A new Shocker forum?

[RampageWSU]

Cold, you are so filled with yourself it is unbelievable.

I can absolutely and positively guarantee you that I have better contacts for inside information than you can ever dream of in your lifetime.

I always find it amusing that people who claim to have "contacts" float them out on a public internet forum...like they have nothing to lose. Everyone "in the know" also knows there is a code of conduct...breaking it (or bending it too far) could hurt them financially or otherwise...

[RoyalShock]

To address a few allegations of "irony", what is wrong with supporting freedoms for all and then exercising those freedoms to set the rules of a private enterprise? (like an internet message board). Or pointing out Chris Matthews' inconsisitency (the topic to which I think Maggie is referring to) in wanting use his position as a supposed journalist to ensure a successful presidency only after his guy gets elected? If a "respected" member of the board posted the same thing as CB and was not removed under the same circumstances, I could see the irony.

If CGM doesn't want people talking about his practices then he shouldn't allow people to watch.

Perhaps he trusts those he allows to watch to not publicize what they see. Most reaonable people would understand that if you are invited to practice, then divulge what you see publically, you aren't going to be invited back. So I don't agree with your statement in that regard.

However, the athletic department and CGM have the absolute right to allow access to the basketball program in a manner in which they see fit. To allow fans of the program access to a practice but at the same time to expect some sort of discretion is not outrageous – a bit naive, maybe, but not outrageous. The fact that Royal decided to honor the athletic department’s request – is similarly, on its face, not outrageous – and like I wrote -- a decision, that I can comfortably assume, he did not take lightly. It simply appears to me that the rules of the game were not widely known.

This is a good description of the situation.

The board rules aren't going to cover everything. That's why they change from time-to-time. Sometimes a situation arises that wasn't anticipated and needs addressed. If a board rule had been broken, the thread would have been removed and a public explanation would not really have been necessary. In this situation the board rules didn't address it, so I explained it. Furthermore, no one was reprimanded for it by me or any SN staff.

[Maggie]

Or pointing out Chris Matthews' inconsisitency (the topic to which I think Maggie is referring to) in wanting use his position as a supposed journalist to ensure a successful presidency only after his guy gets elected?

I was actually thinking of the following topic: "Internet censorship in our future?" -- Mr. Matthews aside. ;-) And I wrote limited irony.

[Flanders]

It is a fine line as to when to pull the plug on a fan forum, but clearly this post by CB was different. There have been hundreds of practice updates on here that have gone through each player's abilities and weaknesses. To date, I don't know when WSU has called to question it.

CB's post went beyond just describing the goings on and added a lot of unecessary opinion that bordered on slander. He made the coaching staff appear to be dangerous, uncaring and abusive - all things that are completely untrue. And it appears that CB is alone in his opinions as I have yet to see any posts from others at the practice that share his opinions. As scared as CB claimed to be just in the stands, maybe "cold blooded" isn't the best screen name. How about "Rainbow?" Rainbow is a nice screen name.

[chitown_shocker]

Furthermore, no one was reprimanded for it by me or any SN staff.

The SN staff should be reprimanded. This board has just crossed the line and has become a tool of the WSU athletic department. I understand that public opinion is not on my side. I understand that the admins of this forum have the only true "rights" as far as the content of the board. I just hope you understand the compromise you made.

[WuDrWu]

I understand that public opinion is not on my side.

At least you got something right.


What you and so many in society refuse to accept is that you cannot force your progressive beliefs in the private sector. There is a right and wrong and obviously we differ defining that.

[BenWSU]

I hope this long thread wasn`t intended to divide the members based on free speech vs censorship.

If Marshall`s coaching is as bad as "so called insiders" say it is, where is the mass exodus of players leaving for other schools???

Plus if you "insiders" claim his coaching style is harsh and abusive, did any of you have information from Winthrop message boards & blogs that wasn`t allow to be posted here that would`ve prevented his hiring???

[Maggie]

Furthermore, no one was reprimanded for it by me or any SN staff.

The SN staff should be reprimanded. This board has just crossed the line and has become a tool of the WSU athletic department. I understand that public opinion is not on my side. I understand that the admins of this forum have the only true "rights" as far as the content of the board. I just hope you understand the compromise you made.

I hope that you adhere to your professed principles in the future – in a much boarder context, of course.

[ShockerInKC]

Shouldn't this thread be moved to the 'off topic' area. It's about something that happened on the message board, not something that happened to WSU basketball.

PS. Cold, too bad www.loudmouth.com is taken.

[RoyalShock]

Or pointing out Chris Matthews' inconsisitency (the topic to which I think Maggie is referring to) in wanting use his position as a supposed journalist to ensure a successful presidency only after his guy gets elected?

I was actually thinking of the following topic: "Internet censorship in our future?" -- Mr. Matthews aside. ;-) And I wrote limited irony.

Ahhh, ok. But I do see a little difference between voluntary, legal "censorship", versus involuntary submission to "truth squads".

[Maggie]

Or pointing out Chris Matthews' inconsisitency (the topic to which I think Maggie is referring to) in wanting use his position as a supposed journalist to ensure a successful presidency only after his guy gets elected?

I was actually thinking of the following topic: "Internet censorship in our future?" -- Mr. Matthews aside. ;-) And I wrote limited irony.

Ahhh, ok. But I do see a little difference between voluntary, legal "censorship", versus involuntary submission to "truth squads".

Umm..."limited"............................not the forum...in my judgment. Can’t I smile, a little..

Otherwise…..you did fine, in my opinion.

[SB Shock]

Re: A new Shocker forum?

i agree with cb, royal did the wrong thing by deleting that post.

With free speech comes responsibility. CB was irresponsible and there was a tone about it and was bordering on slander. He also clearly shown in his posts that he has an agenda against the present administration.

[NCAABound]

My only concern is that WSU won two victories. They got the post deleted AND they will still close practices. Since the post was removed...they should honor the semi-open policy they were following prior to this incident.

[C0|dB|00ded]

One question though, didn't you feel kind of dirty after you went in and deleted an entire thread about an eye-witness account just because somebody told you to? Creepy...

I wasn't going to go into detail, but since you won't drop it, here you go.

When I was first contacted and asked to remove the topic I hedged. It wasn't until I was informed that practices are closed that I decided to remove it.

So for the time that it had an aire of legitimacy, I defended it.

Practices weren't closed. There is no such thing as semi-closed. If the curtains would have been pulled, something that takes the assistants 5 minutes to do, I wouldn't have spectated.

It's good to hear that you at least hedged...


T


...8)

[chitown_shocker]

I understand that public opinion is not on my side.

At least you got something right.


What you and so many in society refuse to accept is that you cannot force your progressive beliefs in the private sector. There is a right and wrong and obviously we differ defining that.

I acknowledged that this is the "private sector" in my post. I have no "progressive" agenda for shockernet, let alone "society." I am a member of this board and I have an opinion. That is all. It is no more or less valuable than yours.