PDA

View Full Version : Motion to ban PFT reports from the main forum.



grooves12
05-07-2004, 05:48 PM
I know there was a boycott movement already, but I say it should be taken a step forward and taken to the level of an all-out BAN. Their reports are completely unsubstantiated and are meant to do nothing but stir the pot.

I'm surprised PFT "presented by the National Enquirer" hasn't made a report of Dave Wannstedt is having Jay Fiedler's illegitimate lovechild. It would probably have more merit than some of the crap they post.

Move them to the smack forum... because that's all they really are most of the time.

stan marino
05-07-2004, 05:49 PM
Stirs the pot on a message board during the offseason...Hmmm that sounds absolutley horrible....

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 05:51 PM
I think this isn't quite necessary. Maybe that's not the best way of putting it, so I'll try again:

I'd like to see anything that cites "sources" that can't be named be moved to the Smack forum. Opinion is one thing, but opinions that are presented as fact by PFT or any other similar source with a checkered past of credibility should IMHO get the same treatment. I don't see any reason to limit this to PFT or to move PFT reports that actually cite specific sources (like a newspaper).

Agua
05-07-2004, 05:51 PM
Yeah, they're crap, but it's interesting to see what kind of crap they can come up with.

IceStorm
05-07-2004, 06:00 PM
No, I am flat out against this. I am an American and freedom of speech, whether we like it or not, must be granted.

You can't ask to have a freedom but then remove that same freedom from another. Just because you dislike what is said, or disagree with what is said, does not make it right to remove a form of communication.

If you wish to ban one, then you must equally apply that rule to all.

So no, I do not wish to become communist and neglect a basic freedom afforded to us all that some wish could be handed out on an individual basis, and denied to others simply because they don't like what is being said.

LIQUID24
05-07-2004, 06:03 PM
I'm against this as well. However, if someone does post something from PFT, it should be taken with a grain a salt.

Section126
05-07-2004, 06:18 PM
I am against it.....and would like to have a link to go with your Wanny and Fiedler lovechild story......

PhinKev
05-07-2004, 06:21 PM
Yeah, we should ban it because everyone is too stupid to understand and take into account the source. Besides, we need to make room for some more Jay Fiedler Sucks threads and Wanny's a Moron Threads.

stan marino
05-07-2004, 06:31 PM
Really i think we should ban the banning pft article threads seeing as how they do nothing for this board. Who cares if pft is the national enquirer of the nfl its interesting stuff none the less and i think just about anyone whos looked at the site for a month and can see the about 25 flip flops they do on any given subject u can tell they are flat out guesing sometimes...doesnt mean its not interesting to read though and in the off season i think we all are lookin for some sorta football entertainment. I even bought one of those rags u see at the check out aisle just for fun it had a huge title with a pic of sharks that were supposedly trained by cubans to attack american beaches, and supposed pictures of osama and suddam in love...some funny *** crap in that mag. If u really cant stand the pft threads, then dont click on 'em, its as simple as that.

Dol-Fan Dupree
05-07-2004, 06:33 PM
The only real problem I have with PFT is they tend to be really negative.

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 07:37 PM
No, I am flat out against this. I am an American and freedom of speech, whether we like it or not, must be granted.

:rolleyes:

This isn't the town square -- it's FinHeaven. We are making a suggestion. If it is accepted, it changes the rules the proprietors have already set up. You must also not like how all Bills threads go to the AFC East room, all Raiders threads go to the NFL room, and all smack threads go to the smack room. You also must not like that I can't say ******* without it being censored.

Your argument is quite simply ludicrous.


You can't ask to have a freedom but then remove that same freedom from another. Just because you dislike what is said, or disagree with what is said, does not make it right to remove a form of communication.

It's not a matter of not liking what is said, at least under my proposal. It's about enforcing a certain level of credibility in the stories that are discussed in the "main" forum on this board. If you have a problem from that, go picket the NY Times for not printing letters to the editor from somebody known only as "Happy Jack".


If you wish to ban one, then you must equally apply that rule to all.

Nobody said anything about banning PFT articles. The suggestion was to move them to a more appropriate forum.


So no, I do not wish to become communist and neglect a basic freedom afforded to us all that some wish could be handed out on an individual basis, and denied to others simply because they don't like what is being said.

:fire:

Communist? Do you even have any freaking idea what Communism is? Check it out before you go throwing that accusation around carelessly.

RUDEbyallMEANS
05-07-2004, 07:47 PM
PFT articles that are Miami Dolphins based and are posted here on FinHeaven DO NOT HURT anyone.

All entertainment and for the most part, when a PFT article is posted, it is a laughing matter where everyone chimes in on how "stupid" it is.

I don't understand the point of moving PFT articles.

DolPhadelphia
05-07-2004, 07:49 PM
They always aren't right on, but they sight smoke, and wait for the fire. Another analogy. There's usually is a grain of truth in something they write, for that fact I'd be against a ban.

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 07:52 PM
PFT articles that are Miami Dolphins based and are posted here on FinHeaven DO NOT HURT anyone.

I would agree with that. It's not like they carry knives. They can be a distraction because they tend to confuse people who choose not to consider where information is coming from and those who don't know PFT's rep. I think reform is a novel enough suggestion to support, but I won't lose much sleep if it doesn't happen (so long as nobody else implies that suggesting it equals communism).

IceStorm
05-07-2004, 08:31 PM
Yes, jimminy, I do know what communism is. And for you, or anyone else, to tell me what I can or cannot read is a form of just that. So please save your "this isn't a public place, blah blah" because that argument is old and validly false.

