Author Topic: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions  (Read 449073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #870 on: September 30, 2016, 08:39:13 AM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
See, the thing that I've noticed is that there's a certain group of posters who insist on derailing every thread in which that guy posts into a contentious and obviously futile exercise in trying to get him to admit to every mistaken thing he's ever predicted or opined upon.  The post becomes a referendum on a particular poster and his proclamations about Joel Embiid rather than whatever the original topic was.


To me, that's more of a problem than one guy on this forum who likes to post tongue in cheek and try to get attention by stating things that are in-context-controversial.  If you don't engage and don't take it so seriously, then the thread keeps moving along.  People just need to accept that some people are the way they are and do what they're gonna do, you're not going to get them to break down and admit they were wrong all along.  And moreover, it's not fun to be here if that's gonna be the goal of so many discussions -- to force people to own their mistakes and be held accountable for them.

This becomes a negative environment if there's a frequent pattern of people refusing to take what other posters say in a given thread at face value because of the need to bring up the context of other posts in other threads.  The worst times I can think of to be on this forum have been when people insist on creating factions and using labels for posters who they perceive to be on the opposite side of whatever divide they want to create, whether it's Tankers vs Anti-Tankers, or whatever.  They disagree reflexively because the person making a post is somebody they identify as a "tanker," or whatever, and so fail to actually read what was said in that thread.

What a load of nonsense. You don't see this behaviour with any other poster, so don't turn this into a topic about the general behaviour on CB. We're talking about one Grade A troll here, who's abusing CB's commitment to their own community rules, in this case free speech, for his own amusement. If anything, he's the guy who turns unrelated threads into his own personal soapbox.

We're also not talking about isolated incidents, which could seem innocuous on their own, we're talking about a clear pattern of outrageous statements coupled with complete denial afterwards. Of course people are gonna quote his old posts in that case.

There's a reason why people like that are usually banned on any decently moderated site, and it's not the inability to accept differing viewpoints, it's the fact that they destroy any kind of actual, reasonable discussion.

I agree with every word, 100%.

Nobody really cares that this guy is making predictions and he's wrong.

What's annoying is that anytime someone uses a better argument against something trollish that he's trying to say, he just doesn't address it.  I hardly ever see him involved in any actual reasonable debates, they're usually out-of-context ones.
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #871 on: September 30, 2016, 08:50:21 AM »

Offline BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8902
  • Tommy Points: 1212
See, the thing that I've noticed is that there's a certain group of posters who insist on derailing every thread in which that guy posts into a contentious and obviously futile exercise in trying to get him to admit to every mistaken thing he's ever predicted or opined upon.  The post becomes a referendum on a particular poster and his proclamations about Joel Embiid rather than whatever the original topic was.


To me, that's more of a problem than one guy on this forum who likes to post tongue in cheek and try to get attention by stating things that are in-context-controversial.  If you don't engage and don't take it so seriously, then the thread keeps moving along.  People just need to accept that some people are the way they are and do what they're gonna do, you're not going to get them to break down and admit they were wrong all along.  And moreover, it's not fun to be here if that's gonna be the goal of so many discussions -- to force people to own their mistakes and be held accountable for them.

This becomes a negative environment if there's a frequent pattern of people refusing to take what other posters say in a given thread at face value because of the need to bring up the context of other posts in other threads.  The worst times I can think of to be on this forum have been when people insist on creating factions and using labels for posters who they perceive to be on the opposite side of whatever divide they want to create, whether it's Tankers vs Anti-Tankers, or whatever.  They disagree reflexively because the person making a post is somebody they identify as a "tanker," or whatever, and so fail to actually read what was said in that thread.

What a load of nonsense. You don't see this behaviour with any other poster, so don't turn this into a topic about the general behaviour on CB. We're talking about one Grade A troll here, who's abusing CB's commitment to their own community rules, in this case free speech, for his own amusement. If anything, he's the guy who turns unrelated threads into his own personal soapbox.

We're also not talking about isolated incidents, which could seem innocuous on their own, we're talking about a clear pattern of outrageous statements coupled with complete denial afterwards. Of course people are gonna quote his old posts in that case.

There's a reason why people like that are usually banned on any decently moderated site, and it's not the inability to accept differing viewpoints, it's the fact that they destroy any kind of actual, reasonable discussion.

Do you honestly view making statements that most disagree with and them denying them something that should get you banned?

