Eliminating threads

[roswelllion]

Nate,
Never could understand the desire to eliminate threads unless they were too explicite or vulgar, seems like if your not interested don't read it, but it is your board and my money So if you prefer to host threads about
Beatles songs,
every other thread about "raise it"" or some other Pirate nonsense
towns in Italy
Nuclear meltdowns in Japan
best movie line
worst movie line
it is certainly your board and your business.

 

[NittanyAmerica]

I can't bring myself to agree with thread shredding. On the other hand, since every thread has evidence of deserving the

INBL

response, I guess the shredder is always in play.

N i t t a n y A m e r i c a

 

[ralpieE]

 

[SteveMasters]

It sure would have been nice if there could have a warning that we were treading on thin ice.

It also would have been nice if comments could have been closed without deleting the thread. If there are comments that are particularly offensive; I would prefer that, if possible, the offensive comments be removed without removing the non-offensive ones.

 

[michnittlion]

It sure would have been nice if there could have a warning that we were treading on thin ice.

It also would have been nice if comments could have been closed without deleting the thread. If there are comments that are particularly offensive; I would prefer that, if possible, the offensive comments be removed without removing the non-offensive ones.

Nobody is preventing you from starting A_New_Trial_For_Jerry.com and hosting a message board on said website. You'll be the boss, and won't have to worry about threads being deleted.

 

[SteveMasters]

Nobody is preventing you from starting A_New_Trial_For_Jerry.com and hosting a message board on said website. You'll be the boss, and won't have to worry about threads being deleted.

Nobody is preventing you from starting a timetomoveon.com site either.

Were you harmed in any way by a civilized discussion of whether Sandusky got a fair trial?

Do you think it is unreasonable to ask for commenting guidelines and what causes a thread to deleted?

 

[michnittlion]

Nobody is preventing you from starting a timetomoveon.com site either.

Were you harmed in any way by a civilized discussion of whether Sandusky got a fair trial?

Do you think it is unreasonable to ask for commenting guidelines and what causes a thread to deleted?

My posts get deleted from here every once in awhile as well.

Such is. This isn't my board. Isn't yours either.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Nobody is preventing you from starting a timetomoveon.com site either.

Were you harmed in any way by a civilized discussion of whether Sandusky got a fair trial?

Do you think it is unreasonable to ask for commenting guidelines and what causes a thread to deleted?

Hope they keep locking the free Jery threads and the threads crying about the deletions.

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

As the employee of an "insider" I can attest that there aren't any White or Black (or Blue for that matter) rules that should be assigned or adopted as to why a specific thread should or is deleted.

Life is a mystery...embrace the unknown and don't get hung up on what the Mods do. They have the power and you/we/me don't.

Cie La Vie

 

[BobPSU92]

By 2018, these threads will be a distant memory.

 

[mn78psu83]

As the employee of an "insider" I can attest that there aren't any White or Black (or Blue for that matter) rules that should be assigned or adopted as to why a specific thread should or is deleted.

Life is a mystery...embrace the unknown and don't get hung up on what the Mods do. They have the power and you/we/me don't.

Cie La Vie

You are a man of wisdom borne of painful experience.

 

[PennStateNate]

By 2018, these threads will be a distant memory.

Its distant to me now. No way he should be free, get a lighter sentence, etc..

If people think he should get another trial, its not going to change anything.

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

You are a man of wisdom borne of painful experience.

I wouldn't call it "wisdom" as much as I would "periodic multi-user rejection".

That said, I have been married to this handle for some time now, but only because of an oath of drunken stupidity in which I promised that I would be her pool boy until the end of time. I now know how Meatloaf felt. I'm prayin for the end of time.

 

[mn78psu83]

I wouldn't call it "wisdom" as much as I would "periodic multi-user rejection".

That said, I have been married to this handle for some time now, but only because of an oath of drunken stupidity in which I promised that I would be her pool boy until the end of time. I now know how Meatloaf felt. I'm prayin for the end of time.

It's too bad. Your previous one was clever and had brand panache for PSUers. It was an excellent handle. The game that caused you to go apoplectic and lose it (figuratively and literally with respect to your handle) was a game that we would all like to forget.

