Matt Natali - Out

• Curly J

  

  Tigerfan00 wrote: JC = the truth

  JC = Jesus Christ = Nick Mangold (the freehuddle holy trinity)
• justincredible

  

  Curly J wrote:

  Tigerfan00 wrote: JC = the truth

  JC = Jesus Christ = Nick Mangold (the freehuddle holy trinity)

  Ass kissers.
• puffyisback

  from a good source Natali got canned plain and simple
• Mooney44Cards

  

  I am a member of a "great" site where 4 letter words are used regularly, even encouraged.
  
  They don't seem to be struggling. They've got:
  
  135,495 registered users (it costs $10 to join)
  2,858,823 threads currently
  94,981,677 posts currently
  
  They are not Nazis like JJ. They moderate the site quite well. Users are put on probation for not following the rules and banned for continually not following the rules. Big infractions include:
  
  posts with little or no content ("hi" or "first")
  worthless posts ("i'm drunk right now")
  hate speech
  threadshitting ("why are you guys even talking about Notre Dame, everyone knows they don't matter anymore")
  
  That is one of the most successful forums on the entire internet and we could do well to emulate that site. Threadshitting is a major offense on this site, and in my eyes is the only fault I see on Freehuddle at all.
• sleeper

  

  I don't know Matt, but from how the whole JJhuddle turning to pay pay was handled, I can tell he's an idiot. He'd be a good McDonalds employee, and certainly won't be hired at any of my companies.
• justincredible

  

  How do you define "threadshitting" though? Is it just posting on a thread to say what is being discussed is retarded?
• jordo212000

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote:
  threadshitting ("why are you guys even talking about Notre Dame, everyone knows they don't matter anymore")

  This always gets me. Do worthless threads and posts that are started by flamers make me mad? Of course...
  
  *do I have a choice to ignore them? Yes.
  *do I have a choice to take a deep breath and remember its a message board? Yes
  *You take life way too seriously if some dbag on a message board is getting to you
• Mooney44Cards

  

  jordo212000 wrote:

  Mooney44Cards wrote:
  threadshitting ("why are you guys even talking about Notre Dame, everyone knows they don't matter anymore")

  This always gets me. Do worthless threads and posts that are started by flamers make me mad? Of course...
  
  *do I have a choice to ignore them? Yes.
  *do I have a choice to take a deep breath and remember its a message board? Yes
  *You take life way too seriously if some dbag on a message board is getting to you

  Thats not the point. The point is that it clutters up the conversation. I don't get mad at WHAT they say, just the fact that they feel the need to say it. It adds NOTHING to the site. Maintaining good, smart sports discussion adds PLENTY to the site.
  
  On the serious business forum it really doesn't matter because the threads are pretty much all bullshit anyways but when someone posts that a kid commits to Notre Dame during the coaching change and NCF (IN THE FIRST REPLY) says "too bad this kid will never win a bcs game", it just turns people off from reading what is potentially a good discussion about the state of an important college football program.
• SportsAndLady

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote: I am a member of a "great" site where 4 letter words are used regularly, even encouraged.
  
  They don't seem to be struggling. They've got:
  
  135,495 registered users (it costs $10 to join)
  2,858,823 threads currently
  94,981,677 posts currently
  
  They are not Nazis like JJ. They moderate the site quite well. Users are put on probation for not following the rules and banned for continually not following the rules. Big infractions include:
  
  posts with little or no content ("hi" or "first")
  worthless posts ("i'm drunk right now")
  hate speech
  threadshitting ("why are you guys even talking about Notre Dame, everyone knows they don't matter anymore")
  
  That is one of the most successful forums on the entire internet and we could do well to emulate that site. Threadshitting is a major offense on this site, and in my eyes is the only fault I see on Freehuddle at all.

  I'm gonna shit on your face.
  
  I just broke all 4 of that site's rules.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  justincredible wrote: How do you define "threadshitting" though? Is it just posting on a thread to say what is being discussed is retarded?

  I would say yes, OR posting something like "too bad Mooney recruits" or just being contrary for the sake of being contrary. Its not hard to spot. You can tell when people are just posting to get under people's skin because they think they are being clever. But when its neither funny, nor clever, and takes away from serious conversation, it just makes me not want to even bother with places like the college football forum.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  ^^ SportsAndTubgirl
• Curly J

  

  CenterBHSFan wrote: ^^ SportsAndTubgirl

  I lol'd
• justincredible

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote: I would say yes, OR posting something like "too bad Mooney recruits" or just being contrary for the sake of being contrary. Its not hard to spot. You can tell when people are just posting to get under people's skin because they think they are being clever. But when its neither funny, nor clever, and takes away from serious conversation, it just makes me not want to even bother with places like the college football forum.

