State of the Board

[Junior]

Junior you are really reaching very far.

 

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

[AR Husker Fan]

 

You're implying that "bullying" is a concept that's either black or white. I don't think that's the case all the time.

 

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.

[knapplc]

Let's remember that we're not in the Woodshed and keep the disagreements civil.

[zoogs]

Yeah, stuff like that. Let's have less of it here, please.

[Landlord]

 

Junior you are really reaching very far.

 

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

 

 

 

Perfect example of how much your disagreement is a stretch on weak technicalities.

 

 

Also you guys get uncomfortable about the most bizarre stuff.

[Count 'Bility]

 

Also, Junior, it seems like this "cyber bullying" that is being referred was most likely something far and beyond anything that should be allowed considering the circumstances surrounding the PMs to begin with. Just a thought. Like I said above. All it takes is some common sense. This world has become so black and white and so "zero tolerance" all the time because people are afraid to think for themselves or think outside the box. it's one big copout. But I think in this situation the mods/admins went against that grain and did what was best for the board and members in the long term.

 

And yeah, I am sucking up a little. i plan to remain here. Feel as if I've been given a pretty lengthy leash in the past with some of my idiotic episodes, and hope to stay on them terms. With that said though, I truly do believe in everything I've said.

 

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.

 

Raging dick? or did it just come off that way. Cuz very seldom do i intend to do so. Just because I make a statement with pretty brash and honest disagreement doesnt mean I'm pissed and banging on my keyboard out of rage. I'm sorry if I did. Like I've said before, it's the sh#ts of social media communication. Point me to these episodes. Cuz I dont remember any real episodes of being pissed lately at all, except the incident with Polo when I made a dumbass remark in regards to the Ray Rice situation. That time, yeah, I remember being pretty torqued.

[tattooedhusker]

 

 

 

 

You're implying that "bullying" is a concept that's either black or white. I don't think that's the case all the time.

 

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?

 

I think so. That's what the Mods and Admins don't get paid to do. Make decisions when stuff comes up.

 

It's not going to be perfect all the time, it is what it is. Some of the stuff you're pointing to is literally years old. Things, attitudes, etc change over the years. Like I said it's not perfect, it is what it is IMO.

 

Yes, it started when boobs were removed from the shed

[presidentjlh]

[Junior]

 

 

You're implying that "bullying" is a concept that's either black or white. I don't think that's the case all the time.

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.

[cg_8]

You know, I don't know who was banned and why. Nor do I care.

 

I have a feeling that I may be in the minority on this but I come on here for these reasons:

 

I love the Huskers. I love discussing them and hearing other people's opinion.

 

I love football. I love the X's and O's and I like to share knowledge that I know as well as learning from other users as well.

 

I love hearing news and stories about the program and the players. Some of the insight we get on here goes beyond the articles we read everyday. People's personal experiences and stories also something I enjoy on here.

 

Those are literally the only reasons I come on here.

 

As far as that is concerned, Huskerboard is great.

 

I don't get on because of other "users". I just plain don't. Maybe I am in the minority in that, but I am not going to be upset if someone is banned. I'm sorry to those who feel differently but honestly, I could care less. I don't know what the incident was, and I don't want to know. I want to talk football and my Huskers. I think most of us want to do that. And I know we will continue to, well, at least I know I will.

[Landlord]

 

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.

 

 

 

The extreme circumstances that would lead to litigation would also lead to, before it ever came to that, appropriate action against posts in the shed.

 

The rules of the shed are no threats, no libel, no bigotry, so people know to expect that they will be free from those three things. Nobody is going to sue Huskerboard if those three things aren't happening. If those things ARE happening, then the board could get sued, but only if the staff was negligent in weeding out the problem and enforcing the rules, which they have been doing, and which you are pissed about.

[presidentjlh]

 

 

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.

 

 

 

The extreme circumstances that would lead to litigation would also lead to, before it ever came to that, appropriate action against posts in the shed.

 

The rules of the shed are no threats, no libel, no bigotry, so people know to expect that they will be free from those three things. Nobody is going to sue Huskerboard if those three things aren't happening. If those things ARE happening, then the board could get sued, but only if the staff was negligent in weeding out the problem and enforcing the rules, which they have been doing, and which you are pissed about.

 

 

tbh no one's going to probably sue over those things because there's not going to be enough damages to make it worthwhile for any lawyer to take the case.

[zoogs]

It's about cyber bullying! It isn't about bullying (according to zoogs), wait yes it is! Who the hell knows? Only Eric.

Okay, I'll clarify this again so people don't get confused.

 

1. The first three bans were not.

 

Ref: "This particular incident occurred from a PM conversation between three members and an Administrator." The administrator attempted to bring these members in line with the conduct we expect people to have here. This kind of talk doesn't happen unless they feel it's, unfortunately, necessary. Their response to this attempt led to the admins concluding bans were necessary. This is a pretty standard way for a ban to go down: mod/admin talks to member. Member doesn't have any of it.

 

2. (Some) of the other bans were.

 

Ref: "It subsequently was broadened as a result of a member sending us quoted comments another member sent them via PM. To verify the authenticity of the claim, we had to verify with our own eyes to ensure there was no fabrication. We determined these were slanderous & offensive comments that had to be addressed."

[tattooedhusker]

 

It's about cyber bullying! It isn't about bullying (according to zoogs), wait yes it is! Who the hell knows? Only Eric.

Okay, I'll clarify this again so people don't get confused.

 

1. The first three bans were not.

 

Ref: "This particular incident occurred from a PM conversation between three members and an Administrator." The administrator attempted to bring these members in line with the conduct we expect people to have here. This kind of talk doesn't happen unless they feel it's, unfortunately, necessary. Their response to this attempt led to the admins concluding bans were necessary. This is a pretty standard way for a ban to go down: mod/admin talks to member. Member doesn't have any of it.

 

2. (Some) of the other bans were.

 

Ref: "It subsequently was broadened as a result of a member sending us quoted comments another member sent them via PM. To verify the authenticity of the claim, we had to verify with our own eyes to ensure there was no fabrication. We determined these were slanderous & offensive comments that had to be addressed."

 

So some of the other bans were handed out for being offensive...in a PM?

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

1. So you're banning people based on Private Messages? I'd recommend changing the name of them. That whole 'private' thing could throw people.
2. It's extremely hard to take a post seriously when it's signed with your handle.

Sincerely,

 

Killer Cacti

 

 

 

P.S. Pretty disappointed with a lot of good posters being banned at once. I will probably be spending a lot less time on the boards.

 

 

 

Oh No! The Clemson fan won't be frequenting our favorite Husker message board anymore....