Notice to all Board members...

[CatEye]

Repetitious posts regardless of their view regarding the Mackovic situation will no longer be allowed.

I feel everyone's point on this issue has already been made, and now it's time to turn our attention to Rivalry week and the big game coming up against Asu.

Let's enjoy this week, and wait till after the game, to figure things out. If you have any problems with my stance please Private Message me.
Thanks,
CatEye

[killervibe]

You are seriously banning further discussion on the Mack topic?

Thats funny.

Whats next? No more topics that discuss Jason Gardener size (or lack their of).

Good one brother...I laughed so hard milk nearly came out of my nose. I will have to remember not to take drinks just before I read your future posts.

[Jim Storey]

As a moderator, CatEye has greater ability to oversee and manage content on this message board. However, I disagree with what CatEye has posted. Though I respect CatEye's opinion on this issue, I will not allow any curbing or discrimination against topics or postings that one individual may not like.

I never want people on this board to feel that they cannot talk about issues that they have on their mind. I never want the moderators, Ben or myself to "lay down the law" other then making sure people are respectful of each other.

As a result, let it be known that topics of any matter are appropriate and welcomed on this board. So, please discuss anything and everything as you see fit - just make sure it is courteous and respectful. Questions/comments - contact me.

JS

[Auercat]

what I think Cateye is looking to avoid is a full scale war between warring Mackovic factions. A certain poster here is flloding the board with "Fire Everybody" and "Go ASU" jibberrish. Cateye is simply looking to avoid a war that is about to break out!

Also, I have question about moderating on the main hoops board! I tried to edit a post geared to incite by a Dookie and was not allowed to do so. So Jim, how do I get word to the other modes there? Just wondering!!

Bearing Down on Being Jim Storey's Faithful Mod!

Auercat

PS Killervibe, before you smack Cateye. You should remember that this was the type of censorship you and others requested elsewhere. Plus making fun of his concern, only furhter proves why he wants to closely moderate this board. But leave it to you KV! :mad:

[Josh Gershon]

I was under the (maybe wrong?) impression that CatEye meant no more discussing the Mackovic situation, which I highly disagree with. Going over his post, I think what he is trying to say is a little confusing.

I agree that we don't need a war over this, and the Go ASU stuff is garbage. At the same time, the Mackovic situation is an extremely important part of Arizona Athletics, and should be discussed in a fair and civil manner.

Think before you post, guys. We are all Arizona fans and I would hope that we can all discuss these manners without offending others and flaming each other.

Mackovic Talk? Yes.
Flame Talk? No.

We are working on the DukeChamps situation, Auer.

[pc in NM]

...as far as limiting redundant and repititious posting of the same argument ad nauseum.

I'm with 07 as far as keeping it an open board, welcoming to all points of view.

I also hope that the moderation of the boards will keep a tight rein on flaming - and by "flaming", I mean when a post is personal (makes personal remarks or attacks the poster) as opposed to topical (say anything you want about a poster's position and debate the merits of the argument)....

We can and should all agree to disagree; but we should be respectful in the process....

[CatnPhx]

I just don't want this board to become BRO-like anti-Lavin toward Mack. Intelligent discussion is one thing but even BRO had to put a stop to what was happening over there toward Lavin.

I will contact you JStorey because I want to make a private point as well. Thanks

[Jim Storey]

Auer...

You may be correct and I may have misundertsood CatEye's post. I wish CatEye were around to elaborate. Point taken by everyone regarding war, so forth. However, I DO want people to be able to talk about what they feel is important, but not like what is happening over in the basketball forum.

I really dislike the fact that message board space is being taken up by talking about "non-athletic" topics. I hope that this is it, but I do leave it in the trusty moderator's hands... but do have to voice my opinion every once in a while :)

Keep in mind, if member's want to ban a poster, all that is needed is a 2/3 vote. I leave it to the member's to make a decision regarding banning.

Thanks for everyone's input and appreciate your efforts to making this a better board.

[killervibe]

"Killervibe, before you smack Cateye. You should remember that this was the type of censorship you and others requested elsewhere. Plus making fun of his concern, only furhter proves why he wants to closely moderate this board. But leave it to you KV!"

