Thin-Skinned Bruin Fans and Coach Lavin

Something interesting happened to me on my way to another blog.  I went over to the SBNation Bruin blog to read what some were saying about Kyle committing there.  But rather than bore you with that now old topic, I also saw a headline titled, "Baron Davis is a Benedict Bruin?"  The piece goes on about how Davis, and even Earl Watson, betrayed the UCLA community by supporting Coach Lavin by visiting SJ's during Kyle visit to SJ's.

The piece goes on to state, "that people that play here have an additional responsibility to ensure that that legacy remains just as attractive and appealing to future generations of recruits, and a responsibility to uphold one of Coach's greatest virtues: loyalty. That means that at the absolute worst, I expect at least an equivalent sales pitch for the greatest collegiate basketball program in the country."

I posted a totally valid and poignant response to this post, and some others posters (some posts were more reasonable, stating that it wasn't disloyalty, but rather loyalty to their former coach) began go into the dysfunctional rehashing of long gone occurrences, ripping Baron, Earl, and Coach Lavin.

I posted a response basically stating that some of the fans bashing Coach and the players are hypocrites because of the way they treated a man who devoted 12 years of his life to an institution, or years playing for the school, and despite leaving on good terms with admin, and class being shown by all parties involved, the fans continue to be disrespectful with their comments and behavior.  I said with these high expectations, if Coach Willard didn't recently turn it around with his recruiting, and now mimicking the SJ's playbook of getting an NBA trainer asst coach on board, you all would have probably run him out of town too.

I guess this response, which was thought provoking, respectful, and admittedly a bit of a lecture to their board fans, hit too close to home.  PS - no profanity, no extreme statements (all of you, you idiots, etc.) were in my post.

I received this after my post was removed:

"You have been issued a warning.
Not only do you display your incredible ignorance of UCLA basketball, but you attempt to parlay that ignorance into a lecture on our frontpage and moderator staff. Your prize is you are now on zero tolerance: The next time you attempt to lecture us from your ignorant little perch there will be your last on BN.
In order to continue participating on Bruins Nation you must acknowledge your warning by pressing the OK button below."

I just want to say in my opinion, if something comparable was posted here, the moderators would not have removed it, and some responses and discussion, however heated, would have ensued.  It would have surely turned on the person posting.  It was something I was open to and ready to respond to.  In conclusion, I can say I am thankful to be on a reasonable board of knowledgeable, funny (liny89 for example ) and insightful posters like JJ and Redmen. 

I guess west coasters, (even if former east coasters), do not have thick enough skin to handle a response that challenges their sensibilities  and behavior.

And at least we have crgreen, who can understand that loyalty is a two way street.  I say this to all of us and our current commit/decommit/not enrolled/enrolled here climate we're currently in.  We can support the guys, and hope they support us back.  But it truly is a two way street.  I hope personal circumstance doesn't get in the way of all of our guys that were on the ark climbing back/staying aboard.  Better late than never...Not sure it will happen, but they have my support. Just like coach and the staff do as well.

That statement they wrote to you makes me want to beat UCLA even more this season.

That is ridiculous.  I guess free speech and debate are not allowed the Bruin site.  Odd policy for a blog.

Something interesting happened to me on my way to another blog.  I went over to the SBNation Bruin blog to read what some were saying about Kyle committing there.  But rather than bore you with that now old topic, I also saw a headline titled, "Baron Davis is a Benedict Bruin?"  The piece goes on about how Davis, and even Earl Watson, betrayed the UCLA community by supporting Coach Lavin by visiting SJ's during Kyle visit to SJ's.

The piece goes on to state, "that people that play here have an additional responsibility to ensure that that legacy remains just as attractive and appealing to future generations of recruits, and a responsibility to uphold one of Coach's greatest virtues: loyalty. That means that at the absolute worst, I expect at least an equivalent sales pitch for the greatest collegiate basketball program in the country."

I posted a totally valid and poignant response to this post, and some others posters (some posts were more reasonable, stating that it wasn't disloyalty, but rather loyalty to their former coach) began go into the dysfunctional rehashing of long gone occurrences, ripping Baron, Earl, and Coach Lavin.

I posted a response basically stating that some of the fans bashing Coach and the players are hypocrites because of the way they treated a man who devoted 12 years of his life to an institution, or years playing for the school, and despite leaving on good terms with admin, and class being shown by all parties involved, the fans continue to be disrespectful with their comments and behavior.  I said with these high expectations, if Coach Willard didn't recently turn it around with his recruiting, and now mimicking the SJ's playbook of getting an NBA trainer asst coach on board, you all would have probably run him out of town too.