As if CelticsBlog isn't enough of an echo chamber most of the time, now we should ban people for having controversial opinions? (Or maybe you mean for not "admitting" to having those opinions, which would just be ridiculous. This is a blog, no one is on trial)

LarBrd having an opinion, whether you agree with it or not, whether it's "controversial" or not, isn't derailing a thread. It might push the conversation in a slightly different direction, but it's still a basketball conversation (and, sometimes, a better one than previously), so who cares? It's much more of a problem when a thread turns into someone trying to pin previous comments on him to try and make him seem... I don't know, stupid? Or worse than them? I don't really know what they're after, but it certainly doesn't add anything, it just totally derails a thread and makes this forum a worse place

Look, I'm not saying that LarBrd is a perfect poster, or that I don't hate his guts sometimes, but the comments about him (and the fact that this is even a conversation that we're having) are ridiculous.  Turning every thread into "LarBrd sucks and should admit he's wrong!" is WAY more detrimental to the blog than him having an opinion you don't agree with, and if anyone should be banned, it should be the people targeting another poster, not the one being targeted. 

After all, if you really hate seeing what he says, you can always unsubscribe
I'm bitter.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #872 on: September 30, 2016, 09:57:55 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7638
  • Tommy Points: 441
See, the thing that I've noticed is that there's a certain group of posters who insist on derailing every thread in which that guy posts into a contentious and obviously futile exercise in trying to get him to admit to every mistaken thing he's ever predicted or opined upon.  The post becomes a referendum on a particular poster and his proclamations about Joel Embiid rather than whatever the original topic was.


To me, that's more of a problem than one guy on this forum who likes to post tongue in cheek and try to get attention by stating things that are in-context-controversial.  If you don't engage and don't take it so seriously, then the thread keeps moving along.  People just need to accept that some people are the way they are and do what they're gonna do, you're not going to get them to break down and admit they were wrong all along.  And moreover, it's not fun to be here if that's gonna be the goal of so many discussions -- to force people to own their mistakes and be held accountable for them.

This becomes a negative environment if there's a frequent pattern of people refusing to take what other posters say in a given thread at face value because of the need to bring up the context of other posts in other threads.  The worst times I can think of to be on this forum have been when people insist on creating factions and using labels for posters who they perceive to be on the opposite side of whatever divide they want to create, whether it's Tankers vs Anti-Tankers, or whatever.  They disagree reflexively because the person making a post is somebody they identify as a "tanker," or whatever, and so fail to actually read what was said in that thread.

What a load of nonsense. You don't see this behaviour with any other poster, so don't turn this into a topic about the general behaviour on CB. We're talking about one Grade A troll here, who's abusing CB's commitment to their own community rules, in this case free speech, for his own amusement. If anything, he's the guy who turns unrelated threads into his own personal soapbox.

We're also not talking about isolated incidents, which could seem innocuous on their own, we're talking about a clear pattern of outrageous statements coupled with complete denial afterwards. Of course people are gonna quote his old posts in that case.

There's a reason why people like that are usually banned on any decently moderated site, and it's not the inability to accept differing viewpoints, it's the fact that they destroy any kind of actual, reasonable discussion.

I agree with every word, 100%.

Nobody really cares that this guy is making predictions and he's wrong.

What's annoying is that anytime someone uses a better argument against something trollish that he's trying to say, he just doesn't address it.  I hardly ever see him involved in any actual reasonable debates, they're usually out-of-context ones.
Also agree.  Some threads become the same poster hogging up 80% of the thread repeating the same things over and over and over, many times quoting himself like he's an inside source.   And some of the posts are novel length... and he says that he doesn't read other people's posts because they are too long.  It takes away from the enjoyment of the blog as a whole.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #873 on: September 30, 2016, 10:07:57 AM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
See, the thing that I've noticed is that there's a certain group of posters who insist on derailing every thread in which that guy posts into a contentious and obviously futile exercise in trying to get him to admit to every mistaken thing he's ever predicted or opined upon.  The post becomes a referendum on a particular poster and his proclamations about Joel Embiid rather than whatever the original topic was.


To me, that's more of a problem than one guy on this forum who likes to post tongue in cheek and try to get attention by stating things that are in-context-controversial.  If you don't engage and don't take it so seriously, then the thread keeps moving along.  People just need to accept that some people are the way they are and do what they're gonna do, you're not going to get them to break down and admit they were wrong all along.  And moreover, it's not fun to be here if that's gonna be the goal of so many discussions -- to force people to own their mistakes and be held accountable for them.

