There's still several people acting like you can't state your opinion, and that's the whole thing that's being talked about.
Possible Transfer
- Thread starter Chiefclone
- Start date
There's still several people acting like you can't state your opinion, and that's the whole thing that's being talked about.
And other people are acting like you can't disagree with those negative opinions.
The fact you used the word "acting" probably means that you're reading a little into what people are writing?
Yeah, the forum isn't the same as it used to be. The content is leaps and bounds greater than any other Cyclone site and some may even feel the board is better now, but it isn't the same.
Probably not. Did we ever figure out what comment was the one that caused him to switch after taking a visit which was a long time after he committed?
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
Nah, I don't think anything was written about Tribune (in the original thread) that was out of the ordinary. I'm still confused about it, but I really don't think posters on this site have come down on criticism as harshly as you're thinking.
You can state your opinion. That's fine. BUT expect to take some flak. Nothing different than our substandard recruits should have to deal with.
The funny thing is, all that talk must have sailed past me because I don't remember reading anything at all about him so when those comments came out and Rhoads said that, I was confused. I just think its a simple solution, let the coaches do their job and lock down the players they want. Then judge their game as cyclones in a respectful manner. I don't understand why this concept is rainbows and unicorns.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
again, butthurt over a negative opinion =/= the site suppressing a negative opinion.
And it may seem like there's more of it, but that's mainly because the site is so much bigger than it used to be. We used to have 10 people disagreeing with 1 negative opinion. Now it's 100 people disagreeing with 10 negative opinions.
You mean an argument was built around something no one can remember? Must by cyclonefanatic
No, and honestly, if I'm a 17-year kid who committed to Rhoads and wants to visit elsewhere, I would give him any number of half-truth reasons to appease him.
This is hopeless. I can't even post a theory without suggesting a Cyclone maybe fibbed a bit.
I wasn't saying it is site suppression, I am commenting more on the fact that Rustshack isn't making a strawman argument in my opinion. There's truth I feel in his assessment that people get butthurt over negative opinions way more than 2 years ago when I first joined. I feel this is unfortunate, in my opinion.
Here's the original thread. It was a little harsher than I remember.
Also, Rabbuk...you fast.
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum/football/151150-db-nigel-tribune-commits.html
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
He said, in his own words, that he's "not aloud to talk Cyclones unless it's all sunshine, rainbows, unicorns" Explain how he's not allowed to do this? It's a false statement. That's a strawman argument.
Ok whatever Janny you win. I don't care. If you want to get caught up examining 1 tree and miss the entire forest that is the at least some legitimacy of his point ok. His wording sucks his whole argument is invalid you win.