A Gentle Reminder

And I’m in South California, so I always have that excuse!

i love AC.

Although… for me it’s NOT unexpected. This is why I’m not staying with a friend during my visit but will instead get a hotel room. I definitely get cranky in the heat.

lol

Thank you PJ for the sacrifices you are presently making. I’m a veteran myself but never was deployed to a combat area. What you do while on duty every day allows us to do what we do in our "cushy, civilian lives." Glad you have something like BE to keep you updated and provide a little escape once in awhile. Keep your head down and come home safe.

Basically, as fans, all our conversations revolve around the risk and the potential of a player and of the team. I think it’s helpful for people to remember this. If what we declared were ACTUALLY fact, the front office would have already reacted. You see, they have a history of showing that they are MUCH smarter and MUCH better educated on the matters than the average fans. Occasionally we get a tidbit right, but that doesn’t make us smarter. It means a risk didn’t pan out or a potential did and in the end we got lucky with our educated or uneducated guess because it can ALWAYS go either way.

I also take strong issue with the extremes of talk radio that I see infiltrating this site. Extremes are ALWAYS harmful for debate and it destroys the quality of conversation. Not only that, but the people on the radio (or other media members) that spout their extremes and declare them fact, they have NO vested interest in the Blazers or the fan. Their sole purpose is to increase ratings. this is done by ticking people off and getting reactions. This is where I think Dave is wrong about the plaid.

The radio announcer can call the sky plaid. The fact it isn’t is so obvious that people will call in to correct the announcer. Then the Announcer will personally attack the callers of rational logic, put down their point of view, and twist the message to showcase how the caller is wrong with the use of twisted logical falsies. Others may now become engaged and the debate grows.

In the meantime someone is listening that hasn’t been outside for a bit, is blind, or just never looks up and they’ll be convinced by the argument because it sounds good to them. After all, the radio host just made the other person look like an idiot by shouting them down and throwing the caller off balance so their logical and sensible response became garbled.

The best way to react, is to ignore the people that want a reaction. The problem is that those people who need the attention know what buttons to push so they’re not ignored and a lot of people just can’t let go. it then feeds on itself.

Anyway, I think this was a good time for your post Dave.

Well, both are inherently competetive, I guess—at least our American brand of sports and politics. I definitely see much, much more flaming on sports sites than on any of the others I visit (mostly set up for musicians, educators, or activists). These sports sites are also the only ones where I see as much cleavage in the ads, so I’m guessing there’s some testosterone involved.

I haven’t owned a TV in over twenty years, but when I’ve stayed in motels and seen sports shows fearuring several commentators debating a point, there is something competetive about it. It’s a slippery slope from debating a point in a civil tone and trash talking (which, I have to admit, I enjoy participating in on the court). Guess that’s why we need moderators.

As long as the points are fair…even if he is crazy. Another way to look at it is one crazy person is just one crazy person. Six people getting all crazy at the crazy person makes seven crazy people. Not only is that hard to read, it’s more credit and effect than the crazy point merits.

—Dave

Here’s the new person’s general guide: http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/4/29/859871/if-youre-new-to-blazersedge-now

Here’s the conversation rules page: http://www.blazersedge.com/story/2007/5/27/35733/4476

It’s pretty simple really. Talk about points, not about other posters. Debate with passion but be fair to other people’s points of view. Don’t swear. Make your post worth reading…bring something to the site rather than just indulging yourself. That’s about it.

—Dave

What ever happened to the new banning rules that you put out a little while back? I guess those in control of this forum have three basic choices:

1) Let people say whatever they want to say, even if it’s offensive and drives some people away

2) Set out rules for banning and enforce them

3) Continue to let people say what they want and attempt to herd those who continue to offend with periodic gentle reminders

I don’t think setting up rules and then not enforcing them is a viable option, but then that’s just me. Maybe the gentle reminder route works, since people seem to be a little better behaved then before the banning rules were set out recently.

I like this forum quite a bit and appreciate the massive amount of work it must take to manage it. If we all treated the forum as our mutual sand box, then maybe we’d be a little better at self policing the stuff we dump into it.

Whatever offseason nastiness lingers, I expect the excitement of opening day washes most of it away

If you cut me, do I not bleed?
If you strike me, do I not bruise?
If you fire an anti-tank rocket at me, do I not explode?

for all the grandparents on the site. – Elgin

Well, that and the moderator/editor publicly going into cussing and shouting matches with posters that make stupid remarks long before banning them :)

You simultaneously make us feel better about ourselves and scare us half to death. We’re glad we’re not as pessimistic as you guys, but we secretly fear turning into the next young team with promise that didn’t make it.

That’s some disturbed kind of relationship right there.

Maybe that explains why I read so much of your guys’ stuff. That, or you’re crack for the eyes.