Junior

Because it's Obamacare for the internets!!! AAAAHHHHHHH!!!!! I HATE THAT DURN OBUMMER! HE'S TAKIN' R GURNS AND R INTERWEBS!!!

You obviously don't understand net neutrality. Try again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QplQL5eAxlY This video makes me furious. Don't watch if you aren't prepared to be completely ashamed of your country.

I believe god told us to be stewards of the earth. But I've never met a christian who actually follows god's teachings, so whatever.

McKewon is the best. Hands down. Sipple is probably the worst.

Why is it bad? Because Dirk wrote it. That's all. Some people seem to have a problem with him because he's not "rah-rah Nebraska is the best team ever!" Which, as a reporter, isn't really his job. It's national recruiting day. We just landed a pretty decent class, #31 in the nation. Sure, it's not a top ten class. But it's better than nearly any other team that went through a coaching change. Instead of finding something good to say about our new recruits our local sportswriter Dirk Chatelain writes that this class could end up like the 2000 class. A class we thought was decent when signed but didn't have any players who went on to win individual awards. I don't care if it was Santa Clause wrote the article. I'd still call him a fuckwad. It's NSD. Pour some damn Kool-Aid. How many different local writers need to write the same recruiting article?

Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

Why is it bad? Because Dirk wrote it. That's all. Some people seem to have a problem with him because he's not "rah-rah Nebraska is the best team ever!" Which, as a reporter, isn't really his job.

NuPolo 8ShawnWatson abdullahthebutcher/Finlay/BrayWyatt/???/???(seriously. this guys changed names from one wrestler to the next every two weeks) Beanman Chaddyboxer Thems are the ones I'm certain of. Are you seriously, without irony, complaining about someone changing their name too much?

So, I ask where the line is. A 12 page thread in the Woodshed dedicated to how to "deal" with NUPolo8? That's ok? Junior, I realize you were not happy with the bans, but your argument is specious. The Woodshed is an "opt-in", password protected forum in which a warning is posted in the forum heading, giving those who enter fair notice of what to expect. People who enter have to request to do so, unlike simply registering for the board in general. From a liability perspective we have a much easier argument to make in defense. By contrast, the other forums, the PM system and the email system are not "opt-in", password protected, or carry any kind of warning. If you want to continue trying to debate this, please feel free. But the bans will stand, and the way we operate will stand. If this is not satisfactory to you, no one is forcing you to remain. If you are truly worried about litigation from cyber bullying, I can assure you that the little password opt-in and the qualifier on what to expect in the woodshed wouldn't be worth the paper it was printed on in court. So there's that. As I said to Zoogs in PM, this is your board and you are welcome to do whatever the hell you want to it. And I'm free to post or not post here. Odds are, I probably won't continue to. Not that you care, you shouldn't, I'm just one random person so who gives a rip. But as the old saying goes: Don't piss down my back and then tell me it's raining. Which is what you are doing here. It's about cyber bullying! It isn't about bullying (according to zoogs), wait yes it is! Who the hell knows? Only Eric.

Thanks, now go post another selfie and let the adults talk.

Also, I don't know how far in the past you consider your "idiotic episodes", but you've been a raging dick to me in the recent past. So sorry if I don't buy this calm and classy new you stuff.

Count, I think the only copout around here is the cyber bullying BS.

So why encourage bullying with the woodshed? There's also rules to the woodshed that says no threats, libel, or bigotry. Now, go find me examples in those VS threads, and the whole 'shed for that matter, in which there are blatant and legit threats made of which it appears (and frankly, not surprising to me in any way) happened within some these pm's. People will say the damndest things and act the damndest ways when they think no one is watching or listening. True character is revealed in supposed darkness. I've been a part of numerous vs threads, and I dont recall ever being on the receving end of a legit threat, nor did I ever make one-THAT I KNOW OF. Being corrected of this notion wouldnt surprise me though. I invite you to do the leg work if you want to find something. I dont have time to do so. Im having this debate in a calm classy manner by the way. Yea, you're synonymous with classy around here.

Yeah, these threads are split off from posts in other forums, and then given that title. If two posters want to go at it, then the 'shed is where that belongs. I don't believe in deleting posts or hiding them unless there's some form of content issue that even the Woodshed won't allow. So, these threads. And there's always been a step up from a just guys calling each other names. That's what we try to keep it to. The Shed has a stated policy that threats/libel/bigotry are prohibited. We've made efforts - probably which some of you remember - to really crack down on things when in the past people have brought other members' real lives and families into the equation. There seems to be some confusion here, so again, the original three bans were a result of the admins deciding a few members needed to be talked to about their regular conduct here. There's definitely some confusion here. If it wasn't about bullying, then why was bullying, and the threat of litigation from it, brought up?

Threads may have been started years ago, but they're still actively posted in today. By Mods and Admins, who are all suddenly worried about cyber bullying. Perhaps if attitudes about bullying have changed, you should close the Woodshed completely. You know, to be fair.

So, I ask where the line is. A 12 page thread in the Woodshed dedicated to how to "deal" with NUPolo8? That's ok? I don't know that you can really set a static line. Isn't there always context that is different from case to case? So this is more of a judgement call? Someone felt that Polo was bullying someone else, but that he hadn't been bullied by the 12 page thread dedicated to making fun of him?

So why encourage bullying with the woodshed?

So, I ask where the line is. A 12 page thread in the Woodshed dedicated to how to "deal" with NUPolo8? That's ok?

There's a 131 page thread called the "Douschebag Hall of Fame". Participated in by numerous mods and admins. Yet bullying is the excuse for why they banned the original three members?

Use common sense. Seriously. I mean the woodshed has threads started by mods PosterX vs. PosterY, and we are supposed to believe they were banning people over bullying??? Come on. I think I'm the only one using common sense here when I call BS.

So cyber bullying is the story? Just curious where the line is draw on razzing and bullying. Because I've seen some posters be rather nasty to other members and they are still around...