|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Quote:
ru·mor NOUN:
A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth.
Unverified information received from another; hearsay.
Is it a rumor to say that you heard something? NO. It is a rumor to say what you heard if you can't back it up.
Some of my words were editted out of a thread because they were deemed rumors by a Ref but I think that Ref has a misunderstanding of the definition of rumor. I never said anything more than that I'd heard stuff- that is a fact not a rumor. I'm sure plenty of people have said that they've heard so and so is a great guy and not had those statements removed. Why was my statement, which was answering a question Pdawg raised, removed as rumor?
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,149 Likes: 833
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,149 Likes: 833 |
Quote:
I never said anything more than that I'd heard stuff
Quote:
ru·mor NOUN:
A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth.
Unverified information received from another;hearsay.
What part of the definition doesn't match that?
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Quote:
Quote:
I never said anything more than that I'd heard stuff
Quote:
ru·mor NOUN:
A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth.
Unverified information received from another;hearsay.
What part of the definition doesn't match that?
Um...all of it. As I said...the fact that i heard something is in fact a fact! Get it? The fact that I heard something is a fact not hearsay.
Again, to illustrate the point, if someone wrote that they heard a player was a nice guy, that would not be removed. So why if someone says the opposite is it removed?
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
I'd guess that it's because saying "I heard so-and-so is an -----"... is more inflammatory. It's easy to say "I heard so-and-so is a great fella!" and not have it deleted. So anyway, what did you hear about Charlie?? 
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Well I didn't even say that...I said I heard something I found revolting (which is my opinion, isn't it?) None of what I wrote was rumor and I find it ridiculous that it was removed. And I'm surprised I got such an unreasonable 'answer' to my question here. Seems like no one wants to even consider the facts.
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
You can't really say "I heard this", and present what it is you heard as a fact, even if it's a fact that you heard it especially if it's a volatile rumour.
If I heard that so-and-so on the Browns beats his wife, would it be a good idea to post it here without some kind of proof?
"No" is the answer.
That's how rumours get blown out of proportion, iambrown.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Are you listening to me? I didn't say anything other than the fact that I heard something. I can say that...that's a fact that I know for sure.
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
Not to get all 'ref' on ya.
Last edited by lampdogg; 09/12/07 12:41 PM.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
Oh goddamit I hit 'edit' and meant to hit 'quote' to reply to myself and wrote over my previous post when I cut what I had said. grrrrrr.... *dumbass*  Anyways refs, now that I screwed this up how's about one of you step in and solve it? 
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
Oh christ almighty I'm better at navigating around here when I'm drunk.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
that's why you need to always be drunk 
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,257 Likes: 339 |
I do make every attempt. I'll try again, iam... Example: 'I heard a rumour about ref2 that's quite revolting' Should that just stay here?
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,426
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,426 |
Quote:
Example: 'I heard a rumour about ref2 that's quite revolting'
Should that just stay here?
I'm all for it. Heck, I'll make it my signature...
[color:"green"] "World domination has encountered a momentary setback. Please talk amongst yourselves." Get Fuzzy[/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
I can't watch this...I hate leading young men to evil ways... 
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 Likes: 26
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 Likes: 26 |
Is this the refs corner, or the "Bickering lot"?? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Well the refs don't seem to want to answer so....
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 Likes: 147
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 Likes: 147 |
Quote:
Are you listening to me? I didn't say anything other than the fact that I heard something. I can say that...that's a fact that I know for sure.
Stating that you heard something may be fact, but mentioning details about what you heard would be repeating a rumor. (an unverified story)
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Quote:
Quote:
Are you listening to me? I didn't say anything other than the fact that I heard something. I can say that...that's a fact that I know for sure.
Stating that you heard something may be fact, but mentioning details about what you heard would be repeating a rumor. (an unverified story)
I agree and that's exactly why I didn't do that. 
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
I guess that the only way you or anyone else could know for sure is to read exactly what she said word for word.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,567
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,567 |
POST DELETED
Last edited by Referee1; 09/12/07 07:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,748 Likes: 305
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,748 Likes: 305 |
You ask a good question. I'm not sure why your response may have been changed. I understand that if you said he was doing something specific it should be backed up with a link. You said that you heard he did something that was "revolting" without any specifics. Sure it's hearsay but so are comments made by me and others. I guess that since what you were saying may be construde as inflamatory, and you had no firsthand knowledge, it was removed.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316 |
Quote:
Well the refs don't seem to want to answer so....
This particular Ref, the one you are having the issue with, has a life outside the board and volunteers time to the cause. I just got back on since yesterday so am seeing this thread for the first time.
I am the one who edited your post.
It's difficult to give you a detailed answer here as I surely don't wish to repeat all that which I deleted from your post. But the gist of it is that you named a player and said that you heard of some "disgusting" behavior that was attributed to him. You have also repeated the same in this thread that you percieved the actions as "revolting" to you.
Now, even though you did not name or describe in detail, the actual "disgusting and revolting" behavior or actions you were attributing to the player, I felt that even bringing hearsay such as that onto a public forum is the equivilent of spreading a rumor. There was nothing you indicated that would back up your claim to your remarks. Simply that you "heard it".