I hope that in exchange for your ongoing torment and suffering you experience the consolation of a bit of paradise by the dashboard light.

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

It's too bad. Your previous one was clever and had brand panache for PSUers. It was an excellent handle. The game that caused you to go apoplectic and lose it (figuratively and literally with respect to your handle) was a game that we would all like to forget.

I hope that in exchange for your ongoing torment and suffering you experience the consolation of a bit of paradise by the dashboard light.

I'm really hoping for Phil Rizzuto to call me out at 1st so that I can shamefully walk back to the dugout.

 

[lionroar88]

By 2018, these threads will be a distant memory.

I see what you did there...

 

[SteveMasters]

Hope they keep locking the free Jery threads and the threads crying about the deletions.

What is your angle LaJolla? You don't want to have any discussion about the fairness of the first trial and the quality of the evidence against JS, yet you are one of the people who will continually chime in with your opinion when any of these topics come up. It seems to me that you are in favor of BWI eliminating any discussions about whether JS got a fair trial and the case against him. How do you justify your hope that BWI continues to lock JS threads with you continual comments?

I am not crying about the deletions. It is BWI's board and they can run it as they see fit. I am asking questions and making comments. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask BWI what their commenting guidelines are and for the reasons a thread was deleted. BTW, they did tell me the reasons and they are pretty lame.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

My angle is I don't condone pedophiles. Like everyone else on this planet minus you a few others. 8 kids, not or 2 said he molested them. Just stop this crap because you shook Jerry's hands once. It's absurd and I hope they lock this one up to. JZ has a facebook page or maybe you can go visit the SOB in jail. He's not innocent and your insistence that he is says a lot about you. 8 victims all testified as adults he did this, but the rapist is the one telling the truth. I really think you are a troll from another school.

Please lock and delete this thread too. Football is almost here....TFG!!!!

 

[BobPSU92]

What is your angle LaJolla? You don't want to have any discussion about the fairness of the first trial and the quality of the evidence against JS, yet you are one of the people who will continually chime in with your opinion when any of these topics come up. It seems to me that you are in favor of BWI eliminating any discussions about whether JS got a fair trial and the case against him. How do you justify your hope that BWI continues to lock JS threads with you continual comments?

I am not crying about the deletions. It is BWI's board and they can run it as they see fit. I am asking questions and making comments. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask BWI what their commenting guidelines are and for the reasons a thread was deleted. BTW, they did tell me the reasons and they are pretty lame.

la jolla takes a strange view on this. Given what we know about the trial, it is bad enough to merely say that sandusky is in jail where he belongs, so we should not question what transpired. What makes it worse with la jolla is that he gets very angry very quickly over any discussion of the sandusky trial. It comes off as though he has a reason to fear a retrial and the information that could come out of it. Maybe he fears that sandusky could be freed as a result of a retrial. Well, first, that is unlikely, and second, there would have to be good reason behind freeing him supported by the law, which is something we would have to accept.

I just don't get the idea that sandusky doesn't deserve a fair trial because he's a convicted pedophile. A fair trial is a constitutional right for everyone in this country, not just the people we don't find despicable. Furthermore, I don't understand why the people who think like la jolla fail every time to see the middle ground. Advocating a retrial and therefore a fair trial for sandusky is not the same as saying he is not a pedophile and should not be in jail. This should not be complicated, but very often when discussing emotional topics on the interwebs, you get certain people who refuse to see the middle ground. It's black and white. That's just not reality with many subjects.

 

[B_Levinson]

Its distant to me now. No way he should be free, get a lighter sentence, etc..

If people think he should get another trial, its not going to change anything.

It is well known that a job that is not done right the first time must be done over.

E.g. if I am running a factory, and I reject some parts, and then find that the gage used to measure the parts was out of calibration, I have to measure those rejected parts again--along with those that were apparently in specification. This doesn't mean the rejects are good, and the ones that passed the inspection were bad, but it means I don't know which is which until I do the job over with a calibrated gage.

