Oden, finally starting to get out of his funk?

[Ed O]

The kind of in-your-face profanity that this guy uses is offensive, and should not be tolerated by the moderators or the members. How can we be expected to "respect" each other when one poster is showing so much disrespect to everyone by the foul language he uses?

It's offensive to you. I'm sorry that you have a thin skin in this regard and that you disagree with the rules here.

I don't feel disrespected at all by his use of language. The rest of the thread seems to have gone on in spite of the allegedly intolerable acts. Again, I'm sorry that you feel differently, but please put him on ignore and stop attacking him personally.

Thanks.

Ed O.
(P.S. I'm keeping this public merely because I wanted to remind everyone of what are pretty much the two rules we have here, not to chastise Shooter.
P.P.S. I'm keeping this text red because I want to keep it in "mod voice", not to act superior but just to clarify)

 

[hasoos]

I was impressed on how his defense improved from half to half. In the first half, he was letting Shaq charge right down to the block. In the second half, he was getting body on him at the top of the key, not letting him get there. That, is fast progress.

 

[Tortimer]

I do agree a little with Shooter about Oden getting some speed back against Shaq but I think he also showed a lot more speed in the last two games before Shaq. I thought Oden's footwork, speed and overall game looked good in both the double ovetime game and the Kings game. So, I think it might have been a reason for Oden to be up for Shaq but I think he seemed better with the last couple games. It might have been what some of the announcers were saying with Oden getting a phone call from a friend(forgot who) and having him telling Oden that he is doing fine for not playing in the last 18 months plus other stuff.

 

[PapaG]

Uh "worried about Oden's Pysche" is what you explained when talking about his reaction to Broy's accomplishment.

I guess that could be taken many ways, but when I read that in the context of the other posts, it's pretty clear to me that you and a few others are over analyzing as usual.

I just chose to use "doomsday" to light a little fire up in here, whatever, your post still insinuates negativity.

You made it negative. I call it me wondering if the guy is OK in the head in terms of confidence, and seeing him respond when he went back on the court.

 

[PapaG]

The kind of in-your-face profanity that this guy uses is offensive, and should not be tolerated by the moderators or the members. How can we be expected to "respect" each other when one poster is showing so much disrespect to everyone by the foul language he uses?

The mods here allow posters to advocate "exterminating" people based on their religion and then expound on this thought in later posts. You think a few obscene insults is going to flip the switch? This place is what it is...

 

[STOMP]

The rules here allow posters to advocate "exterminating" people based on their religion and then expound on this thought in later posts. You think a few obscene insults is going to flip the switch? This place is what it is...

fixed it for you

STOMP

 

[PapaG]

fixed it for you

STOMP

Please stop editing my posts.

 

[Darkwebs]

After Roy's performance last night I think there is no doubt (there was little before) he will be selected to play in the all-star game. There aren't tom many rookie centers so I think it's likely Greg goes to All-Star weekend too for the Rookie-Sophomore game. At that point he should be playing fantastic and I hope he dominates in that game on national television.

Roy deserves to be an All-Star, but I wonder if he will get snubbed this year. There's so many good guards in the West. Obviously CP3 will make it, as well as Kobe. McGrady might get voted in. If those 3 get in, then there might be only one spot left. Nash may not be putting up MVP numbers, but he is still one of the best point guards, so I don't see how the coaches will leave him out. So that's 4 guards.

Would they add yet another guard to the roster? Assuming they do, there's still Tony Parker. Despite the early season injury, he's as solid as ever. Deron Williams is coming back from an injury as is putting up okay stats and will only get better as he gets further away from the injury. Those two are Roy's biggest obstacle I would think. So if either the Spurs or Jazz go on a winning streak, Roy may likely get snubbed. Last year, I think Deron was snubbed because Roy's stock was raised in light of the Blazers' and Roy's surprisingly superb play in that 13 game win streak. So that might happen again this year, but in reverse. And what if Roy or the Blazers hit a slump. Who knows what could happen?

Therfore, I wouldn't say Roy is a lock. However, if I were a betting man, my money would definitely be on Roy to make the All-Star game (as a coach's vote-in.) Especially if he continues the type of play he has displayed in the last 5 or 6 games.