I guess this response, which was thought provoking, respectful, and admittedly a bit of a lecture to their board fans, hit too close to home.  PS - no profanity, no extreme statements (all of you, you idiots, etc.) were in my post.

I received this after my post was removed:

"You have been issued a warning.
Not only do you display your incredible ignorance of UCLA basketball, but you attempt to parlay that ignorance into a lecture on our frontpage and moderator staff. Your prize is you are now on zero tolerance: The next time you attempt to lecture us from your ignorant little perch there will be your last on BN.
In order to continue participating on Bruins Nation you must acknowledge your warning by pressing the OK button below."

I just want to say in my opinion, if something comparable was posted here, the moderators would not have removed it, and some responses and discussion, however heated, would have ensued.  It would have surely turned on the person posting.  It was something I was open to and ready to respond to.  In conclusion, I can say I am thankful to be on a reasonable board of knowledgeable, funny (liny89 for example ) and insightful posters like JJ and Redmen. 

I guess west coasters, (even if former east coasters), do not have thick enough skin to handle a response that challenges their sensibilities  and behavior.

And at least we have crgreen, who can understand that loyalty is a two way street.  I say this to all of us and our current commit/decommit/not enrolled/enrolled here climate we're currently in.  We can support the guys, and hope they support us back.  But it truly is a two way street.  I hope personal circumstance doesn't get in the way of all of our guys that were on the ark climbing back/staying aboard.  Better late than never...Not sure it will happen, but they have my support. Just like coach and the staff do as well.

Not sure it is a West coast thing as Redmen used to ban anti Norm posters. BEB back in its glory days was like the wild west anything went. Somehow Scotch still got banned and I think Baldi was suspended a couple times. Here for the most part everyone is civil but of course Scotch still got banned lol

Quote from: bball purist on September 23, 2011, 01:39:42 PM

Something interesting happened to me on my way to another blog.  I went over to the SBNation Bruin blog to read what some were saying about Kyle committing there.  But rather than bore you with that now old topic, I also saw a headline titled, "Baron Davis is a Benedict Bruin?"  The piece goes on about how Davis, and even Earl Watson, betrayed the UCLA community by supporting Coach Lavin by visiting SJ's during Kyle visit to SJ's.

The piece goes on to state, "that people that play here have an additional responsibility to ensure that that legacy remains just as attractive and appealing to future generations of recruits, and a responsibility to uphold one of Coach's greatest virtues: loyalty. That means that at the absolute worst, I expect at least an equivalent sales pitch for the greatest collegiate basketball program in the country."

I posted a totally valid and poignant response to this post, and some others posters (some posts were more reasonable, stating that it wasn't disloyalty, but rather loyalty to their former coach) began go into the dysfunctional rehashing of long gone occurrences, ripping Baron, Earl, and Coach Lavin.

I posted a response basically stating that some of the fans bashing Coach and the players are hypocrites because of the way they treated a man who devoted 12 years of his life to an institution, or years playing for the school, and despite leaving on good terms with admin, and class being shown by all parties involved, the fans continue to be disrespectful with their comments and behavior.  I said with these high expectations, if Coach Willard didn't recently turn it around with his recruiting, and now mimicking the SJ's playbook of getting an NBA trainer asst coach on board, you all would have probably run him out of town too.

I guess this response, which was thought provoking, respectful, and admittedly a bit of a lecture to their board fans, hit too close to home.  PS - no profanity, no extreme statements (all of you, you idiots, etc.) were in my post.

I received this after my post was removed:

"You have been issued a warning.
Not only do you display your incredible ignorance of UCLA basketball, but you attempt to parlay that ignorance into a lecture on our frontpage and moderator staff. Your prize is you are now on zero tolerance: The next time you attempt to lecture us from your ignorant little perch there will be your last on BN.
In order to continue participating on Bruins Nation you must acknowledge your warning by pressing the OK button below."

I just want to say in my opinion, if something comparable was posted here, the moderators would not have removed it, and some responses and discussion, however heated, would have ensued.  It would have surely turned on the person posting.  It was something I was open to and ready to respond to.  In conclusion, I can say I am thankful to be on a reasonable board of knowledgeable, funny (liny89 for example ) and insightful posters like JJ and Redmen. 

I guess west coasters, (even if former east coasters), do not have thick enough skin to handle a response that challenges their sensibilities  and behavior.

