Fashion Board 1-08-04 through 02-03-04

[pretermitted_child]

Originally posted by Not Bob
One of the few things that bother me about this place is the collective negative attitude we show towards new posters. And (am I mixing my metaphors here?) the piling-on once there is blood in the water.

Yeah yeah yeah -- maybe he should have lurked longer, had a thicker skin, etc. But we should have cut him some slack.

[evenodds]

Originally posted by Not Bob
One of the few things that bother me about this place is the collective negative attitude we show towards new posters. And (am I mixing my metaphors here?) the piling-on once there is blood in the water.

Yeah yeah yeah -- maybe he should have lurked longer, had a thicker skin, etc. But we should have cut him some slack.

Blah, blah, blah.

We started a forum exclusively for new posters to get their feet wet, which was widely ignored. We started the big board forum for general discussion, also widely ignored.

People want to play with the big boys . . . so delurk and step up. Since we are not nice to each other, why would we treat new people any differently.

I disagree that we attack newbies er newbers en masse when weakness is shown. Instead, it encourages many of our members to contact the new poster privately and provide reassurance -- a far better welcome than any of us received elsewhere.

Clearly, we are not discouraging new posters from the FB. Many new people have joined here and become regulars, despite our best efforts to drive them away.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Not Bob
One of the few things that bother me about this place is the collective negative attitude we show towards new posters. And (am I mixing my metaphors here?) the piling-on once there is blood in the water.

Yeah yeah yeah -- maybe he should have lurked longer, had a thicker skin, etc. But we should have cut him some slack.

One of the many things that gets under my skin about this place is how forgiving we are of pansy ass new posters who come on, get what can only be described as the mildest of flamings, and then go crying home to their mommies. I'm reeeeeaaaaallly sowwy if your widdle feewings are getting all hurt. Now go away.

Any recommendations for wall climbing places places in the New York area. [besides for your local law-firm]

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by evenodds
Blah, blah, blah.

We started a forum exclusively for new posters to get their feet wet, which was widely ignored. We started the big board forum for general discussion, also widely ignored.

People want to play with the big boys . . . so delurk and step up. Since we are not nice to each other, why would we treat new people any differently.

I disagree that we attack newbies er newbers en masse when weakness is shown. Instead, it encourages many of our members to contact the new poster privately and provide reassurance -- a far better welcome than any of us received elsewhere.

Clearly, we are not discouraging new posters from the FB. Many new people have joined here and become regulars, despite our best efforts to drive them away.

Translation*: My name is Heather and why does the Chess Club get to have their picture in the yearbook, anyway? I mean, it's not like anyone knows or cares who they are.

Ok, that was a cheap shot. But I am stunned by some of what you say. Anyway, to substantively respond to your comments:

(1) the new posters' forum: What does the fact that no one posts on there, or on Greedy Podunkville, have to do with the fact that new posters on the FB are not exactly welcomed? Is it your point that if NWNative had posted for weeks in the flame-free newbies board that he would have known what the FB was all about?

(2) I would agree with you about the general discussion thing if new people came here and whined about how they were just looking for a general discussion, and why do we only talk about sex and reality tv on the FB? But that ain't what happens, is it?

(3) are you really saying that we don't treat new people differently than established posters? and you are not kidding? wow.

(4) I concede that piling on is not limited to attacks on new people, and that people probably do send reassuring PMs. However, when I first started posting on the old place and was flamed, I got public reassurance, so I'd disagree with you about the different welcome thing.

(5) if by "we" you mean admins, I'd mostly agree; if by "we" you mean the FB as a whole, you have got to be kidding. The fact that some people stick around despite the fact that they were mocked or attacked by the multitudes doesn't make this a welcoming enironment.

For everyone other than E/O -- I love her, but she is wrong. For E/O, you know I love you, but you are wrong.

*Hey, if West Side Story can borrow from Romeo and Juliet, then I can steal from TM.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
One of the many things that gets under my skin about this place is how forgiving we are of pansy ass new posters who come on, get what can only be described as the mildest of flamings, and then go crying home to their mommies. I'm reeeeeaaaaallly sowwy if your widdle feewings are getting all hurt. Now go away.

Something actually gets under your skin? Wow. I'll have to coddle the pansy-assed new posters more often.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
We didn't hire him to coach.

No shit. That's why I said "while his duties are different now..."

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Dynasty? You're crazy. Are the Nets a dynasty? That's as far they would have gone. It's been all about the west coast for years. They should have gone at least one of those years, but they were never that great a team (read: not the greatest players in the world either).