Edit: And I completely blanked on Billups. He is in the early MVP talk, so I think he has as good a chance as Roy to make the All-Star game. So Billups, Parker, and Williams all have chance to get in. Roy's advantage over these guys is that he is a shooting guard while these guys are all point guards. It'll be intersting how this year's All-Star roster shakes out.

 

[PapaG]

Roy deserves to be an All-Star, but I wonder if he will get snubbed this year. There's so many good guards in the West. Obviously CP3 will make it, as well as Kobe. McGrady might get voted in. If those 3 get in, then there might be only one spot left. Nash may not be putting up MVP numbers, but he is still one of the best point guards, so I don't see how the coaches will leave him out. So that's 4 guards.

Would they add yet another guard to the roster? Assuming they do, there's still Tony Parker. Despite the early season injury, he's as solid as ever. Deron Williams is coming back from an injury as is putting up okay stats and will only get better as he gets further away from the injury. Those two are Roy's biggest obstacle I would think. So if either the Spurs or Jazz go on a winning streak, Roy may likely get snubbed. Last year, I think Deron was snubbed because Roy's stock was raised in light of the Blazers' and Roy's surprisingly superb play in that 13 game win streak. So that might happen again this year, but in reverse. And what if Roy or the Blazers hit a slump. Who knows what could happen?

Therfore, I wouldn't say Roy is a lock. However, if I were a betting man, my money would definitely be on Roy to make the All-Star game (as a coach's vote-in.) Especially if he continues the type of play he has displayed in the last 5 or 6 games.

Edit: And I completely blanked on Billups. He is in the early MVP talk, so I think he has as good a chance as Roy to make the All-Star game. So Billups, Parker, and Williams all have chance to get in. Roy's advantage over these guys is that he is a shooting guard while these guys are all point guards. It'll be intersting how this year's All-Star roster shakes out.

If McGrady gets voted in, he should decline to accept or feign injury to get a more deserving player in the game. His game is declining at a startling rapid rate this season.

 

[Darkwebs]

If McGrady gets voted in, he should decline to accept or feign injury to get a more deserving player in the game. His game is declining at a startling rapid rate this season.

Has anyone ever declined? Is that even allowed?

 

[Shooter]

fixed it for you

STOMP

That's rich. You accuse me of breaking the rules of the site, then you intentionally alter another person's post to make it read the way you want to. If that's not a violation of the rules of this board, it certainly should be.

 

[Minstrel]

That's rich. You accuse me of breaking the rules of the site, then you intentionally alter another person's post to make it read the way you want to. If that's not a violation of the rules of this board, it certainly should be.

It's not against the rules. He didn't alter another person's post, he quoted another person's post and altered the quote. It's a fairly standard practice on forums, and everyone understands that it's a form of making a comment about the quoted post and not an attempt to misrepresent it.

 

[Shooter]

It's not against the rules. He didn't alter another person's post, he quoted another person's post and altered the quote.

In other words, he altered another person's post. That's what I said.

It's a fairly standard practice on forums, and everyone understands that it's a form of making a comment about the quoted post and not an attempt to misrepresent it.

Changing another person's post and putting words in his mouth is an insult to the original poster. I don't like it when it's done to me, and PapaG clearly didn't like it. I don't know anyone who would. And I don't care if it's done all the time on bulletin boards, it's disrespectful.

 

[PapaG]

It should be against the rules. Although he altered another person's post, he quoted another person's post and changed the meaning. It's a fairly infrequent practice on forums, and not everyone understands that it's a form of making a comment about the quoted post and not an attempt to misrepresent it.

Fixed it for you.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I got fixed for you.

Fixed it for you.

 

[PapaG]

This guy PapaG is correct!.

Fixed it for you!

 

[Minstrel]

In other words, he altered another person's post.

Nope. PapaG's post is unaltered. You can look at it and note the difference from the quote in STOMP's post.

Changing another person's post and putting words in his mouth is an insult to the original poster. I don't like it when it's done to me, and PapaG clearly didn't like it. I don't know anyone who would. And I don't care if it's done all the time on bulletin boards, it's disrespectful.