And at least we have crgreen, who can understand that loyalty is a two way street.  I say this to all of us and our current commit/decommit/not enrolled/enrolled here climate we're currently in.  We can support the guys, and hope they support us back.  But it truly is a two way street.  I hope personal circumstance doesn't get in the way of all of our guys that were on the ark climbing back/staying aboard.  Better late than never...Not sure it will happen, but they have my support. Just like coach and the staff do as well.

Not sure it is a West coast thing as Redmen used to ban anti Norm posters. BEB back in its glory days was like the wild west anything went. Somehow Scotch still got banned and I think Baldi was suspended a couple times. Here for the most part everyone is civil but of course Scotch still got banned lol

That's crazy, who would be Anti-Norm?

Quote from: we are sju on September 28, 2011, 09:38:06 AM

Quote from: bball purist on September 23, 2011, 01:39:42 PM

Something interesting happened to me on my way to another blog.  I went over to the SBNation Bruin blog to read what some were saying about Kyle committing there.  But rather than bore you with that now old topic, I also saw a headline titled, "Baron Davis is a Benedict Bruin?"  The piece goes on about how Davis, and even Earl Watson, betrayed the UCLA community by supporting Coach Lavin by visiting SJ's during Kyle visit to SJ's.

The piece goes on to state, "that people that play here have an additional responsibility to ensure that that legacy remains just as attractive and appealing to future generations of recruits, and a responsibility to uphold one of Coach's greatest virtues: loyalty. That means that at the absolute worst, I expect at least an equivalent sales pitch for the greatest collegiate basketball program in the country."

I posted a totally valid and poignant response to this post, and some others posters (some posts were more reasonable, stating that it wasn't disloyalty, but rather loyalty to their former coach) began go into the dysfunctional rehashing of long gone occurrences, ripping Baron, Earl, and Coach Lavin.

I posted a response basically stating that some of the fans bashing Coach and the players are hypocrites because of the way they treated a man who devoted 12 years of his life to an institution, or years playing for the school, and despite leaving on good terms with admin, and class being shown by all parties involved, the fans continue to be disrespectful with their comments and behavior.  I said with these high expectations, if Coach Willard didn't recently turn it around with his recruiting, and now mimicking the SJ's playbook of getting an NBA trainer asst coach on board, you all would have probably run him out of town too.

I guess this response, which was thought provoking, respectful, and admittedly a bit of a lecture to their board fans, hit too close to home.  PS - no profanity, no extreme statements (all of you, you idiots, etc.) were in my post.

I received this after my post was removed:

"You have been issued a warning.
Not only do you display your incredible ignorance of UCLA basketball, but you attempt to parlay that ignorance into a lecture on our frontpage and moderator staff. Your prize is you are now on zero tolerance: The next time you attempt to lecture us from your ignorant little perch there will be your last on BN.
In order to continue participating on Bruins Nation you must acknowledge your warning by pressing the OK button below."

I just want to say in my opinion, if something comparable was posted here, the moderators would not have removed it, and some responses and discussion, however heated, would have ensued.  It would have surely turned on the person posting.  It was something I was open to and ready to respond to.  In conclusion, I can say I am thankful to be on a reasonable board of knowledgeable, funny (liny89 for example ) and insightful posters like JJ and Redmen. 

I guess west coasters, (even if former east coasters), do not have thick enough skin to handle a response that challenges their sensibilities  and behavior.

And at least we have crgreen, who can understand that loyalty is a two way street.  I say this to all of us and our current commit/decommit/not enrolled/enrolled here climate we're currently in.  We can support the guys, and hope they support us back.  But it truly is a two way street.  I hope personal circumstance doesn't get in the way of all of our guys that were on the ark climbing back/staying aboard.  Better late than never...Not sure it will happen, but they have my support. Just like coach and the staff do as well.

Not sure it is a West coast thing as Redmen used to ban anti Norm posters. BEB back in its glory days was like the wild west anything went. Somehow Scotch still got banned and I think Baldi was suspended a couple times. Here for the most part everyone is civil but of course Scotch still got banned lol

That's crazy, who would be Anti-Norm?

Well in fairness once it became obvious to even the most simple minded that Norm was in over his head around year 5 Redmen finally turned on Norm and even opened registration.

No one was banned for criticizing Norm.  They were banned for not following the code of conduct which was pretty strict with regard to personal attacks on coaches, players and fellow posters.  It was then very much a more "mature" board, meaning it was for old fogies like me, not fire breathing young 'uns like WASJU.  It eventually became apparent that the use of the ban was too rigorously applied I think.