  Gotcha. Not a bad rule at all.
• SportsAndLady

  

  By the way, I was just kidding mooney, you're a cool poster..I would never shit on your face.
• zambrown

  

  Name me one mod, owner, administrator that gave a damn. (not that I expected it in any way, just saying)

  I gave a damn until recently.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  SportsAndLadies wrote: By the way, I was just kidding mooney, you're a cool poster..I would never shit on your face.

  Why not? My face not good enough for you to shit on?
• SportsAndLady

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote:

  SportsAndLadies wrote: By the way, I was just kidding mooney, you're a cool poster..I would never shit on your face.

  Why not? My face not good enough for you to shit on?

  It's perfect
• ytownfootball

  

  It's not a bad rule but I will say this, adoption of a rule like that would cause some unforseen problems with mods. It's a lot of work and some clear judgement calls would have to be made. Talk about turning mods into JJ "douchebags" , that would do it (well, moreso than they already are).
  
  I guess in the shortrun they'd be kindergarten teachers 'till everyone got the message, then maybe shit would die down, but I don't think being a mod under those new rules would be a whole lot of fun...
• majorspark

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote:

  justincredible wrote: How do you define "threadshitting" though? Is it just posting on a thread to say what is being discussed is retarded?

  I would say yes, OR posting something like "too bad Mooney recruits" or just being contrary for the sake of being contrary. Its not hard to spot. You can tell when people are just posting to get under people's skin because they think they are being clever. But when its neither funny, nor clever, and takes away from serious conversation, it just makes me not want to even bother with places like the college football forum.

  I agree with this as well. Here on the "Serious Business" forum things can be loose. Its up to the moderators on the other forums to keep things in check. Use good judgment, sometimes people are just being funny. You learn frequent posters sense of humor. Don't play favorites and all will be well. As money said its not hard to spot.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  One problem JJ's had going for it was they deleted posts that they deemed probation-worthy or ban-worthy.
  
  The other site I was speaking about, if you post something that is probation worthy, the following appears at the bottom of the post:
  
  (User was put on probation for this post)
  
  Its sort of like a scarlet letter, people see it, and know not to do it.
  
  And I don't think it would turn people off. If a mod is on the fence about something, chances are its not bad enough to be bannable or even probatable. But you guys were on JJ's for a long time, and you've probably been here for a good while too, you know well enough whats acceptable and whats not. We don't need to be Nazi's and keep the post content of the site clean enough for 12 year olds, but there does need to be some pruning of terrible posters. Like I said, if something is probatable or bannable, its pretty damn clear. If its not, its probably not an issue.
• jordo212000

  

  Mooney44Cards wrote: Thats not the point. The point is that it clutters up the conversation. I don't get mad at WHAT they say, just the fact that they feel the need to say it. It adds NOTHING to the site. Maintaining good, smart sports discussion adds PLENTY to the site.
  
  On the serious business forum it really doesn't matter because the threads are pretty much all bullshit anyways but when someone posts that a kid commits to Notre Dame during the coaching change and NCF (IN THE FIRST REPLY) says "too bad this kid will never win a bcs game", it just turns people off from reading what is potentially a good discussion about the state of an important college football program.

  IT IS A MESSAGE BOARD. I hope I never get to the point that when some jackass spouting nonsense gets to me. At a certain point you have to be able to distinguish when somebody actually believes what they and when somebody is just toying with somebody who takes Huddling way too seriously.
  
  What you are suggesting would make this place awful. It would be way too subjective. Then you get into the whole moderating mess (some are lenient, some are biased, etc). At the end of the day the best solution is to just sit back and laugh at their stupidity.
• SportsAndLady

  

  Agree with jordo..it's a fucking message board, why put so many rules? You can't post anything that isn't necessary? are you fucking kidding me? Way to rape me of my first amendment.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  jordo212000 wrote:

  Mooney44Cards wrote: Thats not the point. The point is that it clutters up the conversation. I don't get mad at WHAT they say, just the fact that they feel the need to say it. It adds NOTHING to the site. Maintaining good, smart sports discussion adds PLENTY to the site.
  