The Nets don't have even close to the amount of talent that the Pacers did/do. Jermaine O'Neal can play against Shaq and Duncan. No, I don't think they could have beaten the Lakers, but I think they could take the Spurs. Their 9-5 against the West. The only other team with a better record vs. the West is Sacramento, who is also the only other team with a better overall record.

And of course I can't seem to find ANY stats/standings from last year since ESPN.com sucks right now...all I know is that I heard that the Bulls were better last year than this year record-wise. Wonderful.

Edited to add that, frankly, I don't give a shit either way. All I care about is how individual players are performing for my roto league.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
McGrady, moping on a dead end team, and who's the number one rated point in the East right now?

Isiah will help- you will at least become respectable, but do not dog Chauncey.

(I'll ignore baseball, but don't talk this shit)

Yeah. You would much rather have Billups than Tracy McGrady whose numbers are higher in every category besides 3 point and free throw percentage and that includes steals, overall shooting percentage and assists*. McGrady is an all-star who has scored over 25 points per game (averaging 32 last year) each of the last 4 years.

Over the last 4 years, Billups has averaged 14 points per game (and that's high because I'm using this year's stats) and was outscored by 16 points per game last year (that's double for those of you keeping score at home). I have no disrespect for Billups, but you're a complete idiot if you think he (1) should have been drafted ahead of McGrady or (2) think Detroit wouldn't rather have McGrady than Billups every day of the week and three times on Sunday.

TM

* Isn't Billups a point guard?

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

"Hobbit chic" has hit the runways of Milan:



No, I'm not kidding. I wish I were.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Translation*: My name is Heather and why does the Chess Club get to have their picture in the yearbook, anyway? I mean, it's not like anyone knows or cares who they are.

Ok, that was a cheap shot. But I am stunned by some of what you say. Anyway, to substantively respond to your comments:


.... Blah, Blah Blah ....


For everyone other than E/O -- I love her, but she is wrong. For E/O, you know I love you, but you are wrong.

I think the piling on on newbies is just a by-product of Heather's sock purge. No socks to pile up on, it gets kind of boring piling up on each other over and over again (can whoever has their elbow in my rib please move it), so when a newbie appears its like throwing red meat to a den of hungry hyenas.

We need more socks. Then we'll be nicer to newbies. Let's all try to do our share.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I think the piling on on newbies is just a by-product of Heather's sock purge. No socks to pile up on, it gets kind of boring piling up on each other over and over again (can whoever has their elbow in my rib please move it), so when a newbie appears its like throwing red meat to a den of hungry hyenas.

We need more socks. Then we'll be nicer to newbies. Let's all try to do our share.

I do enjoy the Nut Case, Sensitive sock. Especially the sock's location.

[purse junkie]

Originally posted by Aloha Mr. Learned Hand
"Hobbit chic" has hit the runways of Milan:



No, I'm not kidding. I wish I were.

I see exciting possibilities here for office attire. Do the women get to wear corsets and rustic layered skirts?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Yeah. You would much rather have Billups than Tracy McGrady whose numbers are higher in every category besides 3 point and free throw percentage and that includes steals, overall shooting percentage and assists*. McGrady is an all-star who has scored over 25 points per game (averaging 32 last year) each of the last 4 years.

Over the last 4 years, Billups has averaged 14 points per game (and that's high because I'm using this year's stats) and was outscored by 16 points per game last year (that's double for those of you keeping score at home). I have no disrespect for Billups, but you're a complete idiot if you think he (1) should have been drafted ahead of McGrady or (2) think Detroit wouldn't rather have McGrady than Billups every day of the week and three times on Sunday.

TM

* Isn't Billups a point guard?

Stats? Billips is on a team. McGrady is the team; that tends to increase one's stats. I took your post to be a list of horrible decision. Taking Billups (at least now, don't know what he was out of school) over McGrady is not a horrible choice.
Plus, while McGrady is a great player, both offensively and defensively, he is so at the easiest position to fill, 2 or 3.

Point and center are the tough ones to fill.

Wait. you're just giving me shit because I'm new, right?

[evenodds]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I think the piling on on newbies is just a by-product of Heather's sock purge. No socks to pile up on, it gets kind of boring piling up on each other over and over again (can whoever has their elbow in my rib please move it), so when a newbie appears its like throwing red meat to a den of hungry hyenas.

We need more socks. Then we'll be nicer to newbies. Let's all try to do our share.

I am shocked, shocked you would come out in favor of socking.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by evenodds
I am shocked, shocked you would come out in favor of socking.

Concur. More NotMe's are exactly what this board needs.