What is acceptable material for these boards?

[BillVol]

I've often wanted to ask about shoes, training methods, recruiting, less important news RE: track, etc., but I'm not sure these topics would "fit" on these boards.

For example, sprinter Jonathan Wade of Tennessee was hurt and is being redshirted for football. I just don't think most people give a darn about that. But maybe some would.

Are there some guidelines for what we should post here?

[Jon]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

Who would have thought that so many people would be interested in "reaction times", "Alan frickin' Webb", "Track and Field songs", "6 minute miles", "Ana Guevara's return to Mexico"... etc etc....

Bottom line is - if it's to do with track and field, anything goes.

[BillVol]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

Or Gabe Jennings... ;-) Thanks!

[gh]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

All those topics are most welcome.. so much so that this has been moved from the Historical side to Current Events, for maximal exposure.

[Jefferson Buffalo]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

>All those topics are most welcome.. so much so
that this has been moved from the Historical side
to Current Events, for maximal exposure.<

Maximal exposure? Doesn't that message belong on the Lobinger thread?

[Guest]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

"Maximal Exposure"! I think he might have ment maximum exposure. Maximal, as defined, pertains to maximum. It's a forgivable error with proper editing.

[jhc68]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

It's all good, but can't we all agree to lay off Alan Webb, reaction times and Wilt Chamberlain?

[Guest]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

Hey mon, bring back Usain Bolt!

[Jefferson Buffalo]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

>"Maximal Exposure"! I think he might have ment
maximum exposure.<

I think you might have meant meant.

[tandfman]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

>"Maximal Exposure"! I think he might have ment
maximum exposure. Maximal, as defined, pertains
to maximum. It's a forgivable error with proper
editing.<

No, actually, I think he meant exactly what he said. My dictionary defines maximal as "highest, greatest."

And I'm sure Jefferson Buffalo knew what gh said and meant, and Buffalo meant exactly what he said, which was of course a little joke, based on the reference to exposure.

No errors to forgive. (Well, there was your misspelling of meant, but we forgive that.)

[MJR]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

Just avoid the 7 words you can't say on radio....

[BillVol]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

My wife was putting together a mailing for our damned little store and spelled "wacky" in a way I'd never seen it: whacky. I said she had made an error, that there is no h. She said she had seen it spelled that way before (with an h). I said, no, whack means to hit. Wacky, as in crazy, has no h. I told her I'd go to dictionary.com to prove her wrong. Wouldn't you know it, they had "whacky" as a "variant" of wacky. The lesson here is to double check the dictionary before telling someone they have spelled a word incorrectly. I learned that the hard way!

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=maximal

[tandfman]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

Even MWII recognizes whacky as a variant of wacky.

[The Flash]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

>I've often wanted to ask about shoes, training
>methods, recruiting, less important news RE:
>track, etc., but I'm not sure these topics would
>"fit" on these boards.

For example,
>sprinter Jonathan Wade of Tennessee was hurt and
>is being redshirted for football. I just don't
>think most people give a darn about that. But
>maybe some would.

Are there some guidelines
>for what we should post here?

And I agree with Jon...look at all the replies to threads that I'm not that interested in: Alan Webb--everyday!, reaction times, etc. To a point, I'm interested in all track stories, but enough about Alan Webb already!

I would welcome these topics as an occasional change of scenery.

[Guest]

Re: What is acceptable material for these boards?

And I agree with Jon...look at all the
>replies to threads that I'm not that interested
>in: Alan Webb--everyday!, reaction times, etc.
>To a point, I'm interested in all track
>k stories, but enough about Alan Webb
>already!

I would welcome these topics as an
>occasional change of scenery.

The nice thing about message boards is that you can pick and choose what you tune into. Why does it bother you that Alan Webb is a topic of discussion? If you aren't interested don't look at it. I can list reasons I think the Alan Webb discussion is important and interesting but that would start a new Webb thread would apparently would upset you.