  On the serious business forum it really doesn't matter because the threads are pretty much all bullshit anyways but when someone posts that a kid commits to Notre Dame during the coaching change and NCF (IN THE FIRST REPLY) says "too bad this kid will never win a bcs game", it just turns people off from reading what is potentially a good discussion about the state of an important college football program.

  IT IS A MESSAGE BOARD. I hope I never get to the point that when some jackass spouting nonsense gets to me. At a certain point you have to be able to distinguish when somebody actually believes what they and when somebody is just toying with somebody who takes Huddling way too seriously.
  
  What you are suggesting would make this place awful. It would be way too subjective. Then you get into the whole moderating mess (some are lenient, some are biased, etc). At the end of the day the best solution is to just sit back and laugh at their stupidity.

  I get it man. You're so laid back. I wish I could be you.
  
  YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT. I come here to bullshit, to discuss stupid stuff, post funny things. But I also come here to discuss sports. When there is good discussion going on I enjoy having a place to come and partake in it. When there is NOT good discussion going on, I get annoyed that I cannot partake in good discussion.
  
  I don't see how preventing people from gumming up conversations with "lol private schools recuit" would make this place awful. What is subjective about that? If you want to intelligently discuss why Notre Dame is no longer relevant, I'd love to hear your opinion. If you'd like to intelligently discuss what you deem is an advantage for private schools over public schools, more power to ya. If you think Tressel should no longer be the coach at OSU because he doesn't coach to win, I will join in the discussion. BUT, if you are saying this site is better off with low-brow, no-content, pot-shot posts in the middle of perfectly legitimate conversation, I dunno what you even come here for? To laugh at us peons that take it more seriously than you?
  
  I'm not asking that we censor anything, just make an example out of those who post stupid shit, and motivate them to bring more content to the table if they'd like to partake in sports discussion.
• Hamp89

  Mooney44Cards wrote:

  jordo212000 wrote:

  Mooney44Cards wrote: Thats not the point. The point is that it clutters up the conversation. I don't get mad at WHAT they say, just the fact that they feel the need to say it. It adds NOTHING to the site. Maintaining good, smart sports discussion adds PLENTY to the site.
  
  On the serious business forum it really doesn't matter because the threads are pretty much all bullshit anyways but when someone posts that a kid commits to Notre Dame during the coaching change and NCF (IN THE FIRST REPLY) says "too bad this kid will never win a bcs game", it just turns people off from reading what is potentially a good discussion about the state of an important college football program.

  IT IS A MESSAGE BOARD. I hope I never get to the point that when some jackass spouting nonsense gets to me. At a certain point you have to be able to distinguish when somebody actually believes what they and when somebody is just toying with somebody who takes Huddling way too seriously.
  
  What you are suggesting would make this place awful. It would be way too subjective. Then you get into the whole moderating mess (some are lenient, some are biased, etc). At the end of the day the best solution is to just sit back and laugh at their stupidity.

  I get it man. You're so laid back. I wish I could be you.
  
  YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT. I come here to bullshit, to discuss stupid stuff, post funny things. But I also come here to discuss sports. When there is good discussion going on I enjoy having a place to come and partake in it. When there is NOT good discussion going on, I get annoyed that I cannot partake in good discussion.
  
  I don't see how preventing people from gumming up conversations with "lol private schools recuit" would make this place awful. What is subjective about that? If you want to intelligently discuss why Notre Dame is no longer relevant, I'd love to hear your opinion. If you'd like to intelligently discuss what you deem is an advantage for private schools over public schools, more power to ya. If you think Tressel should no longer be the coach at OSU because he doesn't coach to win, I will join in the discussion. BUT, if you are saying this site is better off with low-brow, no-content, pot-shot posts in the middle of perfectly legitimate conversation, I dunno what you even come here for? To laugh at us peons that take it more seriously than you?
  
  I'm not asking that we censor anything, just make an example out of those who post stupid shit, and motivate them to bring more content to the table if they'd like to partake in sports discussion.

  Great post, and I agree with all of it.
• Upper90

  "it just turns people off from reading what is potentially a good discussion about the state of an important college football program."
  
  Well, it's a good thing Notre Dame isn't an important college football program anymore LOL.
  
  
  Na, I'm j/k.