Actually Auercat, I have never called for topic moderation. What I have requested is the cessation of personal attacks. For example, imagine someone making the post that 'the Dodgers will be watching the playoffs from home' and having someone reply with personal insults such as 'glad to see your kindergarten teacher is letting you use the computer again'. Know anyone that would do that?

It is possible to have heated discussions on college sports topics without crossing the line into personal insults. We both know that many posters on the other board are not able to distinguish where that line is. And truth be told, you and I have blurred the line more than once. But some are allowed to cross the line indiscriminately all day every day.

Making a topic off limits (such as Coach Mack) is not going to stop the insults. If CatsEye's intention was to cease these kinds of durogatory posts as you have claimed then he should have restated the boards policy on this type of behavior and let it be known that offenders of this rule would be dealt with quickly and severely. Because these kinds of posters will always find away to turn any topic into a flame war. Shall we start banning every topic that we think might give fuel to a flamer now? That was the purpose of my post.

Common sense tells me that if someone posts a topic with regards to Coach Mack and you disagree with the points made, make a strong counter argument based on college football (not their lvl of education, hobbies or other personal attributes). Talk about his strengths and records, his ability to recruit, etc. If someone is duragatory and crosses the line between football smack and personal smack...delete the posts, sind the poster a strong warning and let it be. If they persist, ban them.
.

P.S. Anyone have an idea why my signature is so screwy?

[CatEye]

James,
My sole intention for my "notice to the Board" was to avoid a potential flame war that could amount to nothing more than name calling and divisiveness on the Board. I would personally like to thank Auercat, CatnPhx, and PC in NM for understanding my original intentions, and defending my position.

I've been a 5 year+ veteran of these Message Boards, and I've seen enough Board meltdowns to recognize the need for intervention (no Soprano's jokes please). I was simply trying to create a cooling off period without going into a detailed drawn out explanation, I'm sorry that was not good enough for you, maybe I should have taken more time to explain my actions, for that I apologize.

I feel Everyone has had ample opportunity to make their arguments and express their views on this issue. It was my opinion that we should try to move on and focus on other matters for now, and wait till after the Asu game to possibly revisit this issue.

That being said, I have already been contacted by Jim Storey, the owner of this Board, and he seems to agree with you, and feels I should not try to curb any discussion. So for that reason, even though I disagree, and seem to have the support of others whom I respect, and even though I feel there could be long-term harm to the Board, because rifts between posters may develop that could injure our ability to enjoy our common bond, the Arizona Wildcats, I will remain on the sidelines.

Besides, I feel my post has already served it's pupose, by putting everyone on notice and hopefully making people take a second look at their posts before putting them on the Board.

If you or anyone else still has a problem with my views on this situation, please Private Message me, and I will be happy to respond. We are all Arizona Wildcats, and I consider that a very special common thread.
CatEye

[Jim Storey]

After reading CatEye's reply below I realize that I was premature in posting my opinion on curbing discussion. CatEye, for that I apologize in this case for "laying down the law" because I have always maintained that this is a board that the rules and general guidelines are set by the members.

By me posting my opinion and "rule" on the board about not wanting to curb discussion, I went against my one original visions for the board, "Let the members of the board dictate policy."

Again, I hate using board space by discussing matters such as these, but felt that CatEye's post and the ensuing posts by other moderators and members warranted one last post by me.

So with that being said, my point is that no ONE member should be able to dictate policy. I shouldn't have, CatEye shouldn't have, and no one else should. IMO, CatEye is right about "flamers" and other ridiculous posts, but that should not prevent people from discussing what they want. From now on, let's let you as the members of this board dictate what is ok and not ok.

[pc in NM]

I like your vision of the board, and your clarifying response....

However, your avatar is a contradiction of that intent, IMHO.

[WhassaMattaU]

... for his sense of fair play and his intelligent contributions to discussion of Arizona sports.

His loyalty to Arizona is beyond reproach, and he's one of the most respected personalities on these boards.

I do have one (unsolicited, albeit) suggestion, though, for Jim from something I learned at age 18. Disagreement will always occur, but differences between directors and managers or the people one guides are best discussed and left off the record, preferably in private.