RUMORS
If you cannot cite a source when posting information to the board, please do not post it at all. Saying that you saw something on television or heard it on the radio is not sufficient as a valid source . Rumors do not lend to valid discussion and will be removed when seen by a moderator.
Saying that you "heard it" anywhere, especially information of the "disgusting and revolting" variety attributed to a player, is, in my interpretation, nothing less than a slander toward a player aimed at attempting to interest others in your offering.
Without a valid source it is a rumor by definition of the rule.
Remember, "Rumors do not lend to valid discussion and will be removed when seen by a moderator."
Are you to claim that there was valid discussion material in that which you posted?
Quote:
The fact that I heard something is a fact not hearsay.
The "fact" that someone heard something on the radio may be a fact as well, a fact that they heard it, but that is specifically outlined in the rules under rumors as not being a valid source. Without a valid source it is a rumor.
If you had heard such remarks about a player you'll need to back it up with a source just as you would any other information of which the rules require a source.
If you choose, you may PM me for further discussion on this rule or you may continue in this thread if you'd prefer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
Quote:
This particular Ref, the one you are having the issue with, has a life outside the board and volunteers time to the cause. I just got back on since yesterday so am seeing this thread for the first time.
I am the one who edited your post.
I love when you guys talk about yourselves in the 3rd person.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.) ![[Linked Image from i87.photobucket.com]](http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/brownsfan4173/NFL-Football.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Having always been a fan of "Le Théâtre de l'Absurde", I find this thread delightful in the nuances of ridiculousness that abound. Quote:
Now, even though you did not name or describe in detail, the actual "disgusting and revolting" behavior or actions you were attributing to the player, I felt that even bringing hearsay such as that onto a public forum is the equivilent of spreading a rumor. There was nothing you indicated that would back up your claim to your remarks. Simply that you "heard it".
To back up what claim? That I'd heard it or that I found it revolting or digusting? I don't need to back up either of those things since one is a fact and the other is my OPINION. But, you made a judgement call and I will accept that.
However, I will point out that you may want to read and edit an entire thread if you are interested in avoiding instances of rumors of hearsay. In that very thread you missed this statement by Mensa:
Quote:
And as I told you on that thread. JAX tried to trade for Frye on draft day, but Savage wouldn't trade him, he said he was too valuable.
This one did in fact derail the thread as a few of our esteemed fellow posters attempted to extract some kind of source for this blatant claim and were unsuccessful though it appears those posts have since been deleted. (very odd, don't you think?)
And though I am accepting that you made a judgement call, I will answer this question you posed:
Quote:
Are you to claim that there was valid discussion material in that which you posted?
Yes, I am. The reason I posted it was to answer Pdawg's statement:
Quote:
What I can't understand is all the hate for him. He has done nothing wrong other than not being a good starter. He didn't rape anyone, sit on his lazy ass, get drunk and busted, etc..
Is it not valid to explain at least my own personal reason for being glad he's gone?
I fear you are using extremely faulty logic but it is vastly entertaining to see the twists you've used applying the "stating that you heard something..." line. That line in the rule applies to using that as a valid source to back up a statement presented as fact not as the statement itself. So it's something of a gross misapplication of a rule to redeem your very flimsy logic. I don't really expect you to get that.
And as for the "refs aren't answering" thing. I only said that so you could pull out the old "I have a life" line. I figured you'd enjoy saying it as much as we all enjoy hearing it. Though I didn't direct it at you and left it vague intentionally, I'm glad it got your ire up so you could provide this very delightful doublespeak. I am aware that you have a life and I am also aware that you are not the only ref or administrator on the board. I was more so addressing it to PPE who saw fit to appear on this thread once and not return though he was online a good amount of the day and it is his board. I'm happy to see he cares so greatly about the integrity of his refs' performances,the faulty applications of the rules, and the restructing of threads to suit someone's purpose. Perhaps soon he could rename his creation Animal (Farm) Talk. That would be double plus good.
I imagine some will say, "If you don't like it, leave". Oh come on, you're thinking it.... but this is far too enjoyable and I'm so curious to see what little machinations will be used to finally bring about my banning. To be clear, for those who aren't cerebrally-gifted, I am not planning on doing anything to get myself banned but I sense there are those whose lives would be made easier by my leaving. (Wouldn't have to think so hard, would ya?  )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 Likes: 31
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 Likes: 31 |
Quote:
To be clear, for those who aren't cerebrally-gifted
What exactly are you saying?! 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Aw nuthin much...just like to hear myself type.
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 Likes: 31
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 Likes: 31 |
I think you make excellent points. The thing is, I should probably keep my mouth shut about it because I, too, feel I'm on a short lease around here.
Hey, by the way, I heard from a fairly reliable source that the Browns will be sending out an email containing a couple "special offers" in the next couple of days...watch your in box.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,813 |
Quote:
I think you make excellent points. The thing is, I should probably keep my mouth shut about it because I, too, feel I'm on a short lease around here.
Hey, by the way, I heard from a fairly reliable source that the Browns will be sending out an email containing a couple "special offers" in the next couple of days...watch your in box.