No one was banned for criticizing Norm.  They were banned for not following the code of conduct which was pretty strict with regard to personal attacks on coaches, players and fellow posters.  It was then very much a more "mature" board, meaning it was for old fogies like me, not fire breathing young 'uns like WASJU.  It eventually became apparent that the use of the ban was too rigorously applied I think.

Semantics! If the code of conduct indicated not to criticize the coach and people were banned for not following that aspect of the code of conduct, then they were banned for criticizing the coach.

Quote from: yankcranker on September 28, 2011, 12:11:39 PM

No one was banned for criticizing Norm.  They were banned for not following the code of conduct which was pretty strict with regard to personal attacks on coaches, players and fellow posters.  It was then very much a more "mature" board, meaning it was for old fogies like me, not fire breathing young 'uns like WASJU.  It eventually became apparent that the use of the ban was too rigorously applied I think.

Semantics! If the code of conduct indicated not to criticize the coach and people were banned for not following that aspect of the code of conduct, then they were banned for criticizing the coach.

The COC said nothing about not criticizing the coach, it said no personal attacks.  That made it hard for the less mature, more emotional of our group of posters who couldn't understand the difference between fact and defamation.

The COC said nothing about not criticizing the coach, it said no personal attacks.  That made it hard for the less mature, more emotional of our group of posters who couldn't understand the difference between fact and defamation.

Perfectly stated, yank.  This is the second poster that has recently mentioned something about being banned from Redmen for trashing Norm.  Wrong! 

I can name many posters who dissed Norm and they weren't booted.  It's how one conducts themselves.

BEB back in its glory days was like the wild west anything went.

Well not anything.

Quote from: yankcranker on September 28, 2011, 12:25:36 PM

The COC said nothing about not criticizing the coach, it said no personal attacks.  That made it hard for the less mature, more emotional of our group of posters who couldn't understand the difference between fact and defamation.

Perfectly stated, yank.  This is the second poster that has recently mentioned something about being banned from Redmen for trashing Norm.  Wrong! 

I can name many posters who dissed Norm and they weren't booted.  It's how one conducts themselves.

Unless you are over the top and lack human decency it is ridiculous to be banned from one of these IMO. Redmen back in the day went overboard with the bannings as even Yank admitted. I think if you look at all those banned you will notice that outside of Scotch(see lack of human decency)  every banned person was anti Norm.

Quote from: we are sju on September 28, 2011, 09:38:06 AM

BEB back in its glory days was like the wild west anything went.

Well not anything.

That was towards the end, no? And while I enjoy your posts  and do not think you ever did anything ban worthy, you did wage a one man war against the mods over there at the end

Quote from: mjdinkins on September 28, 2011, 02:14:35 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on September 28, 2011, 12:25:36 PM

The COC said nothing about not criticizing the coach, it said no personal attacks.  That made it hard for the less mature, more emotional of our group of posters who couldn't understand the difference between fact and defamation.

Perfectly stated, yank.  This is the second poster that has recently mentioned something about being banned from Redmen for trashing Norm.  Wrong! 

I can name many posters who dissed Norm and they weren't booted.  It's how one conducts themselves.

Unless you are over the top and lack human decency it is ridiculous to be banned from one of these IMO. Redmen back in the day went overboard with the bannings as even Yank admitted. I think if you look at all those banned you will notice that outside of Scotch(see lack of human decency)  every banned person was anti Norm.

First, re anti-Norm vs pro it may have been true but it was immaterial.  Plenty of anti-Norms also managed to behave well enough to stay on the site until the change in policy.  Suffice to say that those that were anti-Norm were more likely to be a bit boisterous and push the limits of the COC.  Their frustration, which was not without just cause, did seem to drive more than a dozen posters over the proverbial edge.

Second, when you pump  your own time and $$$ into a site you can make those calls, ridiculous or not. 

Quote from: we are sju on September 28, 2011, 02:37:08 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on September 28, 2011, 02:14:35 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on September 28, 2011, 12:25:36 PM

The COC said nothing about not criticizing the coach, it said no personal attacks.  That made it hard for the less mature, more emotional of our group of posters who couldn't understand the difference between fact and defamation.

Perfectly stated, yank.  This is the second poster that has recently mentioned something about being banned from Redmen for trashing Norm.  Wrong! 

I can name many posters who dissed Norm and they weren't booted.  It's how one conducts themselves.

Unless you are over the top and lack human decency it is ridiculous to be banned from one of these IMO. Redmen back in the day went overboard with the bannings as even Yank admitted. I think if you look at all those banned you will notice that outside of Scotch(see lack of human decency)  every banned person was anti Norm.

