No ones posts are "changing a thing". It's anonymous internet posting. That's the real hilarious thing. Posters try to paint themselves as sophisticated or cultured or have perspective when they are here (many of them for hours and hours during a week) arguing and name calling other anonymous posters.
Any Dixon defenders left?
- Thread starter SouthSidePanther
- Start date
No ones posts are "changing a thing". It's anonymous internet posting. That's the real hilarious thing. Posters try to paint themselves as sophisticated or cultured or have perspective when they are here (many of them for hours and hours during a week) arguing and name calling other anonymous posters.
As opposed to what, acting like jerks and trolling? If people just let the trolls troll, that would be better? Then this place would become Scout. How does one act "cultured" on a sport site? Type with our pinkie raised?
Who's trolling?
Who specifically is acting like jerks? Is calling people names doing that?
What have you added to the board today?
The fact your referencing threads a week old tells me you have waaaaaaay to much time on your hands.
What is the records of the teams i mentioned compared to Pitt's over the last 3 years. You might not like THE FACTS. Also it was nice of you to leave out Iowa, and Iowa st. Now run along and get a job.
This thread was started, in fact, as an attempt at trolling. South side insulted the intelligence of anyone who supports Jamie, and pittpoker liked it. They, in fact, started the name calling in this thread alone.
What have you added? What has PittPoker added, other than 1900 James Robinson threads, which you yourself wrote have been over the top. Has anybody really added anything to this board today? Has anyone really detracted from the board today?
I also think the most negative posters have the thinnest skin. They want to be able to post opinions without disagreement. Just look, someone putting pittgirl and major majors on ignore? Talk about thin skin.
Last edited:
Have you noticed how posters who sometimes post negative thoughts like chescat, colingrant, badby, yc_ballcat don't really get attacked much, if at all? It's because they provide analysis, they make their point and don't repeat it a thousand times, they don't use idiotic hyperbole like "you guys think Jamie is God" or James Robinson is one of the worst guards in D1. If people don't act like jerks, and discuss things like adults, they are treated as such. People who post the same thing over and over 100 times in all caps get treated as they deserve.
Let me sum up:
Some feel entitled to say what they want. But get ouchy when others challenge or comment back.
In other words, they hold coaches and athletes to standards they do not hold themselves to.
They are children.
Some feel entitled to say what they want. But get ouchy when others challenge or comment back.
In other words, they hold coaches and athletes to standards they do not hold themselves to.
They are children.
Stop bringing me up to fit your stupid agenda. You always act all innocent but in truth you are a big part of the problem.
Not really, I haven't countered many posters this year, only the biggest trolls. Del and I used to go back and forth, but we have both treated each other with respect. I don't agree with him often, but he has tones it down a bit too.
The trolls generally attract the attention to themselves, then cry the loudest about it after. If you don't respect the other posters on this site, then you shouldn't expect respect in return. Simple as that.
You possess at least a measureable amount of objectivity and, ya know, come here to actually contribute to basketball conversations.
It's the "Pitt can-do-no-wrong" crowd that patrols the hoops board and want to insult people who go against their grain that creep me out, so I simply use the handy ignore function.
I have zero problem with people who choose the positive viewpoint, yet can understand and at least attempt to tolerate others who might currently be a little more pessimistic about the state of the program. I think that most everybody here, regardless of your personal stance, seem to want Dixon to be the one to lead this program back to where it was and where we think it can ultimately go. He's never represented Pitt in anything less than a classy manner.
That isn't what it is. You can challenge people's opinions without attack them personally. Let one person answer why it's appropriate to name call someone when they something negative about Dixon?
That's the point none of us have added anything. But because you don't like what Pitt Poker writes you call him stupid. Honestly besides a bunch of other things I'm not going to type you guys aren't very nice people. Moreover, you're not as close to being as smart as you think you are. For you I feel it's conflicting because I think you have self awareness to realize you're being that way while some of your brethren don't even realize their behavior. I'm not going to go back and forth on this anymore but anyone calling someone else stupid on an anonymous message board probably isn't that smart either.
I have never called him or anyone stupid, that I recall. that is not typically a word I use. Maybe you were addressing someone else? Poker doesn't post opinions, he trolls.
Even in this thread, I have not insulted you, but you insult me. Great job killing your own point.
You totally, and probably intentionally, keep missing the point. negative posting doesn't get attacked. Trolling does. Or, something posted that isn't factual. Why is it ok for you that people troll the board? And don't forget, the most negative posters have the thinnest skin.
You still haven't addressed the OP. It was an attempt at trolling, and was name calling. Your criticism is limited to only posters you consider to be positive. There are no "rules" for negative posters. Just stop it already.
I haven't done either of those. Who are you talking about? You didn't point of the OP. #doublestandard, #boardhypocrite
I didn't call anyone a jerk. I said "act like a jerk". I was speaking of the behavior, not the person. Same with troll. It is an Internet term that you probably don't know. It describes the behavior of a certain poster. He even recognized it was him, though I didn't mention him by name. If you have lived in Pittsburgh ever, and haven't called anyone a yinzer ever, you just aren't living. And I usually use it in a general sense, like "yinzers do such and such", I don't recall specifically calling a person a yinzer.
