All good things must come to an end

[chris98251]

Well this is suppose to be the anti-shack, and Random thoughts was a great write that promoted or I should say was suppose to promote insight for Discussions, thats not to say people could not have a different perspective. Its those that would go too far and attack the thought without providing any reasoning, or instead of the thought go after the person in a way, whether its Kearly or a responder.

I don't think you can have a Topic and open it up for discussion without dissenting opinions.

Maybe a thought would be Kearlys Random thoughts and a post a question thread in addition if your going to treat it as a Editorial type synopsis allowing Kearly to respond to those questions that are of substance, or what may be considered the top 10 in some way.

Or the next person that takes on a roll similar.

Anyway, Thanks Kearly for the time you have taken and given to us.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Good luck, Kip.

 

[olyfan63]

How about I agree to start a thread every week and put my name on it and amuse myself with my incoherent ramblings, and then you can come in about three posts later and do your thing? Everybody wins, right?

I would love it if you did that. Kearly first called my attention to your writings, no doubt in an RT thread, and I quickly noticed about you (other than your classic Al Bundy avatar) the terrific insight, football knowledge, and constructive nature of your posts.

Kearly also pointed out ScotteMojo's posts, and boom! there was another guy I always paid special attention to. There are probably at least half a dozen or more posters most .Netters would include in that rarified air; it just happens you and Scotte are the ones I took special note of due to Kearly.

Expanding on that idea... If NFL teams can have a "running back by committee", why can't Seahawks.Net have a "Random Thoughts by committee?"* A couple-three of our prize .NET'ers could PM an article back and forth after a game, with additions and edits, by areas of specialty, e.g., offense, defense, position groups, or whatever organization aproach made sense, and one to call it done and send it out. I bet we'd have a pretty darn good result.

* I don't think we should call it Random Thoughts. Like Seahawks retiring the #80 jersey, there is only one Kearly and Random Thoughts (tm) should always be associated with him.

Really, what Kearly has been, is our own beloved .NET "columnist" with a regular and much-awaited weekly Random Thoughts article.

The columnist approach gets a bit tricky because part of the appeal of .NET is being able to interact in such threads, even for posters who write ridiculous things and make ad hominem attacks. Ridiculous things can be amusing, or a waste of space, but ongoing ad hominem attacks take the fun right out of everything.

Another factor is the need to keep things SIMPLE on the .NET administrative side. We all have complex lives, so I would hope there would be a SIMPLE way to have a football-knowledge-oriented, constructive thread "column", that was well within the technology capabilities of the .NET board software.

Perhaps our board moderators/admins can come up with both a technical, political, and board-content-organization structure approach for "regular columns", that makes contributing more satisfying for columnists. Possibly the columnist and a few of his (or her!) delegates are the admins, and can remove any posts or comments that violate the spirit of their column space. In Kearly's case, he would have no doubt erred on the side of being too kind and too fair to knuckleheads, and not want to spend his attention and energy that way. "He's just all about creating that great content, boss." A delegate-admin approach would be the better choice for his columns. Possibly the approach could feature the columnists' content in a way that limits the "attack surface" for angry and intoxicated knuckleheads to chime in with their ad hominem spew.

I'm sure there are numerous people in the .NET community who could figure out better ways than I've thought of to make the regular-featured columnist approach work within .NET. I would love to see that happen, and for more "columnists" to emerge with insightful content, with less ad hominem attacks involved. If this posts helps trigger some ideas, wonderful.

 

[olyfan63]

Why not create a Seahawks civil discussion forum for everyone where the first ad hominem post bans the poster for one year? Same rule for everyone.

I really like the general idea, but I thought the main forum was supposed to be that civil discussion area.
I wrote up some of my own "random notes" in reply to Tical21's post in this thread, basically asking if the board software environment and structure and politics could be finagled to support the idea of .NET "featured columnists", which is really what we have had, with Kearly. Simply another way to approach the same objective.

 

[olyfan63]

I know how you feel, often times I feel like I wasted my time trying to write up some good stuff only to end up being mocked and laughed at by what seems like the majority.

One thing to keep in mind is that negative people make a much bigger statement when it comes to internet discussions. For example 99% of people might enjoy your posts but 1% of them turns into several very loud negative people.

I think you do a great job even though I don't agree with everything you say. I think you should keep doing it and just forget the haters. Sometimes I get caught up with it and start getting into arguments with people who respond to my posts. But if even 1 person says they enjoyed your posts it's all worth it in my opinion, and I'm sure a lot of people enjoy yours (the vast majority) so hope you don't let the minority negative posters get you down.

When you started here, many of your posts WERE so knee-jerk reactive, emotional, and full of amateur attempts at micro-managing the NFL professionals, that they were often downright funny, for unintentional reasons.

Lately, your posts are still knee-jerk reactive (though less so), emotional, but now filled with mostly plausible, and sometimes downright insightful and thought-provoking football content. You know the team way better now. I enjoyed your recent thread discussing how the 'Hawks could easily still win the division and why other teams (e.g. Arizona) would get reeled back in and passed by the Seahawks.

Keep doing what you do, keep learning, keep working on that thick skin + sense of humor. I suggest a weekly thread name like "Tokadub's Monday Morning Overreaction". Last I knew, the local radio station hadn't successfully trademarked "Overreaction Monday", so you should be good to go with the "Monday Morning Overreaction" title. It would be a fool's errand to try to be another Kearly; there's only one, and your strengths are in different areas anyway, so go with them.

 

[netskier]

Olyfan,

What? Is this really supposed to be the civil discussion area? I need to go read the rules, which I skipped. Where are they please? I find this Tapatalk app hard to use on my phone.

