I don't mind a Rutgers grad running this site. Tyler Donahue from Lions 247 is a Rutgers grad, and I very much enjoy his analysis. What I mind are those who want the program to stay mired in the college football mindset of the 70's and 80's. We have to modernize to compete. Can't expect the team to continue to make a championship run every 4 years or so without investing in the program.
Is Anyone Here.....
- Thread starter Texas Lion
- Start date
That's a reason to stay here as far as I'm concerned. I don't need a PSU board to find pics like that and I was tired of questionable photos popping up randomly in unrelated threads when I browse at work. Those photos are out there for anyone that seeks them and IMO it doesn't have a place on PSU boards.
I don't recall any false advertising from anyone who's voice would matter... Tom, moderators, Phil, etc. They almost certainly had a contract outlining what would happen and what they could say about it on the board. I don't recall any posts from those that would have been in the know that this board would cease to exist, they simply avoided the topic. I assumed the board would be here because the creation of On3 sure isn't enough (at least not yet) to cause Rivals to collapse and Rivals sure wasn't likely to remove content from one of the biggest brands in NCAA football. I'd imagine they all knew this board would continue under a new name, but they weren't allowed to talk about it because the new owners of the BWI brand wanted to get as many members to change over as possible and it would be in the interest of any moderators moving to On3 to not violate a contract and to get the membership at On3 as high as possible. If the members thought the board might disappear through their own assumptions, that's one way to increase the chances of someone moving over.
I noticed that the number of posts I see from ignored posters has gone way down. The Pied Piper took most of the rats with him.
Last edited:
I think that's a fair reading of things. There were some assumptions, and Tom was certainly not anxious to discourage those assumptions because he stood to benefit from them. Moreover, in the middle of the continuing board discussion of those assumptions, he posted detailed instructions on how people could sign up at the new place. Then that post disappeared.
At the end of the day, it's no huge deal. Even if you signed up on the new board, as I did, there was nothing to prevent you from continuing to post on the old one...once you discovered at, like, 1201 AM on November 1 that it wasn't going away. To many like yourself, that was no surprise. To others like me, it was...and a pleasant one at that. But either way, I can't see any major harm done.
GLOV, It’s good to see your humor here, glad you didn’t switch over (at least not completely).Stupid picture?
OUCH man!!
That's his HS senior pic sir!
He was voted 'most likely to start his day the nutritious way!"
You poor snowflake.
Not that it matters, but I don't believe Tom was a Penn State grad either.
Last edited:
Totally, I cancelled On3 already.
Same suck up dribble already. Zero interest in it
I called Tom a few names once about how all-mighty he thought he was.....he banned me for 2 weeks
Seriously, he and the crew are quasi professional at best. Rude to paying customers. Not worth the dime …. They can suck up to the same 30 people forever. Good luck
Why? This thread has brought a bunch of deplorables over from the Test Board in order to vent their spleen - now that Tom has gone - about the fact that they were required to confine their RWNJ diatribes to the Test Board. Boo hoo. There have been, and will likely continue to be, no small number of good people who post on this Board, but if the new Mods allow the RWNJ's from the Test Board to proliferate here, this Board will, IMHO, suffer for it.Yeah, but I'm still here.
Still here to update everyone on Jim and his Big Blue Death Star. Should be a heck of a NC game this year between Georgia and the Big Blue after Jim runs table the rest of the year. JJ McCarthy is the next Trevor Lawrence
Many of the nasty old RWNJ's from the nasty old Test Board happen to also be Penn State fans with informed opinions on football, Laf.
I'm more worried about the nasty old LWNJ's like NJPSU who showed up here a few days ago to get snarky with Mary and had to be escorted to the door...
Jimmy Boy has to win his real Championship Game, against Ohio State. He has yet to do that.
Jerry: I believe we agree on two things:Many of the nasty old RWNJ's from the nasty old Test Board happen to also be Penn State fans with informed opinions on football, Laf.
I'm more worried about the nasty old LWNJ's like NJPSU who showed up here a few days ago to get snarky with Mary and had to be escorted to the door...
1. People who want to submit overtly political posts here at the PSU Rivals site should confine themselves to doing so on the Test Board. That applies to both righties and lefties.
2. There are plenty of people who post very partisan stuff on the Test Board who,. when they are here on the "Regular board" (formerly the McAndrew Board and now the Nittany Lounge) submit informed opinions on football (or other subjects) that do not violate the restriction on politically themed posts.
Unfortunately, that does not apply to all of them. If you looked back through this thread, there are several conservative Test Board posters who felt it necessary to post in this thread in order to bash Tom McAndrew for enforcing a ban on politically themed posts.
People generally tend to be blind to their own faults and keenly observant of the faults of others.
I agree with your two numbered points, Laf, but not necessarily with the closing paragraph.
C'mon, we both know that Tom, as head honcho, brought his own biases to the definition of "politically themed posts." I mean, he (or his associates) censored more than one of mine that didn't reasonably fit the category.
So people are ventilating a bit in this thread, and I think that's understandable.
OK, Jerry. It could be that Tom leaned a tad to the left. I thought he made a studious attempt to be neutral, but perhaps my own biases affected my perception of his. Perhaps other folks' own biases affected their perception of Tom as well. Hotshoe is a moderator here as well. (There are likely others, but I don't know who they are.) Have you perceived Hotshoe as a neutral moderator?
Tom posted glowingly about the 1619 project.
Yes, he authored the post.
On his own “no politics” board. Finally, after taking the beating he so honestly deserved, he deleted it.
A tad left…hahahaha.
I don't know if Shoe is still a moderator. I hope so. In any case, yes, he leans to the right...but you guys who have spent your lives benefiting from the opposite bias are in no position to complain.
Was really sad to see him do so and then defend it later in the thread. As a historian he had to know there were many things wrong with piece of garbage. Shameful.
I just Googled "1619 Project" and read a Wikipedia page or two about it. Aside from the fact that it leans too heavily on the black perspective of American history, I see no glaring problem with it. The opposite could be said of traditional U.S. History books (e.g., most all of them were written exclusively, or virtually exclusively, by whites).
Please amplify your comments as to the defects of the 1619 Project. And perhaps you could point out the posts or posts in which Tom wrote "glowingly" of the 1619 Project.
OK, so there's no opportunity for me to read for myself and judge how "glowing" Tom's comments were. For the sake of discussion, I'll simply assume they were glowing.
And the basis for your declaring the 1619 Project to be garbage? I'm asking here rather than debating, as I just read about it for the first time roughly twenty minutes ago. Prior to that, all I had read were sporadic and brief criticisms of it in posts from conservatives on the Test Board.
If you never read anything about the 1619 Project other than the test board then you must have purposely avoided it. It has been widely criticized, The NY Times....a Co sponsor....had to issue corrections, and it was part of the backlash about CRT and other elated issues that led to the dramatic losses by the dem party this past election week.
I suggest you go back to google....or a less bias search engine.....and read up a bit before trying to discuss it further.
Wait a minute. Your post criticizes me for "purposely avoiding" reading about the 1619 Project. As if my purpose in life is to educate myself about everything conservatives find objectionable. YOU obviously claim to know something about it. If so, please provide SOME level of detail to justify your otherwise conclusory statement that it is objectionable.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
FB Recruiting 2024 Transfer Portal Thread -- Spring Window Edition
- Latest: Chickadee34