You're certainly welcome to that opinion, and you can choose not to converse with people whom you consider disrespectful or ignore them. I'm just mentioning that it's not against the rules. If you feel it should be, you can contact the Admins about it, as they set the site policy.

 

[PapaG]

You're certainly welcome to that opinion, and you can choose not to converse with people whom you consider disrespectful or ignore them. I'm just mentioning that it's not against the rules. If you feel it should be, you can contact the Admins about it, as they set the site policy.

I'm still wondering why people who are offended by Milkshake talking about killing people are censored while his original comments still stand.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Fixed your toilet for you!

Thanks!

 

[PapaG]

Happy Holidays!

Fixed it for you!

 

[Minstrel]

I'm still wondering why people who are offended by Milkshake talking about killing people are censored while his original comments still stand.

Personal attacks are censored, not sides of a debate. If you think any of us moderators are being unfair, you're always free to go over our heads to the Administration and file a grievance. Personally, I don't think we're biased and there are lots and lots of perspectives I disagree highly with (including the comment by Drink Your Milkshake that offends you), but I don't edit them out. Nor do I see barfo or Ed do it to perspectives they disagree with. You, of course, are free to keep your own counsel and, as I said, go up the ladder if you're dissatisfied with the way we do things. You are also free to PM any of us, if you'd like to discuss something specific.

 

[Shooter]

Nope. PapaG's post is unaltered. You can look at it and note the difference from the quote in STOMP's post.

That's nonsense, and you know it. Altering someone's post and then reproducing it in your own post, in its new, altered form, is tampering with someone else's words. I don't care if the original post still exists, it's a violation of the poster's right to express his opinion in his own way. If a person disagrees with a post, he can simply say that. He doesn't need to change the statement to make it read the way he wants it to.

 

[Minstrel]

That's nonsense, and you know it.

No, I don't agree. The original being unaltered is the crux, as far as I'm concerned. People can see the original right there in the same thread, so there's no question of whether someone is being misrepresented.

Disrespectful is entirely a matter of preferences. I don't find it disrespectful. But, as I said, the reality is that it is not against the rules, so it won't be moderated out. If you'd like it made against the rules, that would be an issue to bring up with Administration (the users who's names are in blue). Until it is against the rules, your choices on the site boil down to accepting it or ignoring the users who violate your sense of respectful behaviour.

To avoid diverting this thread further, please direct further discussion about this to PMs...either to me, or whomever you'd like to talk to about it.

 

[oldmangrouch]

"Martha! Round up the kids and fetch the wagon. We're a migrating back to BBF. Too much riff-raff around these parts!"

"But Pa....didn't we move here for greater freedom from censorship?"

"Aw, shut up and git in the wagon...."

 

[ehizzy3]

internet drama is so amazing! people just stop complaining about bullshit kthxbye

 

[BlazerCaravan]

internet drama is so amazing! people just stop complaining about bullshit kthxbye

+1 qft ftw!

 

[Masbee]

I'm still wondering why people who are offended by Milkshake talking about killing people are censored while his original comments still stand.

Your endless repetition of the same damn comment is so completely old and boring. I heard you the first 15 times.

You and Shooter just need to understand the site rules - you know - read and comprehend - and either accept them or move on.

Too often both of your silly and repetitious points hijack otherwise worthwhile threads with this bullshit. It is vandalism. Stop it.

Repitition is Boring, boring boring boring boring boring boring boring boring
Boring, boring boring boring boring boring boring boring boring
Boring, boring boring boring boring boring boring boring boring
Boring, boring boring boring boring boring boring boring boring

 

[Masbee]

That's nonsense, and you know it. Altering someone's post and then reproducing it in your own post, in its new, altered form, is tampering with someone else's words. I don't care if the original post still exists, it's a violation of the poster's right to express his opinion in his own way. If a person disagrees with a post, he can simply say that. He doesn't need to change the statement to make it read the way he wants it to.

You are wrong.

Thank you.

 

[Masbee]

I want to be clear. Shooter and PapaG, I want to read your posts, your thoughts and opinions about BASKETBALL. Let's have a lively exchange of conflicting ideas on that subject. Thank you.

 

[Shooter]

You are right.

Thank you.

Fixed it for you.

There, how does that feel?