Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's your top 10?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: What's your top 10?

    There has been plenty of chit-chat and gossip on these boards. There was a thread about favorite beers a few months ago.

    There was nothing wrong with my topic. It's something that everybody on here has noticed at a meet on TV or in person.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: What's your top 10?

      "Most attractive athletics women?

      Most attractive athletics men?

      Is this PC enough?

      Why are these being zapped? I need an answer!"


      Don't worry BillVol; the posting policy on this site is about as consistent as Al Gore's message during an election year.

      I myself am awaiting a reply from Garry Hill/Ben Hall on another thread regarding why it is alright to speculate about specific baseball players using steroids but not about specific track athletes using steroids.

      I have received no response thus far, which is par for the course when the message board censors know they are wrong and don't want to admit it.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: What's your top 10?

        Before we turn this thread into a gripe-fest, perhaps we need to revisit the letsrun, iaaf, sub-10 or dyestat boards and see what it's like over there. I'll tell you that it's not a pretty sight (site). I can live with this 'censorship' if that's the price to keep THIS site from degenerating into the utter crap that's over there. I thought my expressed desire to have lunch with Stacy D was totally innocuous, but it got ripped - big whoop. You all have to admit we have it so much better here than those other boards.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: What's your top 10?

          tn:

          I don't have a problem with censorship either; there certainly should be some, and I also have no desire for this board to turn into a LetsRun free-for-all.

          What I DO have a problem with is the inconsistent posting policy.

          If you don't want unfounded accusations on the message board, fine; just make sure you delete the non-track ones as well as the track ones. If you don't, it's totally hypocritical.

          As it currently stands, it seems that athletes from all other sports are open to any and all unfounded accusations, while the (supposedly) pristine track athletes are immune to such criticism.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: What's your top 10?

            >RMc, what happened to Ron Clarke's heart?

            Clarke was diagnosed with a leaky congenital heart valve a few years ago. It apparently reduced his cardiac output by about 15%. He a valve replacement operation. BTW, my old college coach, Brian Maxwell who ran 2:11, had the same condition, and also had a valve replacement.

            Perhaps a few names could be different on
            >the list; at 26 years old I'm not as familiar
            >with the runners before my time. My
            >understanding is Ron Clarke is well thought of
            >by all, a legend in fact for his heavy racing
            >and training. I was meaning to catch the
            >runners in my list who have achieved greatly,
            >yet for one reason or another are strongly
            >looked down upon by particular segments of track
            >fans.

            I think many felt that Clarke was unable to rise to the highest competitive level because he never won an international gold medal, even at the Commonwealth Games.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: What's your top 10?

              What I DO have a problem
              >with is the inconsistent posting policy.

              Well then, on your message board, you can have whatever consistent/inconsistent posting policy you want. It may sound harsh, but I don't see it stated anywhere that TnFN staffers are obligated to justify their actions to internet 'No Names'.

              If you do not like their implementations, then you are free to take your shot, discuss, javelin and hurdles and go home.

              This is not a free speech issue but rather driven by market forces. If enough people are turned off by the way a message board is managed, then that could have an impact on the commercial popularity of the publication. Alternatively, if enough people like the board, then that enhances the market niche image the 'Bible of the Sport' attempts to inhabit.

              Beyond a first time letting them know you aren't happy with something they have or haven't done, I think you're taking it all a little too seriously to be repeatedly demanding that your apparently anonymous complaints be addressed.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: What's your top 10?

                >Most attractive athletics women?

                Most
                >attractive athletics men?

                Is this PC
                >enough?

                Why are these being zapped? I need an
                >answer!>>

                The internet has endless sites where one can act out adolescent sex fantasies. This isn't one of them. There will be no "hot chicks" threads here. Call it PC if you want; we call it common courtesy not to treat women as objects.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: What's your top 10?

                  "Well then, on your message board, you can have whatever consistent/inconsistent posting policy you want. It may sound harsh, but I don't see it stated anywhere that TnFN staffers are obligated to justify their actions to internet 'No Names'."

                  No, they're not obligated to justify their actions; it just makes them seem like hypocrites when they forbid anyone to speculate about track athletes and allow an avalanche of unfounded rumors about MLB players, NLF players et. al.

                  "If you do not like their implementations, then you are free to take your shot, discuss, javelin and hurdles and go home."

                  Thanks for your permission to go home, I appreciate it; also, I never competed in any of those events.

                  "This is not a free speech issue but rather driven by market forces. If enough people are turned off by the way a message board is managed, then that could have an impact on the commercial popularity of the publication. Alternatively, if enough people like the board, then that enhances the market niche image the 'Bible of the Sport' attempts to inhabit."

                  So, have you done some sophisticated market research that suggests that the subscription base of T&FN would decline markedly if people speculated about Flo-Jo on this board?