The fact that the prosecution team lied about McQueary's testimony in the presentment, and two investigators coached a witness, doesn't prove Sandusky is innocent, but it does prove we don't know if he is innocent or guilty.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

la jolla takes a strange view on this. Given what we know about the trial, it is bad enough to merely say that sandusky is in jail where he belongs, so we should not question what transpired. What makes it worse with la jolla is that he gets very angry very quickly over any discussion of the sandusky trial. It comes off as though he has a reason to fear a retrial and the information that could come out of it. Maybe he fears that sandusky could be freed as a result of a retrial. Well, first, that is unlikely, and second, there would have good reason behind freeing him supported by the law, which is something we would have to accept.

I just don't get the idea that sandusky doesn't deserve a fair trial because he's a convicted pedophile. A fair trial is a constitutional right for everyone in this country, not just the people we don't find despicable. Furthermore, I don't understand why the people who think like la jolla fail every time to see the middle ground. Advocating a retrial and therefore a fair trial for sandusky is not the same as saying he is not a pedophile and should not be in jail. This should not be complicated, but very often when discussing emotional topics on the interwebs, you get certain people who refuse to see the middle ground. It's black and white. That's just not reality with many subjects.

Bob, being PC about a fair trial is cute and all, but this is not the case to cry foul. The only reason anyone is fighting for this particular pedophile is because of the collateral damage he caused. I feel for the actual victims, not an inhuman child molestor. Unlike Steve I believe the victims in this case.

 

[B_Levinson]

la jolla takes a strange view on this. Given what we know about the trial, it is bad enough to merely say that sandusky is in jail where he belongs, so we should not question what transpired. What makes it worse with la jolla is that he gets very angry very quickly over any discussion of the sandusky trial. It comes off as though he has a reason to fear a retrial and the information that could come out of it. Maybe he fears that sandusky could be freed as a result of a retrial. Well, first, that is unlikely, and second, there would have good reason behind freeing him supported by the law, which is something we would have to accept.

I just don't get the idea that sandusky doesn't deserve a fair trial because he's a convicted pedophile. A fair trial is a constitutional right for everyone in this country, not just the people we don't find despicable. Furthermore, I don't understand why the people who think like la jolla fail every time to see the middle ground. Advocating a retrial and therefore a fair trial for sandusky is not the same as saying he is not a pedophile and should not be in jail. This should not be complicated, but very often when discussing emotional topics on the interwebs, you get certain people who refuse to see the middle ground. It's black and white. That's just not reality with many subjects.

Can anybody say Amiraults (Scott Harshbarger), Grant Snowden (Janet Reno), or the Wenatchee child abuse prosecutions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions)? The first two were clear-cut situations in which ambitious prosecutors railroaded innocent people on trumped-up charges. Harshbarger and Reno should never again be allowed to hold any position of public trust and, as far as I am concerned, should not be allowed to practice law.

This emphatically does not prove Sandusky innocent, but it does prove there are precedents in which ambitious prosecutors were willing to destroy the lives of innocent people to advance their own careers. In this case, we have at least two problems--the dishonest GJ presentment, and I personally reported that to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel by certified mail in May, and also the investigators coaching Victim 4 and then one of them lying about it in court. (They told conflicting stories, so one cannot have told the truth.) It's interesting that perjury laws seem to apply to just about everybody but these investigators.

Now take a look at Linda Kelly in this campaign photo, I mean press conference. http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/penn_state_officials_tim_curle.html Does she look like a prosecutor doing her job, or a politician running for re-election? We (including Republicans like myself) fired her for a reason in 2012 and, quite frankly, if she was responsible for the GJ presentment, maybe additional action needs to be taken. That is however up to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.

 

[B_Levinson]

My angle is I don't condone pedophiles. Like everyone else on this planet minus you a few others. 8 kids, not or 2 said he molested them. Just stop this crap because you shook Jerry's hands once. It's absurd and I hope they lock this one up to. JZ has a facebook page or maybe you can go visit the SOB in jail. He's not innocent and your insistence that he is says a lot about you. 8 victims all testified as adults he did this, but the rapist is the one telling the truth. I really think you are a troll from another school.

Please lock and delete this thread too. Football is almost here....TFG!!!!