This becomes a negative environment if there's a frequent pattern of people refusing to take what other posters say in a given thread at face value because of the need to bring up the context of other posts in other threads.  The worst times I can think of to be on this forum have been when people insist on creating factions and using labels for posters who they perceive to be on the opposite side of whatever divide they want to create, whether it's Tankers vs Anti-Tankers, or whatever.  They disagree reflexively because the person making a post is somebody they identify as a "tanker," or whatever, and so fail to actually read what was said in that thread.

What a load of nonsense. You don't see this behaviour with any other poster, so don't turn this into a topic about the general behaviour on CB. We're talking about one Grade A troll here, who's abusing CB's commitment to their own community rules, in this case free speech, for his own amusement. If anything, he's the guy who turns unrelated threads into his own personal soapbox.

We're also not talking about isolated incidents, which could seem innocuous on their own, we're talking about a clear pattern of outrageous statements coupled with complete denial afterwards. Of course people are gonna quote his old posts in that case.

There's a reason why people like that are usually banned on any decently moderated site, and it's not the inability to accept differing viewpoints, it's the fact that they destroy any kind of actual, reasonable discussion.

I agree with every word, 100%.

Nobody really cares that this guy is making predictions and he's wrong.

What's annoying is that anytime someone uses a better argument against something trollish that he's trying to say, he just doesn't address it.  I hardly ever see him involved in any actual reasonable debates, they're usually out-of-context ones.
Also agree.  Some threads become the same poster hogging up 80% of the thread repeating the same things over and over and over, many times quoting himself like he's an inside source.   And some of the posts are novel length... and he says that he doesn't read other people's posts because they are too long.  It takes away from the enjoyment of the blog as a whole.

Agree as well. The legend in his own mind/grandstanding act has grown stale. He didn't always post like that, though. He actually used to have some really solid thoughts, but that's now been replaced by an attention seeking style that derails nearly every thread he's involved in. He's definitely the common denominator in most locked threads, but he seems to get the "Manny being Manny" treatment and all is ignored.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #874 on: September 30, 2016, 10:16:15 AM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
Some guys just get more rope than others. Its been years worth of behavior at this point, just gotta accept its going to continue and move on unfortunately.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #875 on: September 30, 2016, 11:58:12 AM »

Offline Casperian

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3501
  • Tommy Points: 545
Do you honestly view making statements that most disagree with and them denying them something that should get you banned?

As if CelticsBlog isn't enough of an echo chamber most of the time, now we should ban people for having controversial opinions? (Or maybe you mean for not "admitting" to having those opinions, which would just be ridiculous. This is a blog, no one is on trial)

LarBrd having an opinion, whether you agree with it or not, whether it's "controversial" or not, isn't derailing a thread. It might push the conversation in a slightly different direction, but it's still a basketball conversation (and, sometimes, a better one than previously), so who cares? It's much more of a problem when a thread turns into someone trying to pin previous comments on him to try and make him seem... I don't know, stupid? Or worse than them? I don't really know what they're after, but it certainly doesn't add anything, it just totally derails a thread and makes this forum a worse place

Look, I'm not saying that LarBrd is a perfect poster, or that I don't hate his guts sometimes, but the comments about him (and the fact that this is even a conversation that we're having) are ridiculous.  Turning every thread into "LarBrd sucks and should admit he's wrong!" is WAY more detrimental to the blog than him having an opinion you don't agree with, and if anyone should be banned, it should be the people targeting another poster, not the one being targeted. 

After all, if you really hate seeing what he says, you can always unsubscribe

No, excessive trolling should get you banned, that's all, the rest is in your head.

The fact that you buy his bull**** narrative about him just "having a controversial opinion" is what I find really scary, though. He's clearly doing it for his own amusement, I have seen enough to know his posts don't express his opinions, at all, they're just there to rile people up. That's why he's not owning up to the stuff he said, and that's why his opinion seems to change every few days. Guess that explains why a guy like Trump can run for president these days, "building a wall and let Mexico pay for it" is just a "controversial opinion" (HINT: It's not, it's just bull**** to get attention).

It is truly mind-blowing that people now think they have to defend this psycho, as if they're rooting for the underdog, who stands all alone against these mean, narrow-minded bullies.

