Possible rules changes for 2009

[jaybird]

What set this sumbuck off again? I was really hoping that (s)he went away, thereby elevating the intelligence level on this site.

Hey ze-bra 295,
While you're critiquing others, you need to look in the mirror. The discussion in this thread is about possible rules changes and to date you have added nothing.
If you insist on trying to correct perceived faults of others, I suggest that you go instruct pre-K youngsters so as to mold them as you see fit. No, on second thought, leave our young people alone. Instead, go to a nursing home and try your luck with those experienced folks. Either way, just go! You add nothing to this (or any other) site.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by jaybird

What set this sumbuck off again? I was really hoping that (s)he went away, thereby elevating the intelligence level on this site.

Hey ze-bra 295,
While you're critiquing others, you need to look in the mirror. The discussion in this thread is about possible rules changes and to date you have added nothing.

Even all the king's horses and all the king's men can't make a stupid remark smart, it just doesn't work that way. When frustration compels someone to offer a really unnecessary, and stupid, remark most officials have learned it best to try and ignore the first stupid uttering, in hopes once the hot air is spent it will blow away.

Trying to out-stupid the first dumb remark, with an even dumber one, usually doesn't do anything to elevate anything related to intelligence. Unfortunately, when the first stupid remark generates a string of equally stupid responses, to the point it seems any stupid comment requires a choir like series of equally stupid responses, ignoring all of them just doesn't seem as effective a deterrent as hoped.

The fact that someone has been offering stupid remarks longer than everyone else doesn't usually amount to an accomplishment for most and perhaps should serve as an opportunity for introspection.

Perhaps, simply choosing to respond to stupid postings more like we all know how to respond to stupid comments we hear on the field, ignoring most of the initial ones, there would be a lot less need for cascading stupid reactions. Do any stupid, unnecessary comments relate to rule changes? It's really rare that when rocks start getting thrown back and forth, anyone actually benefits from the exercise

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Even all the king's horses and all the king's men can't make a stupid remark smart, it just doesn't work that way. When frustration compels someone to offer a really unnecessary, and stupid, remark most officials have learned it best to try and ignore the first stupid uttering, in hopes once the hot air is spent it will blow away.

Trying to out-stupid the first dumb remark, with an even dumber one, usually doesn't do anything to elevate anything related to intelligence. Unfortunately, when the first stupid remark generates a string of equally stupid responses, to the point it seems any stupid comment requires a choir like series of equally stupid responses, ignoring all of them just doesn't seem as effective a deterrent as hoped.

The fact that someone has been offering stupid remarks longer than everyone else doesn't usually amount to an accomplishment for most and perhaps should serve as an opportunity for introspection.

Perhaps, simply choosing to respond to stupid postings more like we all know how to respond to stupid comments we hear on the field, ignoring most of the initial ones, there would be a lot less need for cascading stupid reactions. Do any stupid, unnecessary comments relate to rule changes? It's really rare that when rocks start getting thrown back and forth, anyone actually benefits from the exercise

Speaking of dumb remarks and trying to out-stupid someone... zebra295's kin folk, ajmc, just spoke also trying to tell others how to act and speak. Both of you two characters need to focus on the subject matter instead of trying to correct others who's behavior you don't approve. If it would make you feel better, I can group you with KB and just never respond to his or your remarks again.

[Mike L]

Just because I like watching these hamsters run, here's what I got out of ajmc's remarks...

...stupid...unnecessary, and stupid...stupid...hot air...

...out-stupid...dumb remark...even dumber...stupid ...stupid responses...stupid comment...stupid...

...stupid remarks...

...stupid postings...stupid, unnecessary comments...

everything else in between pretty much reminded me of Charlie Brown's teacher. Wa-wat-wa wat-wa-wa.

[ajmc]

I was afraid I might have been too subtle, MikeL, but I'm glad you were able to glean the heart of it. Did you ever think about all the trouble Charlie Brown might have avoided if he heard his teacher, just a little?