I am sure the 11/9 BOT also would have wanted a lot of threads locked and deleted so they could move on, the same way every self-respecting hit and run driver in the country wants to move on after killing somebody while driving drunk (e.g. http://restorepsu.blogspot.com/2015/07/thank-you-karen-peetz-and-kenneth.html).

Nobody here says Sandusky is innocent--it is, in fact, rather difficult to prove somebody innocent just as it is not possible to prove the null hypothesis in statistics. (You can, however, convert it to an alternate hypothesis, but the standard of proof is a lot higher. E.g. I can't prove product A is "no worse" than Product B unless I can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A is better than B--which is not possible if they are actually equal.)

The victims might well be telling the truth. On the other hand, they did have an incentive, in the millions of dollars, to make false accusations. See for example "Fisher posted a photo to Facebook of his girlfriend lying on a hotel bedspread covered in cash." http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Victim_1_finds_his_voice.html, and another of Fisher himself lying in a pile of cash. http://framingpaterno.com/aaron-fishers-family-posts-facebook-photo-him-laying-cash-giving-middle-finger

Thanks for reminding me, I sent both links to Sandusky's lawyer.

The fact that there was an incentive does not mean their accusations were false, but it does create something of a shadow on the entire process. Even worse is the dishonest (now proven as an absolute fact) Grand Jury presentment and the fact that Victim 4 was told by investigators that other people had testified against Sandusky. One of the investigators then lied about this during Sandusky's trial.

None of this proves Sandusky innocent. All of it proves that his trial was defective and, like anything else that is defective, needs to be done over.

I will admit quite openly that Sandusky's exoneration would be very helpful. The enemy (11/9 BOT, Penn State bashers like Dan Bernstein and Buzz Bissinger, the NCAA, Tom Corbett, Linda Kelly, SNAP) would be wiped off the face of the earth in terms of reputation and credibility. They would be like Carthage after the Third Punic War. The facts are, however, what they are. If he is really guilty, nothing I can say or do can change that. On the other hand, if he was Nifonged, and we are dealing with another Amirault scandal to go with Kids for Cash, I and everybody else has an ethical obligation to make that right even if it would not help Penn State.

 

[roswelllion]

I think La Jolla has lived in Ca. A bit too long where PC is paramount and the ends justify the means. Actually quite common out here. ( La Jolla please note my comment "the ends justify the means") that means I do think JS is guilty.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I am sure the 11/9 BOT also would have wanted a lot of threads locked and deleted so they could move on, the same way every self-respecting hit and run driver in the country wants to move on after killing somebody while driving drunk (e.g. http://restorepsu.blogspot.com/2015/07/thank-you-karen-peetz-and-kenneth.html).

Nobody here says Sandusky is innocent--it is, in fact, rather difficult to prove somebody innocent just as it is not possible to prove the null hypothesis in statistics. (You can, however, convert it to an alternate hypothesis, but the standard of proof is a lot higher. E.g. I can't prove product A is "no worse" than Product B unless I can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A is better than B--which is not possible if they are actually equal.)

The victims might well be telling the truth. On the other hand, they did have an incentive, in the millions of dollars, to make false accusations. See for example "Fisher posted a photo to Facebook of his girlfriend lying on a hotel bedspread covered in cash." http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Victim_1_finds_his_voice.html, and another of Fisher himself lying in a pile of cash. http://framingpaterno.com/aaron-fishers-family-posts-facebook-photo-him-laying-cash-giving-middle-finger

Thanks for reminding me, I sent both links to Sandusky's lawyer.

The fact that there was an incentive does not mean their accusations were false, but it does create something of a shadow on the entire process. Even worse is the dishonest (now proven as an absolute fact) Grand Jury presentment and the fact that Victim 4 was told by investigators that other people had testified against Sandusky. One of the investigators then lied about this during Sandusky's trial.

None of this proves Sandusky innocent. All of it proves that his trial was defective and, like anything else that is defective, needs to be done over.