LO effing L
In the summer of 2017, I predicted this team would not win a championship for the next 10 years.

3 down, 7 to go.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #876 on: September 30, 2016, 12:44:35 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8902
  • Tommy Points: 1212
Do you honestly view making statements that most disagree with and them denying them something that should get you banned?

As if CelticsBlog isn't enough of an echo chamber most of the time, now we should ban people for having controversial opinions? (Or maybe you mean for not "admitting" to having those opinions, which would just be ridiculous. This is a blog, no one is on trial)

LarBrd having an opinion, whether you agree with it or not, whether it's "controversial" or not, isn't derailing a thread. It might push the conversation in a slightly different direction, but it's still a basketball conversation (and, sometimes, a better one than previously), so who cares? It's much more of a problem when a thread turns into someone trying to pin previous comments on him to try and make him seem... I don't know, stupid? Or worse than them? I don't really know what they're after, but it certainly doesn't add anything, it just totally derails a thread and makes this forum a worse place

Look, I'm not saying that LarBrd is a perfect poster, or that I don't hate his guts sometimes, but the comments about him (and the fact that this is even a conversation that we're having) are ridiculous.  Turning every thread into "LarBrd sucks and should admit he's wrong!" is WAY more detrimental to the blog than him having an opinion you don't agree with, and if anyone should be banned, it should be the people targeting another poster, not the one being targeted. 

After all, if you really hate seeing what he says, you can always unsubscribe

No, excessive trolling should get you banned, that's all, the rest is in your head.

The fact that you buy his bull**** narrative about him just "having a controversial opinion" is what I find really scary, though. He's clearly doing it for his own amusement, I have seen enough to know his posts don't express his opinions, at all, they're just there to rile people up. That's why he's not owning up to the stuff he said, and that's why his opinion seems to change every few days. Guess that explains why a guy like Trump can run for president these days, "building a wall and let Mexico pay for it" is just a "controversial opinion" (HINT: It's not, it's just bull**** to get attention).

It is truly mind-blowing that people now think they have to defend this psycho, as if they're rooting for the underdog, who stands all alone against these mean, narrow-minded bullies.

LO effing L

I've been coming to CB for a few years, I have an idea of how LarBrd acts, but I really haven't seen it be an issue more than the people around him.  There's nothing to be gained from pulling his old posts up and confronting him about it. Nothing.  Doing so adds nothing and just derails the thread.  Who cares if he changed his opinion from last year, or if he was wrong?

And I'm sorry, it was "outrageous statements" that you didn't like, not "controversial opinions", my mistake.  Why his statements being outrageous, or him denying them later, should be bannable (even if it is a "clear pattern" of it), though, still hasn't been addressed.

You keep calling it trolling, but in most cases (and all cases that have been dragged out years later) it's a prediction that has at least some actual reasoning that gets spelt out

I'm certainly not asking you to agree with LarBrd, or even to read any of his posts (he's even made it easier to ignore him now!), or "defend this psycho", but I have a huge problem with people getting up on their high horse, trolling/brigading LarBrd, and then acting as if they have some sort of moral high ground.  Guess what? Trolling somebody because you view them as a troll adds nothing, and actually detracts from the conversation

And again, who cares if he has a different opinion day to day, or is generally going against the popular opinion? That doesn't make him a troll.  It might make him annoying (and at times it definitely does), but it definitely doesn't mean that he should be banned (which is my main point: you guys aren't saying "hey he's annoying", you're saying "hey he shouldn't be allowed to post here anymore", which is ridiculous).  Honestly, on a lot of threads its nice to see an opinion that breaks up the echo chamber that CB sometimes becomes, and sometimes he's actually right with that opinion (even if it annoys us all at the time)

And I'm not sure what politics has to do with this, but I'm sure you'd find a lot more people in favor of censorship on Trump's side than on any other
I'm bitter.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #877 on: September 30, 2016, 01:15:17 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Also agree.  Some threads become the same poster hogging up 80% of the thread repeating the same things over and over and over, many times quoting himself like he's an inside source.   And some of the posts are novel length... and he says that he doesn't read other people's posts because they are too long.  It takes away from the enjoyment of the blog as a whole.

See, I find that it's pretty easy to skim-read or even entirely ignore a post here and there from LarBrd, even if he has an obnoxious .gif'd out avatar.

