Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Joe Summer

Members
  • Posts

    15,330
  • Joined

Reputation

9,498 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

12,310 profile views
  1. When you're 6-foot-5, doesn't it make more sense to go high than to go low?
  2. It took the announcers about 5 minutes to realize that the play was a tribute to the Music City Miracle.
  3. When I was a kid, my fundamentalist aunt said that the Rolling Stones were spawns of Satan. Now that I'm an adult, my fundamentalist aunt says that the Rolling Stones are being unfairly suppressed by satanic liberals.
  4. Slightly tangential, but I think it's weird that nonprofits can endorse political positions and specific legislation.....but they can't endorse political candidates. Seems like we either need to ban it all or allow it all. On the subject of this thread: if my church did that, it would be an instant dealbreaker for me. But I bet I'm in the extreme minority. In fact, I bet there's an inverse correlation between "How often do you attend church?" and "How much are you bothered by political campaigning in church?"
  5. The professor is right, but for the wrong reasons. The "mating crisis" will not happen because men drop out. It will happen because women don't drop out, either.
  6. West Virginia is going to lose because the coach insisted upon rotating different quarterbacks on every other play.
  7. I don't think anyone needed to know that Johnny Depp can [i]almost[/i] play "Wild Thing" on a guitar.
  8. IMO, there are basically 2 methods of moderation which will create a respectful environment of thriving, mostly happy posters: 1. light-handed approach, relying largely on warnings and short suspensions, with the ultimate goal of correcting the behavior of nonconforming posters. 2. heavy-handed approach, with the ultimate goal of just eliminating nonconforming posters. Both methods can be effective. Obviously, method #2 will lead to a much smaller user base, but such result could be considered to be a feature (not a bug) depending on your point of view.
  9. That's a reasonable argument. What do you propose as fair punishment for repeat offenders of the policy? More of the same? Just take down the offending video again, but let them go ahead and repost it again and again and again, each time it simply gets removed until the next time it is reposted?
  10. Speaking of juvenile and misrepresenting what people say. I get you guys don't like opinions that go against the liberal orthodoxy in this forum, but try harder next time. If you have a point, make it. Don't mock. You misrepresented what FreeBaGeL wrote. Why? Did you think it was the only way that you could "win" whatever point you were trying to make? Were you just being disingenuous, arguing in bad faith because there's no "good faith" counter to what he wrote? Or did you misread what he wrote entirely? I noticed that you did it with my post as well. Why assume that people who think you're wrong are following some sort of "liberal orthodoxy"? Maybe they just think you're wrong? When you assume bias in others, aren't you just mirroring the conservative outrage about social media companies?
  11. Yeah, we get it. As long as you can misrepresent what other people write, it's OK. C'mon man, are you serious with this?
  12. Tight Ends are not Wide Receivers. Wide Receivers are not Tight Ends. If you have to combine the two positions to prove a point, then the point is not worth proving. It's either a fishing attempt or a last desperate grasp to win an illogical argument.
×
  • Create New...