes have, through their tribal governments, expressed opposition to the nickname.

You've got a losing argument.

[sioux7>5]

I think we all understand the concept of representative democracy. The plain fact is that the overwhelming majority of Sioux tribes have, through their tribal governments, expressed opposition to the nickname.

You've got a losing argument.

I think you are wrong. I have always heard that it is only the tribal leaders and a few others that make a big stink over the nickname. The majority of tribal members supprt UND and like the nickname. I am beginning to think that Gothmog is actually GK in disguise.

[Gothmog]

I think you are wrong. I have always heard that it is only the tribal leaders and a few others that make a big stink over the nickname. The majority of tribal members supprt UND and like the nickname. I am beginning to think that Gothmog is actually GK in disguise.

I'm wrong that the majority of Sioux tribal governments have expressed opposition to the nickname, or that we all understand the concept of representative democracy? Apparently the latter.

[LeftyZL]

I'm wrong that the majority of Sioux tribal governments have expressed opposition to the nickname, or that we all understand the concept of representative democracy? Apparently the latter.

I believe you are correct that the majority of Sioux tribal governments have expressed opposition about the nickname. I believe you are incorrect in that it was done in a way with a democratic vote of the entire tribe.

[Chewey]

Gee, that's a Non-Sequitur.

My point was that the lawsuit is a waste because UND's problem isn't really with the NCAA, it's with the Native Americans who object to the nickname. Win or lose, UND will still face the exact same problem. A problem that, in my opinion, can only be resolved by changing the name.

Your comments about trademarks, etc. may, or may not, be correct. However, they have no relevance to the questions I raised.

They have every direct application to the points that you raised, although you apparently raised them nebulously. You indicated that the lawsuit was a "waste." In that you have now clarified your previous message, I still do not agree with your position that it is a "waste." As has been pointed out on numerous occasions, the only scientific polls conducted on the issue indicate that a majority of native americans either don't care or are not bothered by indian nicknames. As far as "altruistic" motivations are concerned, I have no doubt that the NCAA and its star chamber of PC do-gooders must be reigned in but that is not the complete picture. Demanding that the NCAA follow its own by-laws and constitution, arguing that the NCAA treat all of its members equally, protecting legal rights are only a few of the points that are the reasons for the lawsuits. These points and others may be a collective "Non-Sequitur" to name change advocates who myopically focus on "insults" and "degradation" concocted in the recesses of the minds of some PC'ers that have nothing better to do. It's not time to change the name. If you think that changing the name is the almighty panacea of the "problems" with the tribes (there are only problems with the name vis-a-vis the tribes as per a vocal and itinerant minority that gets bused around the country/region to address "outrages") see Dartmouth. It is beyond time to do just what UND is doing and it is time for the NCAA executive committe to stop being an habitue to the PC demimonde and focus on scheduling games, preventing fights between football teams, educating athletes beyond a fourth grade level, preventing athletes and coaches from engaging with prostitutes, reign in coaches' salaries, etc.

The hurt feelings of a small group of PC hacks that are used to getting their way once they not only throw around mundane and inapplicable accusations of institutional racism but also ghost "victimization" upon groups of people is the collective Non-Sequitur here. If such things do exist, the proper remedy is to go through the legislative process or through the alumni organizations rather than grease the palms of fellow PC hacks that occupy powerful positions in a monopolistic organization. One of the most shocking examples of mis-placed priorities and flawed logic is the minimizing and/or lack of acknowledgment by the NCAA and the PC hacks of their own "hostile and abusive" conduct and of their own use of racist tactics (see accusing an institution of racism where no civil rights group has discovered such racism) to further their PC agenda. The logic employed is completely sophomoric and that is a very generous adjective for it. Pseudo-altruism is a tactic that the NCAA is good at employing when it comes to this issue.

[Gothmog]

I believe you are correct that the majority of Sioux tribal governments have expressed opposition about the nickname. I believe you are incorrect in that it was done in a way with a democratic vote of the entire tribe.