Is the policy here really zero tolerance for ad hominem argumentation? It does not feel like that, but rather that many warnings are given before banning. Kids will push the limits, so ban for a year immediately on the first ad hominem offense. Let them read for one year without posting to give them time to grow up.

 

[olyfan63]

Olyfan,

What? Is this really supposed to be the civil discussion area?
...
Is the policy here really zero tolerance for ad hominem argumentation? It does not feel like that, but rather that many warnings are given before banning. Kids will push the limits, so ban for a year immediately on the first ad hominem offense. Let them read for one year without posting to give them time to grow up.

*In comparison to* The Shack, this would appear to be marketed as .NET's *civil discussion* area.
Definitions of "civil discussion" can and do vary greatly.

A year ban would seem excessive for a poster who is having a bad day and posts something a little meaner than appropriate. In theory, we are all (mostly? 18+ but probably not all) adults, and can handle a few opinionated disagreements every now and then. Again, definitions of "civil discussion" can and do vary greatly.

Numerous other sites have a model of escalating posting privileges that must be earned over time. A great one I use, called Stack Overflow, doesn't allow newbies to post comments until they reach 50 points, which requires persistent effort, help to other users of the site, and support/points awarded by other participants who've found their contributions helpful. Their specific approach is probably not technically feasible here, but it's a useful model to keep in mind.

 

[SouthSoundHawk]

Good job asshats, now we have one less awesome thread a week...at a place where great threads are few and far between.

Time to start blocking fools that speak ill of Kip...chances are they're not worth the time of day any how.

 

[seedhawk]

When most of us say we watched the game, what we really did was just watch the ball. Kip watched the GAME, and then put his thoughts and impressions front and center for all of us to read. RT will be missed.

 

[pehawk]

There's something to be said for policing ourselves a bit. If we want this place to be "better", it takes effort. Create a post that's about discussion instead of self aggrandizement or affirmation.

Kearly laid out an example of good discussion.

 

[ImTheScientist]

This is the second time I have seen him go all Brett Favre and retire....he will be back. I do feel those types of posts are better off being on a blog especially if people that disagree with your posts get to you. Message boards always encourage back and forth discussion which always leads to disagreement.

 

[NM-Hawk]

Bummer.....I never post have enjoyed reading yours over the years.

 

[Slick]

Thanks for all the great insights! I'm not a robust commenter so I enjoyed the quality of your RTs and hopefully you continue to post other topics and replies.

Without RTs, I have NOTHING too look forward to after a Seahawks loss except for playing with thy self.

 

[cnjvh]

Why not just have the mods lock your threads? Why do the rest of us have to suffer because of the clowns that can't keep their mouths shut and recognize a good thing?

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Couldn't agree more. Just post a locked thread. I love the Random Thoughts posts. First thing I read after a game. I don't have the football knowledge to always know why things went right or wrong in a game and I love reading the insights of someone who does.

 

[volsunghawk]

I always appreciated the time and effort you put into RT, Kip. I'm surprised you stuck with it as long as you did, considering the slings and arrows that were often sent your way. Totally understand your decision.

 

[HawkGA]

Before anyone asks, I have no interest in continuing these posts on a blog. I don't have that kind of time or energy anymore, and besides, I think it's been a good run.

If you change your mind, be sure to let me know the blog address! As somebody who no longer watches games, I get most of my information from your posts. Gonna suck to lose it. I've been more of a lurker when it comes to football stuff because most people know more x's and o's stuff than I do. That said, now I wish I'd posted more to at least do my part to drown out the bitchers.

 

[HawkGA]

There's something to be said for policing ourselves a bit. If we want this place to be "better", it takes effort. Create a post that's about discussion instead of self aggrandizement or affirmation.

Kearly laid out an example of good discussion.

I'm tempted to start a thread bitching about the bitchers.

 

[RolandDeschain]

That sucks for us, Kearly - but that is just being selfish on our part. I get why you're done with it, and don't blame you.

Sorry to see it go for more than just the loss of personal entertainment and information reasons, though.

 

[DavidSeven]

That's a shame, but completely understandable. You're right; the RT threads were a great place to breed discussion, and your cogent thoughts immediately after the game obviously served as the catalyst for a lot of great analysis from other posters. I'll miss those threads but will continue to look forward to reading your "random thoughts" spread throughout the forum. Maybe, one day, we'll be able to twist your arm back into it.

 

[Tical21]

How about I agree to start a thread every week and put my name on it and amuse myself with my incoherent ramblings, and then you can come in about three posts later and do your thing? Everybody wins, right?

I would love it if you did that. Kearly first called my attention to your writings, no doubt in an RT thread, and I quickly noticed about you (other than your classic Al Bundy avatar) the terrific insight, football knowledge, and constructive nature of your posts.

Kearly also pointed out ScotteMojo's posts, and boom! there was another guy I always paid special attention to. There are probably at least half a dozen or more posters most .Netters would include in that rarified air; it just happens you and Scotte are the ones I took special note of due to Kearly.

Constructive nature? I think you've got me confused. I sincerely thank you for the compliment, but I don't deserve to be held in this regard. You're talking about folks here that have contributed much more both in terms of longevity and substance. Heck, I don't even know that I've watched an entire game yet this year. I tend to be loud and more brash and the biggest difference between these posters and myself is that I tend to rub a lot of people the wrong way, and I am not above getting in pissing matches to try to convince somebody I'm right, which could spell doom and gloom for any attempt of mine to try to lead any post-game discussion.