I will admit quite openly that Sandusky's exoneration would be very helpful. The enemy (11/9 BOT, Penn State bashers like Dan Bernstein and Buzz Bissinger, the NCAA, Tom Corbett, Linda Kelly, SNAP) would be wiped off the face of the earth in terms of reputation and credibility. They would be like Carthage after the Third Punic War. The facts are, however, what they are. If he is really guilty, nothing I can say or do can change that. On the other hand, if he was Nifonged, and we are dealing with another Amirault scandal to go with Kids for Cash, I and everybody else has an ethical obligation to make that right even if it would not help Penn State.

This has nothing to do with the BoT and how they screwed up. This is about fanatics who care more about a HC, school, or program so much that they side with a pedophile in their head to justify Jerry's actions. All of that just to make them feel better about themselves. It's disgusting and the most selfish crap I have seen on this site in close to 2 decades.

Stop with the fair trial BS and at least man up like Masters does. You guys are so deep in this BS you now have taken the BoT's f ups and tied them to anyone associated with PSU.

This trash needs to go!!!

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I think La Jolla has lived in Ca. A bit too long where PC is paramount and the ends justify the means. Actually quite common out here. ( La Jolla please note my comment "the ends justify the means") that means I do think JS is guilty.

Actually I lived there for 4-5 years and have been away for a decade so maybe geography isn't the reason I can speak my mind. PC means saying I think he is guilty but I want a new trial to exonerate my dead coach which some are doing here.

I'm fine with Joe's legacy and those hear crying the most have already talked about a new trial exonerating Joe. This is the only PSU site where loons even attempt to spread this BS. Most of it being done by AARP members more upset about the bad press than the actual child molestation.

 

[B_Levinson]

This has nothing to do with the BoT and how they screwed up. This is about fanatics who care more about a HC, school, or program so much that they side with a pedophile in their head to justify Jerry's actions. All of that just to make them feel better about themselves. It's disgusting and the most selfish crap I have seen on this site in close to 2 decades.

Stop with the fair trial BS and at least man up like Masters does. You guys are so deep in this BS you now have taken the BoT's f ups and tied them to anyone associated with PSU.

This trash needs to go!!!

NOBODY here is going to side with a pedophile.

On the other hand, no decent person with any sense of honor will tolerate the use of the justice system to railroad innocent people for political gain, as happened to the Amiraults (Scott Harshbarger), Grant Snowden (Janet Reno) and Duke Lacrosse (Mike Nifong). Nothing you say will change the proven fact (not opinion) that whoever wrote the GJ presentment lied, and that two investigators hinted to Victim 4 as to how he should perhaps testify. That is a big problem, just like the exculpatory evidence that Mike Nifong withheld was a big enough problem to get him disbarred. It is up to a retrial to determine whether this is enough of a problem to vacate Sandusky's conviction.

Two adult rules exist for two reasons: to protect minors from sexual assault, and also to protect the adults from false accusations of sexual assault. If Sandusky had had enough sense to follow this rule, there would have been no problem either way. The Amirault and Snowden scandals should be ample warning that no adult in his right mind should ever be alone with a child who does not belong to him or her.

By the way, Paterno does not need exoneration. It was proven by Masser's and Frazier's court depositions (legal evidence) that the Board not only scapegoated him but also lied about it afterward.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Justice was served. He had a right to a trial and it was a speedy one. He chose his lawyer and he had zero defense for all of it. He had no rights stripped from him different than any other convicted felon. He had his day and court, sorry you are bothered that the pedophile embarrassed the school. You're mad at the result of the trial. Help the real victims, not Jerry.

 

[nits74]

Nate,
Never could understand the desire to eliminate threads unless they were too explicite or vulgar, seems like if your not interested don't read it, but it is your board and my money So if you prefer to host threads about
Beatles songs,
every other thread about "raise it"" or some other Pirate nonsense
towns in Italy
Nuclear meltdowns in Japan
best movie line
worst movie line
it is certainly your board and your business.

"Your two minutes are up". Karen Peetz and old guard BOT logic. Nothing more.

 

[JoeBatters1]

My angle is I don't condone pedophiles. Like everyone else on this planet minus you a few others. 8 kids, not or 2 said he molested them. Just stop this crap because you shook Jerry's hands once. It's absurd and I hope they lock this one up to. JZ has a facebook page or maybe you can go visit the SOB in jail. He's not innocent and your insistence that he is says a lot about you. 8 victims all testified as adults he did this, but the rapist is the one telling the truth. I really think you are a troll from another school.