                  "Beyond a first time letting them know you aren't happy with something they have or haven't done, I think you're taking it all a little too seriously to be repeatedly demanding that your apparently anonymous complaints be addressed."

                  As you've seen over the past few weeks, one post usually isn't enough to get them to respond. It typically takes a number of posts on my part to bring a reply from T&FN.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: What's your top 10?

                    Hey No Name give it a rest - DL came up with a great topic for this thread and you've managed to turn it into your own bitch-fest. Why ruin a good thread?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: What's your top 10?

                      No, they're not obligated to justify
                      >their actions; it just makes them seem like
                      >hypocrites when they forbid anyone to speculate
                      >about track athletes and allow an avalanche of
                      >unfounded rumors about MLB players, NLF players
                      >et. al.

                      So you see them as hypocrites. It is their site.

                      Thanks for your permission to go home,
                      >I appreciate it; also, I never competed in any of
                      >those events.

                      Neither did I, but with the exception of relay races, there isn't much in the way of implements in track races. Maybe I should have listed spikes?

                      So, have you done some
                      >sophisticated market research that suggests that
                      >the subscription base of T&FN would decline
                      >markedly if people speculated about Flo-Jo on
                      >this board?

                      It's got nothing to do with whether definitive numbers on subscription could be proven. Like all commercial endeavours, TnFN creates an image or personality for themselves. It may be good, it may be hypocritical, it may be pathetic. They determine what their image will be and the capitalist, consuming public decides whether they want to be associated with that image (and the content that goes along with it). Maybe they could change the image they project to focusing on gratuitous 'up skirt' photos from track meets (and we're talking more voyeuristic than all-Stacy all the time) and maybe that would double their circulation. They've chosen not to pursue that avenue. Part of their image is defined by their website and the message boards as a subset.

                      Their commercial endeavour, their decision on how to run it.

                      As you've seen over the past few
                      >weeks, one post usually isn't enough to get them
                      >to respond. It typically takes a number of posts
                      >on my part to bring a reply from T&FN.

                      But as I stated before, they are not responsible to you to respond to your complaints. Just as you are free to stop perusing the boards if you don't like the way they are run, they do not have to justify or explain themselves to you or me. Given how much you pay to be able to engage in the discussions on the boards, I think it is awfully presumptuous to expect that you get personal attention from the board owners.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: What's your top 10?

                        Back to the original thread...

                        My top ten best US college coaches. Coaches who are merely as I like to call them, bus-drivers, do not rank high on my list. Anyone can take a few elites and win titles. Show me a coach who can develop athletes.

                        1. John McDonnell - Arkansas
                        2. Ron Mann - Northern Arizona
                        3. Mark Guthrie - UW Lacrosse
                        4. Dick Booth - Arkansas
                        5. Mouse Holloway - Florida
                        6. J.J. Clark - Tennessee
                        7. Damon Martin - Adams State
                        8. Rick Sloan - Washington State
                        9. Chick Hislop - Weber State
                        10.Bill Carson - East Carolina

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: What's your top 10?

                          The internet has endless
                          >sites where one can act out adolescent sex
                          >fantasies. This isn't one of them. There will be
                          >no "hot chicks" threads here. Call it PC if you
                          >want; we call it common courtesy not to treat
                          >women as objects.

                          Are you saying I'm exhibiting an adolescent sex fantasy here on Track & Field News message board? If so, that's absurd. You damn right I'll call it PC. And I resent being accused of treating women as sex objects. This is bullshit.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: What's your top 10?

                            On a documentary of Wilma Rudolph, Jesse Ownens said that President John F. Kennedy was taken aback by the beauty of Wilma Rudolph. This when some Olympians visited the White House. Said JFK was almost speechless. Shame on Jesse for bringing that up. Shame on both of them for noticing how beautiful Wilma Rudolph was.

                            What is worse: the thread discussing attractive track athletes (the former thread) or you, Garry, constantly talking about the drinking of beer? (Your "K20" hat. Drinking the Swiss beer at a European meet. Having beer for breakfast at the worlds. Etc.) In fact a lot of posts here have glorified the drinking of alcoholic beverages. There are kids reading these boards, I'm sure. Why are these posts allowed to stand, but my harmless post is zapped?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: What's your top 10?

                              Without fail any post about best looking/hottest/most attractive women in the sport will instantly degrade into whether a poster gets to go to have sex with someone on the list. Your own intentions may be genuine enough but those that follow will not be so well intentioned. Such a post is the beginning of a path we're not going to go down.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: What's your top 10?

                                Well mines are:
                                1.Flo-jo
                                2.Marion Jones
                                3.Regina Jacobs
                                4.Carl Lewis
                                5.Micheal Johnson
                                6.Maurice Green
                                7.Allyson Felix
                                8.Sanya Richards

                                Well it's not ten but it's my list anyways.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X