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I was afraid I might have been too subtle, MikeL, but I'm glad you were able to glean the heart of it. Did you ever think about all the trouble Charlie Brown might have avoided if he heard his teacher, just a little?

Actually, Charlie always did hear his teacher and responded intelligently. At least as intelligently as a cartoon kid could. The genius of Schultz was he realized, what the teacher actually said was not relevant to his audience for either the humor or understanding of the story. Perhaps that is something you in your self appointed role of "teacher" here should consider.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Mike L

. Perhaps that is something you in your self appointed role of "teacher" here should consider.

MikeL, I've never seen myself in the role of a teacher, especially not with something as basic and as important as normal manners and respect. Those are things your parents were supposed to teach you, although I don't fault them for the results they attained with you. For any type of learning to happen, it requires some level of interest and intent to be taught on the part of the student.

There are some things, that if you fail to understand by the age of 10 or 12, you just may never get.

[BktBallRef]

mick and Bob, the Internet Nazis are in full force, telling folks what they can and can't post. Isn't it about time to shut this thread down?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Even all the king's horses and all the king's men can't make a stupid remark smart, it just doesn't work that way. When frustration compels someone to offer a really unnecessary, and stupid, remark most officials have learned it best to try and ignore the first stupid uttering, in hopes once the hot air is spent it will blow away.

Trying to out-stupid the first dumb remark, with an even dumber one, usually doesn't do anything to elevate anything related to intelligence. Unfortunately, when the first stupid remark generates a string of equally stupid responses, to the point it seems any stupid comment requires a choir like series of equally stupid responses, ignoring all of them just doesn't seem as effective a deterrent as hoped.

The fact that someone has been offering stupid remarks longer than everyone else doesn't usually amount to an accomplishment for most and perhaps should serve as an opportunity for introspection.

Perhaps, simply choosing to respond to stupid postings more like we all know how to respond to stupid comments we hear on the field, ignoring most of the initial ones, there would be a lot less need for cascading stupid reactions. Do any stupid, unnecessary comments relate to rule changes? It's really rare that when rocks start getting thrown back and forth, anyone actually benefits from the exercise

Irony?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Irony?

I was thinking the same thing.

Peace

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Even all the king's horses and all the king's men can't make a stupid remark smart, it just doesn't work that way.

Agreed

When frustration compels someone to offer a really unnecessary, and stupid, remark most officials have learned it best to try and ignore the first stupid uttering, in hopes once the hot air is spent it will blow away.

I'm really hoping.

Trying to out-stupid the first dumb remark, with an even dumber one, usually doesn't do anything to elevate anything related to intelligence.

Damn, so much for hoping.

Unfortunately, when the first stupid remark generates a string of equally stupid responses, to the point it seems any stupid comment requires a choir like series of equally stupid responses, ignoring all of them just doesn't seem as effective a deterrent as hoped.

I'm getting lost here, are you making the first stupid remark or the equally stupid response?

The fact that someone has been offering stupid remarks longer than everyone else doesn't usually amount to an accomplishment for most and perhaps should serve as an opportunity for introspection.

How about someone who has offered the longest stupid post?

Perhaps, simply choosing to respond to stupid postings more like we all know how to respond to stupid comments we hear on the field, ignoring most of the initial ones, there would be a lot less need for cascading stupid reactions.

Physician heal thyself.

Do any stupid, unnecessary comments relate to rule changes?

Your post sure didn't, but is that required? This board would be really quiet if all posts were required to relate to just rule changes. Some posts relate to rats and cheats.

It's really rare that when rocks start getting thrown back and forth, anyone actually benefits from the exercise

Says the man as he throws one of the largest boulders in the thread.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Agreed



I'm really hoping.



Damn, so much for hoping



I'm getting lost here, are you making the first stupid remark or the equally stupid response?




How about someone who has offered the longest stupid post?



Physician heal thyself.



Your post sure didn't, but is that required. This board would be really quiet if all postes were required to relate to just rule changes. Some posts relate to rats and cheats.



Says the man as he throws one of the largest boulders in the thread.

A friggin' classic! Well done, sir.