You're treading on thin ice there lady...
...always have been, always will be...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316 |
Quote:
...you made a judgement call and I will accept that.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,496 Likes: 166
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,496 Likes: 166 |
Quote:
Quote:
...you made a judgement call and I will accept that.
Thank you.
I'm kind of surprised that after that lengthy post that 'thank you' was the only reply...
and I know I shouldn't but my head in here... but it's a message board so I get that opportunity... but I too found it interesting that no ref replied to this thread for awhile... and yet I know one person's post was deleted by a ref...
I know that the other refs probably wanted to wait until the ref who deleted the parts signed on... but just made it interesting to see one ref delete a post and yet no ref mentioned anything on this thread for a day or so...
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961 |
Quote:
but I too found it interesting that no ref replied to this thread for awhile... and yet I know one person's post was deleted by a ref...
I know that the other refs probably wanted to wait until the ref who deleted the parts signed on... but just made it interesting to see one ref delete a post and yet no ref mentioned anything on this thread for a day or so...
The question was posed at 6:44 a.m. on Wednesday and was replied to by the moderator who removed the post at 11:52 p.m. on the same day.
Is a response in 17 hours unacceptable to you? Does that seem unreasonable??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Let me ask something, if I may. There are a few posters here who have obvious inside knowledge about the team through "sources". I have posted things I have gotten from people inside the team without providing a link or source, as have a couple others. The information turned out to be true and validated....but the posts weren't removed. I'm not sure what the difference is. Being probably the biggest fan of CF there is, I wasn't bothered at all by iam's statements.
I'm not saying that those with actual inside information should be censored as it has been important to many discussions. I just don't see a whole lot of difference in the two situations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 730 Likes: 1
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 730 Likes: 1 |
I was also not on line yesterday, and didn't see this question. It's also very hard to answer a question when you have not seen what was deleted or edited.
I see and hear everything. Now where did I put my white cane, and my hearing aid?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,496 Likes: 166
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,496 Likes: 166 |
Does it really matter what seems reasonable to me? PPE posted on this thread at 8 AM... I assume he's still a ref... You deleted a post at 7 PM (I believe) with no response or reason why it was deleted... which is fine for me... I'm just saying I found it interesting that the refs would be on a thread asking a question in their forum and there was no response, but it was obvious refs were on it.. again, I know ya'll probably wanted to wait until ref6 was here.... which is understandable... but I still found it interesting that PPE would post a response under his name and a post would be deleted without explanation and yet it took as you pointed out 17 hrs for a response from any ref... I guess I was what? 7 hours off of my inital guess. And just to clarify, I have no idea how often the refs are on here or how many refs there were... I just found this whole situation fairly interesting.... I'll try to stay off this thread now... just wanted to put in my two cents.... edit: and I understand that ya'll are busy and many of you may have not have seen the thread in question - I actually appriciate it when one or two you try to give an explination but say that the ref in question will have to clarify his/her reasoning... kind of gives a head's up and doesn't create a thread that just goes on between two or three posters posting crap back and forth and then making comments that the refs aren't here or don't care and I truly feel that ya'll do a fabulous job which is one of the reasons that this is the only Browns board I'll ever post on.
Last edited by jaybird; 09/13/07 07:53 PM.
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I am curious about one thing here. What is the difference between this case and doing what guys like Versatile Dawg (hasn't been here in a while) or Mourgym do quite often? I don't mean to be a pain, I am just curious.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 316 |
Quote:
know that the other refs probably wanted to wait until the ref who deleted the parts signed on... but just made it interesting to see one ref delete a post and yet no ref mentioned anything on this thread for a day or so...
For the other Refs to comment on a deleted/edited post when they had not seen it themselves is difficult. In cases like these we usually wait and allow the Ref who did the editing to respond.
At the same time, they need not stand by and allow a post to remain in the thread that needs deleted.
Quote:
I'm kind of surprised that after that lengthy post that 'thank you' was the only reply...
It's not in my interest to get into a back and forth of lengthly posts. In fact, my own first post was far too lengthy a response which only served to fuel the fire and pretty much "required" a lengthly response back to me.
I was not being a smart ass, but merely acknowledging that I've read it and appreciate the poster's gracious acceptance of my action even though she disagreed with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
I'm on a short lease around here.
So they're charging you rent? I wondered how they paid for this place...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280 |
iam... it's really simple, if somebody you really trust saw something and reported it to you..... then just lie and say you saw it yourself.... then it isn't a rumor any more... Oh, and lamp..... there is no second 'u' in rumor... nor is there any 'u' at all in color. This isn't France. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Just wandered in here so I thought I'd throw in my $.02.....
I saw what was posted. And I see no reason to question it's deletion. It was a rumor, pure and simple. It can't be validated and probably bordered on slander. Don't know why you'd be surprised or especially pissed about it's deletion unless your attempt was aimed towards slander.
Next time just post what you know. Not what you think you might know.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
there is no second 'u' in rumor... nor is there any 'u' at all in color.
I disagree
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Fan Feedback Forum What is a rumor?
|
|