So?

Representative governments often take positions contrary to the will of a majority of citizens (thank God). Does that mean that we are free to disregard those positions?

[Chewey]

So?

Representative governments often take positions contrary to the will of a majority of citizens (thank God). Does that mean that we are free to disregard those positions?

According to many NA's at UND, it means that the vocal support for the nickname must be squelched and disregarded.

[PCM]

No, you are wrong, the time has come to just change the name.

Like the NCAA, you arrogantly and condescendingly believe that your opinon is fact and there is no other way but yours. You are wrong about that, and so is the NCAA.

Your first point is basically a very weak slippery-slope argument that if the NCAA prevails on this issue they will inevitably impose some sort of politically-correct tyranny. There is not one bit of evidence to support that.

The August 2005 policy arbitrarily and capriciously imposed by the NCAA's executive committee is proof positive that the polictically correct tryanny has already taken place. How you can be so blind as to argue otherwise is beyond me.

The Native-American nicknames issue has been with us for decades, and the NCAA's position on the issue, whether you chose to admit or not, has the support of the majority of native tribes, educational institutions, and civil rights organizations throughout this country. No other even remotely comparable issue exists.

I'm well aware of all the organizations and tribal resolutions against UND's nickname. Off the top of my head, I can think of one social issue that dwarfs the Indian nickname issue: abortion. There are many, many social issues about which the general public and, I dare say, the Native American population cares more about than the nickname issue.

Tell me this, Gothmog. If the Fighting Sioux nickname issue is as hugely important to the American Indian community as you seem to believe, why is it that no protest over the name has ever drawn more than 100 people? Why don't the 400 Native American students enrolled at UND march as a monothitic block to demand that UND change the name? Why are so many of the protestors non-Indians?

The NCAA is not a malevolent institution, and this is not an enormous conspiracy against the University of North Dakota.

When did I ever say it was a conspiracy? Please stick to the topic.

The NCAA is simply trying to do the "right thing" by finally bringing closure to a divisive issue.

And as recent events at Dartmouth have shown, they will fail. Meaningless symbolic gestures don't end racism.

If you're really seeking to establish a legal precedent, would you accept the same policy if it had been passed by a majority of the NCAA's membership? I think not. This is not about UND's altruistic interest in curbing the NCAA's power.

Where's your proof to back up that absurd statement? UND has no illusions about curbing the NCAA's power. It simply wants the autonomy to make decisions as guaranteed by the association's own bylaws and constitution. That's what the lawsuit is about. Read it. You might learn something rather than hatching ridiculous fantasies.

As far as UND, someday, convincing the majority of tribes to "work with" the university. UND has had 30+ years to do just that. There is absolutely no reason to believe that it will be able to do so in 30 more years. Do you really want decades more of this?

The resolutions passed by the various Sioux tribes calling on UND to change it's name haven't been around for 30 years. Just as tribal leaders were convinced to pass those resolutions, they can be convinced to withdraw or change them.

That brings me back to one of my original points. How is it that during the past 30 years, those who want to end the practice of using American Indian nicknames for sports teams have been unable to convince a large majority of the allged victims that the practice should end?

I'd like to know, Gothmog, what will your position be if the Sioux tribes pass resolutions demanding that NDSU stop using the Bison, a sacred animal to their religion, as its nickname and the NCAA uses its executive committee power to force that change? Will you be the first Bison fan to lead the charge and demand that NDSU cave into the pressure?

[Riverman]

OK, whatever you say!

What's in a name. gothmog, do you really think that UND picked Fighting Sioux to mock the Sioux nation?

You picked a unique or what you thought was a unique name. gothmog really is two words.

Clarifying gothmog into two words breaks down to goth a noun or goti or gota, anyway were Germanic or one might say "barbarians".

I choose to use mog as being a verb and not a noun. So we all now that mog or mogging as a verb means to walk.

See how easy it is gothmog to turn words around to fit what just one person thinks of your name?

Oh never mind..