New Policy on "Inside Info" - Please Read

Have questions or seeking answers regarding anything to do with NET Nation? Here's the place. RATING: PG
  • .NET Community
    Because of the amount of people we've been seeing coming through .NET lately claiming in some fashion to have "insider info" on various subjects, I felt it was necessary to create a new policy which defines when and how these types of claims will be allowed.

    Regardless of where our community comes down on this topic, the fact is that we are viewed as a one-stop shop for seeing what's happening with our team, and we've seen too many times where random people claim to know something or someone and it helps to spread false information. We want to keep our main forum a place for legitimate Seahawks news and talk, not for rumor-mongering from anyone claiming to be in the know.

    As always, if a rumor is reported by a legitimate media source, please feel free to create a topic and discuss away. This policy is only to discourage .NET users claiming they know something without any accountability to the validity. We hope to at least provide substance to these claims with this policy.

    As such, the following has been added to the official FAQ/Rules section. Please let me know via PM if you have any questions or concerns about this. Thanks.

    **Posting information from inside sources**

    If you claim a confidential source, prior to posting you must contact Seahawks.NET owner RockHawk and have your source verified. Verification is quick and completely confidential and will not put your source at risk.

    If your source checks out .net will allow postings citing a confidential source with our support.

    All other posts citing inside sources will be deleted without explanation.
    Image
    Les - "Mark, you're my favorite player"
    Mark - "Mine too!"
    User avatar
    RockHawk
    * NET Landlord *
     
    Posts: 4038
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:23 am
    Location: Owner's Box


  • OK Mark, just shot the little birdie so it won't be talking to me anymore, :D But seriously, sounds like a good idea. :179422:
    Why is it when I try to come off as a smart ass, the opposite happens? :-(
    User avatar
    grizbob
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 2334
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:17 am
    Location: Born in Oakharbor, raised in the west, sentenced to life in St George


  • Perfectly reasonable.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11309
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • I have a source that likes this idea.
    @SeahawkGreg

    Image

    "I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan
    User avatar
    FlyingGreg
    * Master Chief *
    * Master Chief *
     
    Posts: 7534
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: CVN-68


  • Great. Now posters are subject to accountability. This will significantly hamper my contributions.
    User avatar
    Hawk Finn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1186
    Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:44 am


  • What this means in practical terms:

    1. For the person who has a source and gets checked out before posting: There's no need to publicly disclose any information about your source, although you can certainly do that if you like.

    2. For members: If someone is citing a 'source' and the post does not disappear relatively quickly, then there's no rhyme or reason to questioning whether or not the poster has a legitimate source. The actual information and how solid/reliable/subject to change it might be, that's certainly a valid line of discussion, but the fact the person has a source should not be in question as the owner (Rockhawk) is allowing it. If you want staff to give you 'proof' or something, well that ain't happening.

    3. For people who want to claim sources without getting checked out: **Highly inadvisable**
    RIP Les. We will miss you.
    User avatar
    Happy
    * NET Lead Admin *
     
    Posts: 8594
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • I know a guy, who knows a guy, who said there is gonna be some new rule or something at .NET. Keep your eyes open and your arrows sharp.
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 7093
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • IDK? I though it was always kinda fun not knowing what was truth or not. Now when it's posted from an inside source it will be "validated" and wouldn't that put the poster & insider at more risk?

    So i'm curious back in 02 my co-worker had some dirt on Jeremey Stevens, said he beat some guy with a bat. If i posted something like that now would that get deleted?

    I recently had another co-worker who went to high school with Crabtree and told me he was into some drugs and was kinda a bad seed/thug. How would you validate my source? Would i not be able to post that info?

    Seems a little strict and takes some of the fun/mystery out of things
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2180
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • FlyingGreg wrote:I have a source that likes this idea.

    JesterHawk wrote:I know a guy, who knows a guy, who said there is gonna be some new rule or something at .NET. Keep your eyes open and your arrows sharp.

    My source found these jokes to be humorous.
    Image
    User avatar
    Guardian
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1233
    Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:51 am
    Location: Minneapolis, MN


  • Wenhawk wrote:IDK? I though it was always kinda fun not knowing what was truth or not. Now when it's posted from an inside source it will be "validated" and wouldn't that put the poster & insider at more risk?

    So i'm curious back in 02 my co-worker had some dirt on Jeremey Stevens, said he beat some guy with a bat. If i posted something like that now would that get deleted?

    I recently had another co-worker who went to high school with Crabtree and told me he was into some drugs and was kinda a bad seed/thug. How would you validate my source? Would i not be able to post that info?

    Seems a little strict and takes some of the fun/mystery out of things


    Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Presenting hearsay rumor, ESPECIALLY stuff about a player's private life, will not be tolerated here. Period.