First, re anti-Norm vs pro it may have been true but it was immaterial.  Plenty of anti-Norms also managed to behave well enough to stay on the site until the change in policy.  Suffice to say that those that were anti-Norm were more likely to be a bit boisterous and push the limits of the COC.  Their frustration, which was not without just cause, did seem to drive more than a dozen posters over the proverbial edge.

Second, when you pump  your own time and $$$ into a site you can make those calls, ridiculous or not. 

For your second point while I appreciate the hard work and effort of the people running these sites, what is the point of having a stepford site? Besides I thought the problem was some of the moderators enforcement went a little overboard. This was apparent even when the registration was reopened IMO.

No one was banned for being Anti Norm. Some people got so angry at Norm that they didn't follow the coc and went at it with other posters.

I can pretty much name every poster that got banned and I'm friends with some of them like Tommysea and Newsie and I have no problem admitting that at the time there was just cause. The only Anti Norm who got banned which might not have been kosher ( a shout out to my jewish friends today ) was Marillac.

That being said I didn't like when people get banned ( especially Newsie aka Krusty for Religion and Politic forum purposes) because I for one like the reading of the arguments and the personal threats etc. Not to mention that I had met people like Tommysea and Newsie in person and like them a lot. But I think even they'd admit their frustration with Norm that they had earlier than others including myself got the worst out of them sometimes

But that being said when you post on someones site it is that owners property and you follow their rules. There wasn't 1 poster who got banned that wasn't warned beforehand. If we don't like the rules we don't have to post

A new coach brings new optimism and now everyone is friends again and unfortunately I'm forced to wait for the rare golden argument moment like LINY's missing tee shirt thread

  Marillac got banned?

 Not for this , i hope?


 http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-body-issue-2011-9#in-2010-wnba-star-diana-taurasi-was-on-the-cover-7

  Marillac got banned?

 Not for this , i hope?


 http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-body-issue-2011-9#in-2010-wnba-star-diana-taurasi-was-on-the-cover-7

Close. I think it was the other picture that surfaced from this same photo shoot with a tattoo in her pelvic area that said " BH was here "

No one was banned for being Anti Norm. Some people got so angry at Norm that they didn't follow the coc and went at it with other posters.

I can pretty much name every poster that got banned and I'm friends with some of them like Tommysea and Newsie and I have no problem admitting that at the time there was just cause. The only Anti Norm who got banned which might not have been kosher ( a shout out to my jewish friends today ) was Marillac.

That being said I didn't like when people get banned ( especially Newsie aka Krusty for Religion and Politic forum purposes) because I for one like the reading of the arguments and the personal threats etc. Not to mention that I had met people like Tommysea and Newsie in person and like them a lot. But I think even they'd admit their frustration with Norm that they had earlier than others including myself got the worst out of them sometimes

But that being said when you post on someones site it is that owners property and you follow their rules. There wasn't 1 poster who got banned that wasn't warned beforehand. If we don't like the rules we don't have to post

A new coach brings new optimism and now everyone is friends again and unfortunately I'm forced to wait for the rare golden argument moment like LINY's missing tee shirt thread

Not true. I and other posters I know were banned for no good reason and without even one advanced warning. Reason given was something to the effect "it has been determined that you bring nothing positive to this site". Bannings were way way over the top and I am glad they became more reasonable.

Quote from: mjmaherjr on September 28, 2011, 05:48:47 PM

No one was banned for being Anti Norm. Some people got so angry at Norm that they didn't follow the coc and went at it with other posters.

I can pretty much name every poster that got banned and I'm friends with some of them like Tommysea and Newsie and I have no problem admitting that at the time there was just cause. The only Anti Norm who got banned which might not have been kosher ( a shout out to my jewish friends today ) was Marillac.

That being said I didn't like when people get banned ( especially Newsie aka Krusty for Religion and Politic forum purposes) because I for one like the reading of the arguments and the personal threats etc. Not to mention that I had met people like Tommysea and Newsie in person and like them a lot. But I think even they'd admit their frustration with Norm that they had earlier than others including myself got the worst out of them sometimes

But that being said when you post on someones site it is that owners property and you follow their rules. There wasn't 1 poster who got banned that wasn't warned beforehand. If we don't like the rules we don't have to post

A new coach brings new optimism and now everyone is friends again and unfortunately I'm forced to wait for the rare golden argument moment like LINY's missing tee shirt thread

Not true. I and other posters I know were banned for no good reason and without even one advanced warning. Reason given was something to the effect "it has been determined that you bring nothing positive to this site". Bannings were way way over the top and I am glad they became more reasonable.

Who were you on redmen ?