LU v Pitt
Re: LU v Pitt
well, that contributed zip, mthawk, thx for your 'effort' ... heck, if both spladle & I left, this thing might put all of you to sleep. Show of hands: if I suddenly became more negative online, would that improve LU wrestling?
-
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:04 am
- Contact:
Re: LU v Pitt
Here's a bulletin for you: THERE IS NOTHING THAT TAKES PLACE ON THIS BOARD THAT MAKES LEHIGH WRESTLING BETTER OR WORSE.
Not even the gloriousness of you.
Not even the gloriousness of you.
Re: LU v Pitt
Probably not true. I thought you made a bunch of posts last week that we were highly supportive of the program, that encouraged posters to relax and move on. I happen to think encouraging fans to man up is a good thing. Young or old. The kind of thing that encourages hs parents and recruits to consider joining our 'family.' I've met a number of eventual parents who agreed with that. I'm certainly aware that the relationship between me and another poster represents a stain on that sense of family
-
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:04 am
- Contact:
Re: LU v Pitt
A stain on the Lehigh sense of family huh?
Either that or this is just a public message board that carries basically zero weight toward the success or failure of the Lehigh wrestling program. MH reports, you decide.
Either that or this is just a public message board that carries basically zero weight toward the success or failure of the Lehigh wrestling program. MH reports, you decide.
Re: LU v Pitt
You are correct, it doesn't matter much, although one expert poster just suggested that my posts contribute to the decline in young people being interested. And I've talked to coaches, ADs, parents & wrestlers nationally who've complained bitterly about how negative boards can be. USAW just canceled theirs, so it's pretty apparent they felt theirs was a net negative. Why don't you write them to ask them for their definition of 'net negative'?
Re: LU v Pitt
Speaking of despising such anonymous boards, why do you think the person(s) who host this one do it w/out any apparent moderator or policy on avoiding personal attacks? Obviously to generate more posts - we already admit our public IDs for ourselves and insistence on decorum killed the interim forum.
Notice the huge increase in ads ? of course we all have - because it's' all about the money, baby. Given past history of folks like Allen Brown, it wouldn't surprise me if an occasional instigator was paid by the host with various benefits. To the host w/out rules, the ONLY bottom line is profit.
Notice the huge increase in ads ? of course we all have - because it's' all about the money, baby. Given past history of folks like Allen Brown, it wouldn't surprise me if an occasional instigator was paid by the host with various benefits. To the host w/out rules, the ONLY bottom line is profit.
-
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:04 am
- Contact:
Re: LU v Pitt
You do realize this is all strictly voluntary right? Go outside and get some fresh air. All this nonsense is bordering on conspiracy theory.
Just yikes.
Just yikes.
Re: LU v Pitt
Gee, thx for reminding me it's all voluntary. But let's give each other (and this almighty forum) a break
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2024 2:35 pm
- Contact:
Re: LU v Pitt
It's concerning to see how negative online forums can deter interest in sports, including among young people. USA Wrestling's recent decision to cancel their forum indicates a recognition of this issue. While I can't contact them directly to inquire about their definition of 'net negative,' it's clear that fostering a positive and supportive environment is essential for sports communities. In my article, I'll incorporate keywords related to 'pickleball sports' to enhance its relevance and reach.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: LU v Pitt
I'm positive I like wrestling.