    But when it comes to football-related rumors like "I have a source that guarantees we will be drafting player X in the first round", the validation can be done without ever actually telling me who the source is. Validation is easy if it's someone in the organization itself as I have a tried & true method for validation this without EVER even talking with them. If the source isn't from within the organization (as in your examples of a neighbor or co-worker), it's going to be a much harder validation. But if the source & info is legitimate, I can corroborate the info with some of my contacts who would KNOW these to be true or not, regardless of if the front office wanted the info to be publicly known. Once I confirm if what your neighbor is saying has roots within the organization, I'll give the green light.

    I know some of you have mentioned that you enjoy having people bring these types of source info up because this is an internet message board and not the Associated Press. I get that, but in the end with what we've seen in the past year, the people claiming these sources ended up being nothing more than attention spotlight-seeking idiots that made something up and hoped it would pan out. This rule simply allows us to validate the sources claims (not the source themselves) without having to wait to find out if it's true or not.
    Image
    Les - "Mark, you're my favorite player"
    Mark - "Mine too!"
    User avatar
    RockHawk
    * NET Landlord *
     
    Posts: 4038
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:23 am
    Location: Owner's Box


  • Well, that pretty much shoots the hell out of that little voice that keeps talking to me in my head, OR DOESE IT??, it is after all, "AN INSIDE SOURCE" :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3630
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Sources close to me tell me that this is a good idea!
    Hawkfan509
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 1040
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:09 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities


  • RockHawk wrote:Validation is easy if it's someone in the organization itself as I have a tried & true method for validation this without EVER even talking with them. If the source isn't from within the organization (as in your examples of a neighbor or co-worker), it's going to be a much harder validation. But if the source & info is legitimate, I can corroborate the info with some of my contacts who would KNOW these to be true or not, regardless of if the front office wanted the info to be publicly known.


    I'd like to confirm these sources of yours. :twisted:
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11309
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • Rock, how about a stickied thread (or an addition to an existing stickied thread) of people that have one or more confirmed sources by you? Just a simple list for the rest of us to verify who's legit and who's full of it; something like:

    List of posters with one or more confirmed sources by RockHawk:
    BFS
    English
    etc.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26403
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • Where there's smoke, there's fire - and if someone has a source and the news breaks here, I think it's worthwhile to verify the source. In reality, most newsworthy items will probably break somewhere else (like Twitter for example). I think it's just as necessary to name the referring public source when someone wants to be the first poster on Seahawks.NET.
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1443
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


  • I'm sure most here will believe this rule change is "for someone else". :141847_bnono:

    For those of you that want a place to post pure rumors and trash talk you already have a place, 2 places actually. The Smack Shack and the PWR Forums. Trust me wild ass rumors abound in those places.

    :roll:
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


  • Very cool. I appreciate the effort to keep this place legit & organized while fun as well. Thanks, Rock & mods.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkAroundTheClock
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1552
    Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:30 pm
    Location: Olympia


  • Is this a news outlet or a fan forum?

    You're the big cheese and all. Just seems like more of a headache for you.

    Then again, we can never have enough regulations in the world. :sarcasm_off:
    BigMikeWill17:
    Its ok if you're a Hawks fan and didn't believe we would be division champs.. Just don't let it happen again. Hahahah
    User avatar
    Frostbyte
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 106
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:56 pm


  • Frostbyte wrote:Is this a news outlet or a fan forum?

    You're the big cheese and all. Just seems like more of a headache for you.

    Then again, we can never have enough regulations in the world. :sarcasm_off:


    IMO, it's a bit of both. I tend to get most of my news here and I for the most part things posted here as news are pretty solid. I hear stuff here before it hits the ESPNs of the world sometimes. You can speculate all you want, just don't pretend you've got a source who "knows" something if you don't.

    We have plenty of fan speculation going on and guys just spewing their opinions, but if people start throwing around mysterious sources it dilutes the "news" portion of the site.
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 7093
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • While I understand where you are coming from. I am not going to reveal who has given me the info. No more inside scoop from this guy.
    Image
    "Hit it and regret it later" -Ron Burnett (My Grandfather)
    IHateSleeves
    * NET Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 404
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:00 am


  • The Radish wrote: the PWR Forums.


    what is this mysterious place you speak of?
    Image
    User avatar
    muxpux
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2787
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:26 pm
    Location: Longview, WA


  • muxpux wrote:
    The Radish wrote: the PWR Forums.


    what is this mysterious place you speak of?



    Hey MP, sorry to use big words.

    :D
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


  • Source, what's a source?
    C-Hawk12
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 130
    Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:32 pm




It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:15 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE NET NATION FAQ FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests