Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
My time here has come to an end (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter flapgreen
- Start date
Drunken knight
Footballguy
That sucks.
I like having you around
I like having you around
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
It's not just this place, fwiw. It's the internet now. I got booted from the competition's board over a joke, and they were supposedly the free speech, almost everything goes board.
skol asylum
Footballguy
No idea who the Potato brothers are but they must be a big deal if you are walking away because of them.
Enjoy your golden years of retirement.
Enjoy your golden years of retirement.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Me neither, never heard of them. Of course, I will be looking them up now....
massraider
Footballguy
Who's gonna name the Bears thread?
Willie Neslon
Footballguy
Milli Vanilli - Girl I'm Gonna Miss You (Videoclip)
Milli Vanilli's official music video for 'Girl I'm Gonna Miss You'. Click to listen to Milli Vanilli on Spotify: http://smarturl.it/MilliVSpotify?IQid...As f...
www.youtube.com
DA RAIDERS
Footballguy
Wait….,
rockaction
Footballguy
flap, there are lots of sites these days with strict rules on discourse, etiquette, and topics of discussion. I think that free speech in forums has gone the way of the appetite for truly free speech in society. I hope you'll stay. Peace, man.
DA RAIDERS
Footballguy
The food truck?
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Sorry to hear that. I thought I was as polite as I could in letting you know the Tate Brothers thread was going to unavoidably become political.
I realize not everyone agrees with us trying to stay away from political threads. I have no idea if that's the right thing. But it's how we're trying to operate.
We'll hopefully still be here if you decide to return. All the best to you whichever way you decide to go.
I realize not everyone agrees with us trying to stay away from political threads. I have no idea if that's the right thing. But it's how we're trying to operate.
We'll hopefully still be here if you decide to return. All the best to you whichever way you decide to go.
Peak
Footballguy
That seems a little extreme. As much as I don't care about the royal family, what's going on with them is newsworthy.
Capella
Footballguy
Yea I didn’t ask why it got nuked. @Joe Bryant any idea?
rockaction
Footballguy
It's because there are conspiracy theories going around about it, and those eventually seem to turn political these days.
I'd like to lodge formally that that sort of deference to conspiracy theories is a bad move. That it might get political is a red herring. There is a serious problem when verifiable facts are being debated as political disagreements. Sandy Hook conspiracies should not be tabled because they are purportedly within the political realm. The facts of Sandy Hook and the subsequent child deaths are not debatable. If we do choose to go that route, then the conspiratorial nonsense has completely won the day. It masquerades then as a legitimate point of view or opinion when it is the complete opposite of legitimate or within the realm of opinion.
I hate seeing easily-proven truth get usurped by people that live their lives fancifully and borderline crazily.
Peak
Footballguy
Honest question, but when everything you read, hear online or in MSM is political and divisive, how does any thread survive? Every headline is click air and acts to trigger one side or the other. It's like everyone's identity starts with which side of the line you lean towards. If you're constant trying to avoid it, it'll never work.
SWC
Bromigo
this is 100 percent right and i hate it even more that the morons pushing such conspiracies have their lead consumption enabled theories legitimized in the name of supposedly presenting both sides sometimes there aint two sides and thats just how it is take that to the bank brohan
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
It seems to be working pretty well since the politics forum was killed off imo. Of course there’s a ton of grey area but the thread in question, however we’ll-intentioned, almost certainly would’ve veered into politics.
Thanks for the question. I think the answer is just looking at the forum. Tons of threads not just survive but flourish. The forum is so active threads are constantly being moved off the front page.
It's certainly not perfect, but it seems to be working ok.
Last edited:
Peak
Footballguy
But every thread has the "potential" to veer into politics. Even the thread in question was nukes before it cold even start. It didn't have a chance. Or the other instances mentioned in this thread. Whether it's political or conspiracies, the judgement to nuke a thread is still based on opinions of the moderation if it's killed before it starts.
Not sure. It may have been the conspiracy angle. Looking at the log it was, "But now the AP just announced not to use it as it’s fake! I was skeptical but baby it’s conspiracy time!!"
I'm sure we get plenty wrong on these.
Of course. But some are obviously bound to go there and easy to predict.
Capella
Footballguy
Oh yea it was when the AP put the kill notice on that picture. That was newsworthy! But I truly don’t care.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Sure - of course the decision is based on a moderator’s opinion.
Maybe. Who knows. I don't get into the "see ya tomorrow" posts on these types as it's a bummer. He's been a good poster for a long time so I hope he stays. But the list is long of people who don't like how I run things and have left and not returned. There's not a lot I feel we can do about it as I know for certain, the political stuff wasn't sustainable. It is what it is but always a bummer to know some are disappointed and leaving even when I know the reality is it's impossible to make it work for 100% of the people.
skol asylum
Footballguy
I had no idea who they were. I googled them and didn't see the politics but maybe I didn't dig deep enough. I just saw a couple of truly awful people.
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
I had no idea who they were. I googled them and didn't see the politics but maybe I didn't dig deep enough. I just saw a couple of truly awful people.
This is why we can’t have nice things. You’re allowed to make derogatory comments about people, but if anybody were to question why the thread gets axed.
If I make a comment on why you think those people are awful then I get axed.
You admit that you knew nothing about them but after googling them for five minutes and not finding the political stuff, you call them awful
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I tend to agree, but the fact is that there are a lot of topics that should be non-political in theory, but are unfortunately political in fact. I think that's stupid, but it's not Joe's fault. He's just reacting to the world as it is, as opposed to the world as we would like it to be.
A few weeks ago, I was asked nicely to drop a particular line of argument about the origins of the SARS-CoV2 virus. I genuinely didn't perceive that as political, but I understand that in 2024 people still freak out over this stuff, and the ownership does not want freak-outs in this forum, so I dropped it. No problem. I can go elsewhere if I want to debate this stuff (I don't), and preserving a good community that makes for good gameday threads is more important anyway.
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
Easy might be an overstatement, but I get the sentiment. Wouldn’t it be worth letting at least some of them play out before closing them? What is the harm? Genuinely asking.
rockaction
Footballguy
I understand your points, and I don't like reading political and emotional freak-outs any more than the next person. I also like the game threads politics-free and believe that the camaraderie in them is really part of the lifeblood of the board. We agree upon that. For further background, let me state that I have never once commented on the broader no-politics rule the board adopted, even when the PSF was shutting down and so many others did. Nary a peep came from this quarter. I was really unsure how I felt and how it would work, so I trusted the people running the show and making the decision.
What I do find suspect and bad for the larger community are thread police who aren't moderators telling you not to discuss something like your favorite team's starting QB having espoused conspiracy theories that you personally have witnessed to be false because of first-hand knowledge, conspiracy theories that have netted 1.1 billion dollars in defamation damages from those that use a media platform to promote them because they are verifiably false and not anyone's political opinion; but rather, events that have been found as fact in a court of law—facts bolstered by overwhelming and indisputable evidence to the contrary.
I don't trust the motives of those who would silence people about that situation. I don't think they operate with the community we have at FootballGuys.com on their mind. Indeed, I'm sure they don't. They simply do not want speech because they do not like the truth of the speech, nor can they rationalize a weird undercurrent of social alliance with the progenitors of these theories, so they attempt to shut down all speech contrary to their liking. To say Sandy Hook happened is an apolitical statement no matter how much people try to stuff it under the rubric of political discourse, and acquiescing to the demands that one keep the threads free of talk about these relevant issues gives those commenters a heckler's veto over almost any issue they can concoct as plausibly political.
Further, when discussing a player's potential, or making predictions for his performance for next year like in the thread in question, it would seem important that one consider off-field factors as well as on-field ones insofar as the off-field concerns have an effect on the on-field performance or availability. If a player is being considered for a VP position in the presidential race that might cost him playing time, or if a player has had his views about a local event that people feel very strongly about disclosed by the media in that market—a disclosure that might harm his future performance by virtue of being nearly run out of town—we should be allowed to address those concerns. Especially when they would cut into playing time or effectiveness of that player. That should be what we're doing here.
The whole thing—the way it was handled by the moderators and how it was outwardly approached by certain commenters—makes me think that there are people using the political moratorium here for something more sinister and cynical than simply keeping politics out of the discussion. It sounds like the smothering of speech and basic facts because it doesn't fit the commenters' desires. It strikes me as an outright attempt at the suppression of relevant facts and relevant conversation regarding the player and his beliefs, even when those beliefs have a good chance of affecting his future performance. If we're here for football then you can't shut off the glaringly obvious, no matter how off-the-field one would like it to be. The world doesn't work that way.
But be that as it may be, I don't trust the newfound way in which discourse becomes silenced out of appeals to decorum. When someone believes rank and disprovable falsities, it is not the job of the person stating facts to humor those fanciful beliefs, especially when those beliefs would have earned a proper shunning or reprimands by sensible people in sensible times. And maybe these are not sensible times, but I cannot say that we are better off shutting down facts and truthful observations for comity's sake. It is foolish to let these things fester or allow them to stifle reasonable conversation in the name of a begrudging coexistence that renders truth a casualty, a coexistence where silence is complicit in the evil and delusional nature of certain postulations.
Last edited:
El Floppo
Footballguy
@flapgreen
I hope you stay.
I hope you stay.
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
Makes for an interesting possible thread crossover: I wonder if the death of “third places” has had an impact on our ability to have reasonable conversations with each other? I think it’s almost certainly true. Discussions online veer immediately to the extreme too often it seems because everyone has become too comfortable with creating caricature straw men that they’re fighting against because there is no real relationship there like there would be if you got into a discussion down at the Elk Club.
And this is why the thread was axed.I had no idea who they were. I googled them and didn't see the politics but maybe I didn't dig deep enough. I just saw a couple of truly awful people.
This is why we can’t have nice things. You’re allowed to make derogatory comments about people, but if anybody were to question why the thread gets axed.
If I make a comment on why you think those people are awful then I get axed.
You admit that you knew nothing about them but after googling them for five minutes and not finding the political stuff, you call them awful
skol asylum
Footballguy
You do make a valid point and I understand where you are coming from.I had no idea who they were. I googled them and didn't see the politics but maybe I didn't dig deep enough. I just saw a couple of truly awful people.
This is why we can’t have nice things. You’re allowed to make derogatory comments about people, but if anybody were to question why the thread gets axed.
If I make a comment on why you think those people are awful then I get axed.
You admit that you knew nothing about them but after googling them for five minutes and not finding the political stuff, you call them awful
I'm also of the belief that the poison in our public discourse has come from this idea that there are two sides to everything and they must be weighted equally. Some things (and people or ideas) are just wrong and should be called out as such.
I've said too much. Sorry Joe.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Ah, I get it now. I've stayed away from that whole thing, but I sincerely feel bad for Jets fans. You guys deserve better than this.
I kind of stopped myself. This place absolutely sucks now and we are moderated like children. I've moved onto reddit. Come here for the tv threads only now.
rockaction
Footballguy
Thanks, IK. I knew there was some out-there stuff he likely believed in mixed with a prima donna attitude behind it all, but I didn't know it was both duplicitous and that far gone. Rodgers denies he believed or believes it. Jets fans will likely roll with that denial, and while I don't think the fans will forget it fully, it seems like the only thing to do is to take him at his word and let the next season play out should nothing more come of it.
Not much one can really do.
Mrs. Rannous
Footballguy
Mrs. Rannous
Footballguy
Having watched uneven moderation essentially kill another internet board I've been on for about 25 years, this really needs a better discussion than "that's the way it is." I'm starting to see the same trend where people leave just for this reason. It's a bit like the Green Mile.
fatness
Footballguy
I had a reply typed to flap's initial topic saying there were plenty of places online to talk about people who've advocated rape, sexual assault, and sexual coercion, and that I hoped the FFA didn't become one of them. Then I sat on my reply and didn't post it, thinking I'd be doing what I was objecting to. Now that there's a second topic on it, I've posted what I did not in the first topic. You can't talk about people without talking about what they've said and done, and doing that for the Tate brothers would have guaranteed an ugly thread going well outside what's allowed and encouraged in the FFA. This is a more enjoyable place without all the heat and anger generated by the PSF.
If this post needs to be deleted to keep the peace here, that's fine by me.
If this post needs to be deleted to keep the peace here, that's fine by me.
rockaction
Footballguy
I'm with you. I think he's owed an apology, frankly. Other than speculating about whether or not one of the kids had a snot bubble, what was the big deal?Kate Middleton. Come on
Im going to miss Flap
That was Cappy. flap was starting a thread on the Tate brothers, who are a lot more problematic and are themselves trafficking in conspiracy theories. I'm not saying the thread should have been stopped, but we should get the context and facts correct before castigating the decision.
FairWarning
Footballguy
Totally agree with this take.
Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
The Elk Club? When did we all turn 70?
Mrs. Rannous
Footballguy
I know that. But the brush seems very broad and not very discriminating in its sweep.I'm with you. I think he's owed an apology, frankly. Other than speculating about whether or not one of the kids had a snot bubble, what was the big deal?Kate Middleton
Im going to miss Flap
That was Cappy. flap was starting a thread on the Tate brothers, who are a lot more problematic and are themselves trafficking in conspiracy theories. I'm not saying the thread should have been stopped, but we should get the context and facts correct before castigating the decision.
massraider
Footballguy
Anyone who has been on these boards for as long as he has knows the only direction that thread would take. If you have any idea who these guys are, you know. Let's all be honest here at the very least.
But he wanted to discuss it anyway, and then start a thread to kick over some furniture on the way out the door.
Can you imagine owning a business, and you keep a little clubhouse going for some friends, at a loss?
And you dealing with this on a Sunday night. Annoying.
But he wanted to discuss it anyway, and then start a thread to kick over some furniture on the way out the door.
Can you imagine owning a business, and you keep a little clubhouse going for some friends, at a loss?
And you dealing with this on a Sunday night. Annoying.
squistion
Footballguy
SMH.
I predicted it would come to this. That banning all political discussion was unrealistic and impractical, as politics can and do bleed into almost any discussion.
I said that ultimately the mods would always be playing Whac-A-Mole to keep politics out of this forum and it seems that I was right.
It gives me no pleasure to have been prescient.
I predicted it would come to this. That banning all political discussion was unrealistic and impractical, as politics can and do bleed into almost any discussion.
I said that ultimately the mods would always be playing Whac-A-Mole to keep politics out of this forum and it seems that I was right.
It gives me no pleasure to have been prescient.
The General
Footballguy
See ya next week.
Similar threads