And often I find his posts are interesting, or at least amusing, and often supported by some reasoned analysis, even if it's from an out-there perspective or he's trying too hard to sound like Bill Simmons.

What's harder to scroll past or ignore is the pages worth of conversation, consisting in large part of multiple layers of dense quotes, where people are responding angrily to something that was pretty obviously tongue in cheek or intentionally over the top to begin with, and then on top of that dredging up old, old arguments about Hinkie, the Nets, Joel Embiid, or whatever.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #878 on: September 30, 2016, 01:27:34 PM »

Offline walker834

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
  • Tommy Points: 238
I agree. I don't know what has happened to people but people get offended by the siliest of things nowadays.  I was just walking outside and a guy had a good song on his radio and I gave him the sign of the devil in approval and he took it the wrong way. When did people become so stupid honestly?  I can't even say that without people getting offended.  Oh no personal attack.  No some people really are stupid.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #879 on: September 30, 2016, 01:49:29 PM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
what happened to the spinning chad ford? i liked that gif a lot actually...
It's the last day of the offseason.  Time to get down to business. 

this guy is a legend
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #880 on: September 30, 2016, 01:56:42 PM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7638
  • Tommy Points: 441
Also agree.  Some threads become the same poster hogging up 80% of the thread repeating the same things over and over and over, many times quoting himself like he's an inside source.   And some of the posts are novel length... and he says that he doesn't read other people's posts because they are too long.  It takes away from the enjoyment of the blog as a whole.

See, I find that it's pretty easy to skim-read or even entirely ignore a post here and there from LarBrd, even if he has an obnoxious .gif'd out avatar.

And often I find his posts are interesting, or at least amusing, and often supported by some reasoned analysis, even if it's from an out-there perspective or he's trying too hard to sound like Bill Simmons.

What's harder to scroll past or ignore is the pages worth of conversation, consisting in large part of multiple layers of dense quotes, where people are responding angrily to something that was pretty obviously tongue in cheek or intentionally over the top to begin with, and then on top of that dredging up old, old arguments about Hinkie, the Nets, Joel Embiid, or whatever.
Some people are prone to responding to things they find ridiculous in a blog or in real life.  Not everyone is content to ignore things and let them go without saying anything.  It's human nature.  The people that respond on this blog may be the people who speak up in real life when they disagree with something.  Maybe you are content ignoring things and letting them go, but not everybody is like that, and I don't think they should be blamed when they do respond to ridiculous posts.

And what good is a thread if someone is going to ignore 70% of it?

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #881 on: September 30, 2016, 02:01:24 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
I gotta admit I'm getting a chuckle out of this thread.   It's definitely being over-dramatized and made into a bigger deal than it actually is.  In the last day, people have gotten away with calling me a "psycho" and "clinically insane".  C'mon.   Let's admit that the people making these dramatized declarations about me are ALREADY ignoring my posts - hence why they think I'm some kind of monster.  Their perception has become their reality. 

I mean, what's my most shocking and "outrageous" recent opinions right now?  Do these people even know what they are?  What's these board-damaging psycho clinically insane thoughts I'm sharing?   I'll sum them up for you.  But first, let's talk about the opinions that I have that people don't freak out about:

Ok opinions:   I supported the shift to making a playoff run two years ago.  I was a big believer in our free agency abilities and staunchly defended the Celtics ability to lure big names.  I was even perhaps the first person here to suggest Kevin Durant would be a legit possibility and I spelled out in-detail why he should consider this team.  I've raved about Jae and Avery's progress.  I've continued to say I think Marcus Smart can still make a leap.  I've consistently raved about Boston's depth.   I've consistently raved about the brilliance of Danny Ainge.  I was on board with the Jaylen Brown selection IMMEDIATELY and have consistently expressed my excitement about his long-term potential.  I've written extensively about my optimism surrounding Kelly Olynyk.    These opinions, for the most part, are fine with the masses.

Ignorable opinions:  I've consistently defended Philly's strategy.  I genuinely believe it has a really good shot of working out for them.  I've continued to defend the Embiid pick for them.  I am not as down on Okafor/Noel as most people here.   Additionally, I had real concerns about Brooklyn's ability to stay competitive after two straight playoff appearances.  I've also gotten flack for pointing out that Marcus Smart has thus-far been a disappointment.  He's coming off the worst shooting season of any player ever.  I also believe the several reports that Boston attempted to move the Brooklyn pick at the trade deadline for Okafor.  I supported signing Bismack Biyombo for cheap over trading 6 first round picks for Willie Cauley Stein - I've been vindicated for this.