Please lock and delete this thread too. Football is almost here....TFG!!!!

ii

As I posted in the last thread that got deleted there are a few things to remember:

These threads about Sandusky and the scandal are never going away. Whether we like it or not this scandal will always be a part of PSU. And given how things were handled and how in particular Paterno's reputation was destroyed the whole sorry saga will always generate powerful emotions for all Penn Staters.

Issues related to the Sandusky scandal will be posted on PSU message boards in some form or another most likely for decades to come. There is no escaping it or running away from it by deleting threads. The bottom line is that if one wants to get away from talk about the Sandusky scandal then they need to get off the message boards and stop following all things related to PSU. That is not a knock on those that are understandably tired of the issue but an acknowledgment of the reality of the situation.

As others have noted maybe topic view was not the best idea by Rivals but that is Bwi's problem - one which is not solved by deleting threads.

 

[ralpieE]

The lies associated with this are astronomical!

 

[B_Levinson]

Justice was served. He had a right to a trial and it was a speedy one. He chose his lawyer and he had zero defense for all of it. He had no rights stripped from him different than any other convicted felon. He had his day and court, sorry you are bothered that the pedophile embarrassed the school. You're mad at the result of the trial. Help the real victims, not Jerry.

The Amiraults also had a speedy trial, with the court accepting testimony that is simply not believable by anybody who is not too stupid to get out of jury duty. I won't go into the details but you can read it here.
.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Amirault

 

[johnsonguy45]

The problem isn't discussing the scandal or aspects about the trial.

The problem is the handful mental midgets who go down the rabbit hole of arguing Jerry may be innocent because giving a kid a bear hug in the shower is simply indicative of an adult with boundary issues.

Such a suggestion is patently absurd and offensive to any sane human being, let alone a Penn Stater.

 

[SteveMasters]

The problem isn't discussing the scandal or aspects about the trial.

The problem is the handful mental midgets who go down the rabbit hole of arguing Jerry may be innocent because giving a kid a bear hug in the shower is simply indicative of an adult with boundary issues.

Such a suggestion is patently absurd and offensive to any sane human being, let alone a Penn Stater.

You are welcome to your own opinion. My opinion is that inappropriate touching may or may not be CSA, depending on whether or not there is sexual intent. If this is patently absurd and offensive to you, so be it. I believe this opinion is not patently absurd to many sane human beings.

 

[SteveMasters]

Justice was served. He had a right to a trial and it was a speedy one. He chose his lawyer and he had zero defense for all of it. He had no rights stripped from him different than any other convicted felon. He had his day and court, sorry you are bothered that the pedophile embarrassed the school. You're mad at the result of the trial. Help the real victims, not Jerry.

Justice was not served by an unfair trial. JS was potentially victimized by a miscarriage of justice. We need a new, fair trial in order to make that call.

 

[Misder2]

You are welcome to your own opinion. My opinion is that inappropriate touching may or may not be CSA, depending on whether or not there is sexual intent. If this is patently absurd and offensive to you, so be it. I believe this opinion is not patently absurd to many sane human beings.

and if Jerry says it wasn't sexual that means he is innocent? Good lord

 

[johnsonguy45]

You are welcome to your own opinion. My opinion is that inappropriate touching may or may not be CSA, depending on whether or not there is sexual intent. If this is patently absurd and offensive to you, so be it. I believe this opinion is not patently absurd to many sane human beings.

Okay Jerry.

 

[B_Levinson]

and if Jerry says it wasn't sexual that means he is innocent? Good lord

No, but if the prosecutors are shown to have lied (already proven) and that at least one victim was encouraged to testify in a certain manner, that could mean he is innocent.

 

[michnittlion]

Justice was not served by an unfair trial. JS was potentially victimized by a miscarriage of justice. We need a new, fair trial in order to make that call.

Fine. Go discuss it on A_New_Trial_For_Jerry.com

I presume you were productive this afternoon and started that website this afternoon?

 

[1PSUfootball1]

Can I please nominate THIS thread to be deleted?