I'll make it simple for you, if you don't like whats on TV change the channel.

But to say that PFT shouldn't be in here because you don't like what is said, well that grasshopper, is (as you say) ludicrous.

Most of their stuff is crap, yes. But some of their reports make people here communicate and discuss about it. People read it and laugh at it, yell about it, think about it, and all kinds of good stuff. But if its about the Dolphins, it has a right to be discussed about in this forum. Thats all I'm saying. :D

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 08:49 PM
And for you, or anyone else, to tell me what I can or cannot read is a form of just that.


Move them to the smack forum

Where do you get that anybody is suggesting we want to tell you what you can or cannot read? We are expressing our preferences about what passes here just as you're expressing yours. I note that you didn't address the "censorship" already present in this forum. Could that be because there isn't a rational way to accept some intermediate level of content discrimination and argue against more or less of it?


But to say that PFT shouldn't be in here because you don't like what is said, well that grasshopper, is (as you say) ludicrous.

I clearly said that my problem isn't with the content -- it's with the lack of authority. I have no problem with PFT reports that cite specific named sources. Anything less from a site such as PFT amounts to writing on a scrap of paper blowing down the street.

(Edited to make it a bit less confrontational)

Iryman
05-07-2004, 09:07 PM
LOL @ Jimmy James - how could we now know that you was a lawyer befor that occupation thread cosidering how much you love to debate on the boards!!!!!! LOL

LIQUID24
05-07-2004, 09:13 PM
Seems like an argument for the sake of an argument :D

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 09:14 PM
LOL @ Jimmy James - how could we now know that you was a lawyer befor that occupation thread cosidering how much you love to debate on the boards!!!!!! LOL

I just want it to be clear that I'm a law student and not a lawyer. I am in no way competant to give legal advice, so nothing I say should be considered legal advice. You should also never trust anything you just read from a stranger on the Internet no matter what he says his expertise is.

That has nothing to do with your point, but I feel it is important to note this so there is no confusion.

Another question: do I argue like this too much? Perhaps I should tone it down just a notch or two.

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 09:18 PM
Seems like an argument for the sake of an argument :D

I think that's probably a fair criticism. I get a bit fired up when it is implied I encourage censorship, and maybe I shouldn't be so worried about things like that here. To pull in something from the Eli Manning brain thread, I am an INTJ -- I do sometimes lose the forest for the trees when I deal with other people.

LIQUID24
05-07-2004, 09:28 PM
I think that's probably a fair criticism. I get a bit fired up when it is implied I encourage censorship, and maybe I shouldn't be so worried about things like that here. To pull in something from the Eli Manning brain thread, I am an INTJ -- I do sometimes lose the forest for the trees when I deal with other people.It wasn't really criticism as much as an observation.
I've never seen anyone get into as many heated arguments as you JJ :lol: . I think you carry yourself pretty well and I agree with you most of the time. Most of the time :D

Iryman
05-07-2004, 09:57 PM
Another question: do I argue like this too much? Perhaps I should tone it down just a notch or two.

Hell no. Don't tone a thing down. Personally i really like what you have to say. Prob cause i tend to agree with a lot of your points. But no toning down!!!!!!! These forums are all about debating. I guess i should have said practicing law instead of laywer. would that be correct. LOL

Jimmy James
05-07-2004, 10:01 PM
Nah -- I can't practice law, pretend to practice law, or anything of the type until I finish school, pass the bar exam, and get admitted to the state bar. If I do, I may find myself facing criminal charges and disciplinary action from the bar that would prevent me from ever becoming a lawyer.

That's why I try to be cautious about making sure people know that they can't rely on anything I say from any kind of legal perspective -- the people who run this profession have no sense of humor about this topic.

xiidaen
05-08-2004, 06:48 AM
PFT doesn't bother me - you know where it's from and react accordingly. If you like them, listen. If not, don't. Or take the middle line and accept it with a grain of salt. I do belive, for example they (or the precursor) was one of the first sites reporting the Gardener release, something I found hard to believe at the time.

I'd much rather ban the 'Wanny is a #@$%#$^' type posts (especially where that's all they say) and move the Fiedler debates back to the Fiedler forum. But now that the bandwagons have died down, what does that leave us? :)

relive1972
05-08-2004, 10:49 AM
Why stop at PFT? Let's go ahead and ban every source who was either wrong or has something negative to say about Miami.

Be pretty boring around here once that happens.

PFT's articles are rumors. Take any rumor with a grain of salt.

plc001
05-08-2004, 11:10 AM
Why stop at PFT? Let's go ahead and ban every source who was either wrong or has something negative to say about Miami.

Be pretty boring around here once that happens.

PFT's articles are rumors. Take any rumor with a grain of salt.

Exactly. You ban PFT on the main forum its an awefully gray area you start to step into. All news sources print retractions. PFT probably has to do that a little more frequently, but where do you draw the line? I say leave it the way it is.

P4E
05-08-2004, 02:53 PM
I'm surprised PFT "presented by the National Enquirer" hasn't made a report of Dave Wannstedt is having Jay Fiedler's illegitimate lovechild.
There's no such thing as an illegitimate child.

ZOD
05-08-2004, 11:00 PM
*sniff, sniff*

:escape:

Mebeverine
05-09-2004, 11:12 AM
Simple solution: any reports from PFT must have "PFT" at the beginning.

Example:

NO = "RICKY WILLIAMS RUNNING PROBLEMS ARE DUE TO AMPUTATED LEG"
YES = "PFT: RICKY WILLIAMS RUNNING PROBLEMS..."