Rutgers - Game Thread

 lapchick1 added absolutely nothing to any conversation on this board. You guys don't see the difference between constructive criticism and opinion and just down right, negative trolling?  I'm surprised he/she lasted this long.

Nice job Dave, I fully support your decision.  He pretty much sucked as a fan of the program and as a poster. Good riddance.

I aint weighin in on this since I wudnt readin all them posts. I just skip 'em fo the most part.

But I just wanna again thank Dave fo providin this here site and freein those of us who think constructive dialogue is better than the vitriol thrown all 'round in other places where the rule of law is nowhere to be found and nastiness can ensue turnin a msg board into a shameful sewer that no one does anytin to control.

Peace out!
Choz4Life

Quote from: Lapchick65 on March 05, 2012, 08:37:23 AM

This is not a free speech or censorship issue.  Its about standards.  Anytime someone really badmouths SJU, and repeatedly, they don't deserve to be part of the 6th man.  Think of it as membership revoked.  If you had a buddy who just ripped on your wife all the time would you stand up for his free speech?  If you heard someone rip on your kid for being a loser would you stand up for their contrarian views?  Why do you think SJU doesn't let any Tom, Dick & Harry speak on campus even though people have lots of different opinions and many are contrarian?  They don't allow it because they don't want to support people who communicate information SJU thinks is wrong/offensive.  Is that clamping down on free speech?  No.  Is it censorship?  No.  Just protecting the house.

I think people bad mouthing your wife and kids is very different than what occurs here.  Posts here that criticize the program are more like me bad mouthing my own wife and kids.  Which I do frequently.  And yes I would stand up for the free speech of my buddy ripping my wife and the guy ripping on my kid for being a loser.  Just as I stand for the right of the KKK and al-Qaeda to peaceably assemble, give speeches and publish material.

The facts remain that here you can post positive things about the program till the cows come home.  If you write anything negative about the coach, team or program; you do so at your own peril.

I am extremely appreciative of this fine fansite and all of Dave's efforts in bringing it to us.  I've met Dave on several occasions and know that he's a stand up guy that I consider a friend.  As I posted already,  I recognize his right to include and exclude whomever he wants. But I will never understand why it bothers people so much when people post negatively about the team.  I just don't get it.  What just happened and has happened before is very plainly censorship and is clearly opposite the spirit of the first amendment.

"Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body."

Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Very solid post, I agree completely with everything you said. 

A good chunk of people here would be all for the country removing the right to free speech out of the constitution.  That's all well and good when you agree with the majority but if it comes back to bite you; oops.

What Lapchick did was flame the board.  He would come here ONLY after losses and post the same damn message over and over and when ppl refuted him or challenged him with facts he would ignore them and just post the same drivel over and over again.  Was it nasty? No.  But it was flaming to me.

Let’s simplify the discussion.  Since SJU basketball is an extension of our great university, let’s use universities as an example.  At at a purely individual level, in the USA, we are all entitled to our personal opinions.  We won’t get arrested for airing an opinion.  We are free to say what we like.  Yet, in universities across the country, which are bastions of free speech, universities take an active role in deciding what speech is and IS NOT empowered with a platform.  It doesn’t take away an individual’s right to an opinion.  For example, just because someone thinks that cigarettes are not harmful it doesn’t mean NYU’s School of Medicine should provide a venue for a lecture on the topic.  As a school dedicated to health, it would be negligent to the community and school to provide such a forum.  In recent years, SJU has disinvited speakers from outside the university when it has come to light that we do not support their views.  Is this a violation of free speech?  No.  It doesn’t stop the individual from being entitled to say what they want, it just means that SJU has decided that it won’t happen through their platform.

If a speaker on this forum, dedicated to SJU basketball, is considered to espouse views that are actually bad for the program, hurt morale, etc. why should they be granted the ability to air their views here?  Let them air their views some other place.  Think about this: from time to time a poster will suggest that our players or recruits (or their families and friends) are actually reading what we write.  I can’t confirm or deny that, but I will say if one reads the posts on Moe Harkless being awarded BE FROSH of the Year it certainly appears that members of this forum believe, even in their own fantasy worlds, that they are speaking directly to Moe, with postings like: “Way to go Moe”, etc.  How would individuals of this group – the 6th man of SJU basketball – feel if we knew that some of the grossly negative stuff being written about our young men and our program, was responsible for a recruit going elsewhere or contributing to hurting the morale of the team?

It's done, it's over. Lets move on to Big East Tournament!