Hey dong.. I am too busy to sit here every day. I didn't look, but fairly sure I am right--- as what you said is not only silly, but inaccurate...
To be honest, you have attacked me personally more than I to you. I have mostly spoke of your behavior, which is typically poor. You have put me on ignore no less than twenty times. You have no self control. You will take me off again is am sure. Till then.....
He did the same thing with TiredRam a couple of years ago Bob and Ram went off on him and called him psycho amongst other choice words. I will never forget that exchange - it was warranted. If anyone trolls it's kiwijeff. He needs to spend some time looking in the mirror. I'm glad he's on ignore and will be permanently from this point forward. Arguing with that guy is just a big time waster because he never thinks he does anything wrong, just like Souf. Today for example just brings my name up for no reason to insult me. I'm gonna enjoy this board and have respectable disagreements if necessary, not get insulted by that guy all the time.
Ram just posted he thought I was alright just a month ago, in response to your continued personal attacks on me, so it didn't seem to bother him as much as it bothered you. You have to go back 2-3 years to find an instance of me "attacking" someone? i'm not too bad then. You have trolled The whole board since then, up and through today.
Heck, the OP was an attempt at trolling, and you liked it. Seems you are pretty selective in who you approve of trolling.
Bob liked that mess? Dear lord, I didn't insult poker, I brought up his name in context of bad behavior, because that's what people attack. why didn't you address the OP, or the fact that people who post negative things in an adult manner don't get attacked? I think I know the answer.
Because I didn't read the initial post to be honest. It was 5-6 pages in when I stumbled upon it. I don't have much use for that type of posting either.
I agree with your second point. Virtually everyone regardless of how they present it get attacked when they are negative of coach Dixon.
I didn't write that at all. I wrote that they DONT get attacked. Chescat, yc_ballcat, badby, and other, provide concise, thought provoking criticism. Not bull crap like accusing people of saying "you just think Jamie is God" or saying "where are all the people who said James Robinson was better than x and y combined" when nobody did. Like I said, you are very selective in your criticism, only to the more positive posters. I don't know what makes you so sensitive that way.
It was Dixon's decision to recruit who he recruited. And if you consider this upcoming class to be the first of him "getting back to his roots" then you are looking at a 2-3 year wait for any substantial pay-off. Is the University and its fans that patient?
That's what some of these guys don't understand. If you post something that I think is dumb and I tell you that your post was dumb that isn't an attack on your person, it's an attack on your opinion. There are people who do not understand that difference, and they use that difference of opinion to actually make personal attacks, and then claim that the other guy started it
I've used this analogy before, but this board is like sitting at the bar BSing with your friends about sports. When one of your friends says something dumb in that context don't you pick on them over it? Don't you tell them that they just said something dumb? Maybe say someting like "come on man, you can't really think that,can you?" And yet you are still friends. I'd imagine some of these guys in that situation would punch their (now former) friend in the mouth and then claim that he started it.
Almost everyone is missing the point I've been trying to make. None of us know what the real objective of the athletic department is other than to raise revenue. What all fans want is a national championship and final fours ,elite eighths etc is that really the goal. Sure they want to win ,but are they willing to put the resources into the athletic dept to accomplish this. I don't think their heart is into it so what makes anyone think that their willing to eat a big contract . Then have to go out and make a significant hire $$$$$. Not going to happen. JD will have the time he needs and only when it's become so obvious that time has pasted him by and when the buyout can be stomached would they act.
Yep, Jamie definitely recruited these guys and several more who are no longer here, and he definitely made mistakes. I'm on record as saying I want to give him 2-3 more years to get back to his roots since we've seen how successful he can be when he has the right kind of players. I'd also really like him to make some staff changes.
Obviously, you and many others on this board don't agree with giving him more time, which is fine. Everyone's entitled to an opinion. I honestly have no idea how much time the University is willing to give him, and no one else on here does either as far as I can tell, and honestly that's all that really matters.
I wouldn't hit a friend. But people I don't know that insult me, maybe.
We aren't friends, I don't know you. And people I don't know don't talk to me like a few people on this site do. And I believe whole heartedly the same people that insult people on this site wouldn't do it in person.
Well if that's the way that you look at it, then a serious question for you. Why do you give a rat's arse what anyone on here posts? Why do you care if someone is the nicest, most polite person in the world or if someone is more confrontational in their posts? After all, you aren't their friend. You don't know them. So why do you care what they have to say when they post?
I guess this gets to the heart of the matter. It's an anonymous message board. Why do you let any of this bother you? Why do you care if Poster A thinks that Poster B is dumber than a box of rocks and Poster B thinks Poster A is a meanie who always picks on them if you don't know either one and don't care about either one?
I would.
But of course, in the context of actual conversation it wouldn't seem so ,"mean" unless you actually are this sensitive.
In which case, I'd be meaner.
Similar threads
