How Can We Improve?

The best way is to bag the whole conspiracy/April fools jokes. They spice things up for a while but become tedious all day affairs that probably piss a bunch of people off. Today is case and point.

How far do you think they would be willing to go if this was some April Fools Joke? Granted, it's still possible. But how dedicated so you think they are to this?

How far do you think they would be willing to go if this was some April Fools Joke? Granted, it's still possible. But how dedicated so you think they are to this?

about as far as we went on the arch nemisis thing i'd imagine ;)

I think the place could stand to be a bit edgier than it has been. We're not talking about satin throwpillows here, we're talking about football for god's sake. We're all grown men here (with the exception of PWNED).

I agree that it could be "edgier."

Homerism prevails here...not to the extent that it does over at Extremeskins...but it is nevertheless dominant. If a poster expresses an unpopular opinion, he can expect to be ridiculed even by the moderators.

You have some nice ancillary features on this site, but I didn't come here for those. You can improve this site by improving the quality of the discussion or debate...by encouraging not discouraging controversy.

I agree that it could be "edgier."

Homerism prevails here...not to the extent that it does over at Extremeskins...but it is nevertheless dominant. If a poster expresses an unpopular opinion, he can expect to be ridiculed even by the moderators.

You have some nice ancillary features on this site, but I didn't come here for those. You can improve this site by improving the quality of the discussion or debate...by encouraging not discouraging controversy.

I have assumed, as a newer member, that the Homerism was a function of the Redskins recent success. I think that if this were 1996, everyone would be in high dudgeon--Norv this and Casserly that. Am I wrong?

I have assumed, as a newer member, that the Homerism was a function of the Redskins recent success. I think that if this were 1996, everyone would be in high dudgeon--Norv this and Casserly that. Am I wrong?

If you browse the fansites of other teams, you'll read the same kind of posts you read here.

I agree that it could be "edgier."

Homerism prevails here...not to the extent that it does over at Extremeskins...but it is nevertheless dominant. If a poster expresses an unpopular opinion, he can expect to be ridiculed even by the moderators.

You have some nice ancillary features on this site, but I didn't come here for those. You can improve this site by improving the quality of the discussion or debate...by encouraging not discouraging controversy.

hate to break it to you, argueing that stats are almost worthless and engaging in multiple circular arguements per week while refusing to even consider that you might possibly maybe be wrong about ANYTHING doesn't exactly promote debate.

In fact, rampant and ludicrous illogic stonewalls it. So does stating and believing that there's no such thing as proof regarding objective comparisions of players (making any debate involving who we should look at or who's better etc totally impossible, so every such post becomes a worthless he said/she said thread). If you can't prove anything, then there is no debate. And so once again i find it ironic that of all people, you're the one asking for better debate when that's the very thing you've tried so hard to kill over and over again on this very site.

Go take some of those crap arguements and debating "techniques" to other forums and see how many people you get bowing before you there, or see how many sites decide not to bother entertaining it and just ban you instead.

What i think you meant to ask for is a pulpit where you can spew biased and unsupported opinions without being challenged while a loyal throng of idiot followers constantly PMs you about how amazing and smart you are.

Go take some of those crap arguements and debating "techniques" to other forums and see how many people you get bowing before you there, or see how many sites decide not to bother entertaining it and just ban you instead.

That Guy, I found that adding certain members to my ignore list makes this a better forum for me. Some members are self absorbed, oppositionally defiant, stupid, and/or not worth the time. You should add these people to yours!:food-smil

hate to break it to you, argueing that stats are almost worthless and engaging in multiple circular arguements per week while refusing to even consider that you might possibly maybe be wrong about ANYTHING doesn't exactly promote debate.

In fact, rampant and ludicrous illogic stonewalls it. So does stating and believing that there's no such thing as proof regarding objective comparisions of players (making any debate involving who we should look at or who's better etc totally impossible, so every such post becomes a worthless he said/she said thread). If you can't prove anything, then there is no debate. And so once again i find it ironic that of all people, you're the one asking for better debate when that's the very thing you've tried so hard to kill over and over again on this very site.

Go take some of those crap arguements and debating "techniques" to other forums and see how many people you get bowing before you there, or see how many sites decide not to bother entertaining it and just ban you instead.

What i think you meant to ask for is a pulpit where you can spew biased and unsupported opinions without being challenged while a loyal throng of idiot followers constantly PMs you about how amazing and smart you are.

I really tweaked your ego in that stats debate...didn't I?

I really tweaked your ego in that stats debate...didn't I?

I don't think you tweaked anybody's ego, Huddle. I have been involved in some debates with you on here, but I've also just been witness to debates between you and others like That Guy. In those debates in which I've just been an observer, if I were judging, I'd say you flat out lost. That Guy is right, your logic is often circular. If you're going to win debates as you seem to be so concerned with, you have to offer valid rebuttals when someone shoots your points down. Your points were shot down so often, but I never heard you rebut. You usually clammed up on the subject and then picked a different, and irrelevant, point to dispute. That's the reason that debates with you seem to drift towards the pointless and irrelevant aspects of the subject matter.

In my judgment, That Guy got angry with you because you're frustrating to argue with. Mind you, you're not frustrating because you can shoot down valid points with solid reasoning. You're frustrating because when someone shoots down your point, you dance around and argue different subjects. Then you continue to argue as if yours is a position of strength when it's clearly not. That's where the frustration stems.

That's my opinion on your debating skills. I don't think you're very good at it. My guess is a lot of people would see it the same way. If you're such a great debator and so great at getting your point across, how come NOBODY on this site agrees with you? Is it possible you're actually smarter than EVERYONE here? You probably think so, which is exactly why you're so frustrating.

Is it possible you're actually smarter than EVERYONE here?

I don't know. How many do you suppose exceed a 150 IQ?

And no...that doesn't mean that I know it all...nor does it mean that I'm not capable of logical errors. What it does mean is that I'm not the obstinate dunce that you and others claim.

You are pissed with me because you couldn't handle me in debate.