Not actually opinions:  I started a handful of threads last offseason that were taken out of context and used against me all season.  These were outlined as admittedly outlandish out-of-the-box thought experiments and I never actually took a definitive stance one way or the other.  I was talking about the potential of the #16 pick in relation to the potential of young available guys who had already been labelled busts.  Namely, Ben McLemore, Nik Stauskas and Anthony Bennett.  Find those threads and you'll see me outlining the overlooked positives of those players in order to get people to think about it - despite acknowledging that player contracts (such as Bennetts) made such a hypothetical exceedingly unrealistic.   It should be noted that the guy we ended up taking #16, while showing encouraging signs of late, spent the entire season the D-League so nothing about those thought experiments have even been proven "clinically insane".  This has been misrepresented for a full year by folks who just say "LarBrd33 hates the Celtics young guys, but thinks NIk Stauskas and Anthony Bennett will be stars"...  That's on you.

Since this thread is full of discussion about me in-direct, I want to acknowledge something.   People going out of their way to share my previous inaccurate thoughts isn't entirely on them.  Part of it is my fault.  Let me explain...

Part of the reason folks here think I'm a troll is because a lot of the opinions I have in the moment are exceptionally unpopular (though later proven true).  Yes, I might occasionally play the contrarian or devil's advocate, but a lot of the times I'm straight-up telling the truth about something that fans don't want to hear and I'm being ridiculed for it in the process.  Such as recently when I strongly dismissed the garbage Blake Griffin rumors everyone was obsessing over.  Or going back a decade, there were threads where people were calling Orien Greene a future star PG - I disagreed.  They thought Marcus Banks was a future star - I disagreed.   They thought Jiri Welsch was the next Larry Bird - I disagreed.  They thought Gerald Green was the next T-Mac - I disagreed.  They thought the Walker/Pierce Celtics were legit contenders - I disagreed.   Someone once said Kendrick Perkins was a better fit for this team than Hakeem in his prime - I disagreed. 

More controversial were my opinions on guys like Rajon Rondo.  That's where all this "troll" nonsense started.  Two straight years of me admitting this board had overrated Rondo, saying the "playoff Rondo" concept was a myth based on his minutes and usage, agreeing that Ainge was trying to trade him, agreeing that he wasn't as good as Chris Paul.   I once even got bashed for admitting I'd trade then all-star Rondo for an oft-injured young shooter by the name of Steph Curry, because I believed a Ray Allen and Steph Curry back-court would be potentially lethal.  I didn't think we needed a true point guard in today's NBA.  I was basically describing "pace-and-space" before there was a name for it.  Back in the day, I'd have endless "debates" with BBallTim about it.  The Rondo fans felt it easier to label me a "troll" and a "hater" than admit to Rondo's shortcomings.  Now a couple years later and I've been 100% entirely vindicated for my views on Rondo.   Most people here now share the views I was attacked for years ago.  Likewise, I started the tank bandwagon in 2013-14 much to the chagrin of folks here who thought rooting for losses was clinically insane trolling.   Eventually, everyone else hopped on board.  We have Marcus Smart as a result. 

So here's how this comes into play.  There's only so many times a person can get called a "troll" or "idiot" or "hater" for accurate opinions.   It's not like anyone was later saying, "hey LB... sorry for the two years of trashing you about your Rondo opinion - you were right.  My bad!".   So I admit that on occasion, I've dug up some of my own prior unpopular opinions that proved to be accurate and shared them on this forum.  "Hey, remember when I spelled out in detail why Dwight would be still be traded despite having signed an extension?  Remember when you guys called me a lunatic and brushed it off? - BOOM!".   Naturally, that kind of stuff irked the folks who spent two years being on the wrong side of debates.  So it kind of organically grew into folks now going out of their way to share my previously inaccurate opinions.  Part of that is on me.  So my bad.   But, it should be noted that I wasn't going out of my way to trash other posters or rub egg in their face - I was merely pointing out that, "Hey guys... You know all those times in the past you called me a troll for having rational opinions?  I think you owe me enough to re-evaluate them.  I warned you."

More of the same today.  It's still happening.  Five months from now people might be saying, "Wow, Philly's young team looks good.  It looks like it worked out for them after-all."   Don't count on MBunge making a post admitting that LarBrd33 had been right to defend them.

I try my best to police my own behavior here.  While we're mentioning people by name, it should be pointed out that Eddie20 has been transparently trolling me in thread after thread for well over a year.  There's been at least a half-dozen times where he's flatly accused me of being a 76ers fan.  He doesn't stop.  He's constantly taken things I've said out of context and tried to convince people that I'm some cancer that needs to be removed from the forum.  If I remember correctly, I think at one point he even created a thread on that very topic that was quickly locked by mods.  He long ago stopped treating me with any sort of respect.  His new shtick is to just make not-so-thinly veiled insults about my personal life both on the forum publicly and in private messages.  Suggesting I have no friends, my life is terrible, I'm a sad and lonely depressed man, that I need to be medicated.  He even took the time to psychoanalyze my entire upbringing.  It's fine.  I'm not even upset about it.   I'm mostly just impressed that my comments about the 76ers could fire someone up that much.   I assure you Eddie, my life isn't all that bad.  Here's a clip of me just the other day:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2dXRFGhzME 

... But on top of that, I've been presented as some kind of raving ego-maniac who refuses to admit when he's wrong.   Perhaps my method of dealing with these insults rub people the wrong way.  As opposed to engaging with these remarks, having pointless fights over it, and creating more unnecessary drama, I'd rather just steer into the slide and try to make light of it as a means of hopefully diffusing the situation.  So sure, I'm an ego-maniac.  Whatever.  So on that note, the only real question left to be answered about the iconic home-dingering LarBrd33, is who belongs on the Summer 2016 Mount Rushmore along with him, Kanye West, and Donald Trump?  Then can we please get back to talking about the Celtics?  Thx.

I encourage people to please opt-out and unsubscribe to my posts if they are that upsetting to you.  But honestly, I feel that Celtic forums like this will soon go the way of of the Dodo anyways.  It has been one of the best outlets for actually talking about the team and expressing viewpoints.  Compare it to somewhere like RealGM where it's actually entirely an echo-chamber and alt-viewpoints are openly harassed and scorned, and there's no contest.  But as internet culture shifts more towards the Reddit model where only popular opinions are upvoted, back-and-forth discussion of differing opinions basically gets ignored anyways. And that's not even a knock on the Celtic subreddit, which I find myself browsing more and more frequently as a better source of Celtic-related info.  I suspect old-school forums will eventually die out to the upworthy model of non-discussion.   It's been a fun 10+ years here, though.   Go Celtics.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 02:36:56 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #882 on: September 30, 2016, 02:14:28 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

And what good is a thread if someone is going to ignore 70% of it?

Here's my point: You wouldn't have to ignore 70% of a thread if it were just LarBrd's posts.  It's the hyperventilating responses that aren't even about what he said, but are instead about how he said it, or how what he said squares with what he posted a year ago, that takes up 70% of the thread.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #883 on: September 30, 2016, 02:43:00 PM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7638
  • Tommy Points: 441

And what good is a thread if someone is going to ignore 70% of it?

Here's my point: You wouldn't have to ignore 70% of a thread if it were just LarBrd's posts.  It's the hyperventilating responses that aren't even about what he said, but are instead about how he said it, or how what he said squares with what he posted a year ago, that takes up 70% of the thread.
It always goes back and forth.   It's not mainly other people's responses like you say.

Re: Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions
« Reply #884 on: September 30, 2016, 03:22:49 PM »

Online celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15718
  • Tommy Points: 1386

And what good is a thread if someone is going to ignore 70% of it?

Here's my point: You wouldn't have to ignore 70% of a thread if it were just LarBrd's posts.  It's the hyperventilating responses that aren't even about what he said, but are instead about how he said it, or how what he said squares with what he posted a year ago, that takes up 70% of the thread.

Lol phosita. Please please please tell me you see the irony of your response immediately below a 1745 word post from Larbrd where he explains the history of his viewpoints and people's interactions with him. It is quite literally taking up 50% of the space available on the page for all responses. Furthermore, as you have pointed out to him many many times this kind of post makes the thread about him and his view points and it is no longer about rules and regulations at all. Your response below this pretty funny in contrast to what is above it. You acting like none of this issue when you have said many times otherwise in the past and is quite comical to me.