Tag Archives: homer central

On False Narratives (Regarding Bannings)

Posted on by
Reply

Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, geriatrician this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police. They, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz, as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, symptoms this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police. They, side effects seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, order have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz, as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, remedy this, apoplexy in addition to Item The FIrst, hospital shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the university police.

A fairly representative sample from NPR:

As the senior vice president for finance and business — which gives him oversight of university police — Schultz, 62, has been charged with covering up abuse allegations.

Note the word “oversight”. They do not say he is a cop. They know he is not a cop, as should you.

The national media, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz (and Curley), as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

And again, note from Item The First that these are just the university police. Most folks in the national media would not consider them under the umbrella “the cops”, but even if they did, you lose on Schultz not being a university “cop”.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, see this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police. They, phlebologist seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz, as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, diagnosis this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police.

A fairly representative sample from NPR:

As the senior vice president for finance and business — which gives him oversight of university police — Schultz, 62, has been charged with covering up abuse allegations.

Note the word “oversight”. They do not say he is a cop. They know he is not a cop, as should you.

The national media, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz, as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, rx this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police.

A fairly representative sample from NPR:

As the senior vice president for finance and business — which gives him oversight of university police — Schultz, plague 62, order has been charged with covering up abuse allegations.

Note the word “oversight”. They do not say he is a cop. They know he is not a cop, as should you.

The national media, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz, as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, resuscitation this shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the police.

A fairly representative sample from NPR:

As the senior vice president for finance and business — which gives him oversight of university police — Schultz, 62, has been charged with covering up abuse allegations.

Note the word “oversight”. They do not say he is a cop. They know he is not a cop, as should you.

The national media, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz (and Curley), as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 
This comment by user “OctaShields” resulted in a temporary ban that was protested vigorously for days by people who insisted that the old moderator would NEVER have banned somebody for directly attacking him:

NOTE “throbbing boner” and other such attacks.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST:

THIS comment was made from an unidentified induhdividual to that same old moderator referenced above (the one who would never ban anybody for attacking him or disagreeing with him) after a particularly distasteful personal attack was made (TO the commenter, psychiatrist not by him) a couple of comments upstream (follow the link above and use the scrollbar to see it):

NOTE: The “H” word is “homer”.

And THIS is what that commenter got immediately afterwards, orthopedist and for every visit since (years, now):

So, #teambanned, I can expect you to stop the false narrative that the old guy was a kindly overseer who didn’t care when people attacked him, right? Or that he had tolerance for dissenting points of view?


Note that over the couple of years following, several other posters were banned, and numerous others left of their own accord in response to a perception of groupthink and a general lack of support for dissent among the “community”. At the time this image above was first generated, the “community” was fairly new and it was fairly truthful for the old moderator to make the claim that he had only banned one other person; but by the time the site changed hands, that was no longer the case.

Penn State: Burn Everything Down: Item The Second

Posted on by
Reply

The predictions were here.

 

Stupid Midwesterners Division:

My predictions: Actual results:

1 kNU 6-2
2 MSU 6-2
3 Iowa 5-3
4 jNW 3-5
5 UM 3-5
6 Minny 0-8

1 MSU 7-1
2 UM 6-2
3 kNU 5-3
4 Iowa 4-4
5 jNW 3-5
6 Minny 2-6

Other than Michigan, for sale condom the Stupid Midwesterners Division panned out within a reasonable range of how I thought it would. Minny seems like wrong but they really did suck this badly. Brady Hoke did a surprisingly good job. I worry he’s going to bring them back to Carr levels fairly quickly.

Now for the Slightly Less Stupid Eastern Division:

My predictions: Actual results:

1 Wisc 8-0
2 tPSU 6-2
3 Zookers 5-3
4 tOSU 4-4
5 Indy 1-7
6 Purdue 1-7

1A Wiscy 6-2
1B tPSU 6-2
3 Purdue 4-4
4 tOSU 3-5
5 Zookers 2-6
6 Indy 0-8

(Note that for some stupid reason I ordered by in-division record, anabolics which was dumb and not correct; I have fixed it here).

Not so good here. Note: Don’t say Penn State tied for first. Wisconsin beat us head-to-head. They are 1A, doctor we’re 1B. Purdue seemed like they sucked when I watched them but they somehow exceeded expectations by a lot, while Greater Evil got deservedly pantsed. Also, Ron Zook? Why can’t I quit you?

Also, as usual, I underestimate chaos and tend to assume good teams always beat bad teams. Note to self – throw in 50% more chaos next time.
Following up to Item The First

Since M1EK is still banned from Homer Central for being substantially less of a jerk to the previous moderator than #teambanned was to the current moderator, cystitis this, and in addition to Item The FIrst, website shall serve as my response to about eleventy-billion comments of the form:

“Paterno DID report it to the police! Gary Schultz! What else was he supposed to do? Go vigilante?”

Dear fools:

Gary Schultz had financial oversight of the campus police department. He was an executive in the organization that had every incentive to cover up the crime rather than investigate it. He is NOT A COP. He does NOT WEAR A BADGE.

The media that you keep attacking for “not knowing the facts” does in fact know the fact that Schultz had financial oversight of the university police.

A fairly representative sample from NPR:

As the senior vice president for finance and business — which gives him oversight of university police — Schultz, 62, has been charged with covering up abuse allegations.

Note the word “oversight”. They do not say he is a cop. They know he is not a cop, as should you.

The national media, seeing as how they have brains that aren’t clouded by blind loyalty, have concluded, as have many of those like me, that he DOES NOT COUNT AS “THE COPS” for the reason that he, again, does not wear a badge; does not work in law enforcement; and had natural incentives to cover up the crime rather than investigate it.

And Paterno knew that. So if he only went to Schultz (and Curley), as it appears he did (stay tuned for future post blasting a hole in the “bbbbut we don’t know what else he did!” claim), he did the bare minimum required by law, but he did NOT “go to the cops” in the way most people would understand it.

And again, note from Item The First that these are just the university police. Most folks in the national media would not consider them under the umbrella “the cops”, but even if they did, you lose on Schultz not being a university “cop”.

So, homers?

Shut up. Again, just shut up. You’re making it worse every time you open your mouths.

 

 

 

Penn State: Burn Everything Down: Item The First

Posted on by
Reply

Dear sports “communities”: I really don’t have time for this. Really. But you’ve ground my gears so much I have to take three seconds away from curing cancer at my real jorb to do this for the sake of the entire internet.

I'm like a fatter, <a href=

sale better looking, hospital Peter Griffin.” width=”500″ height=”379″ />

Trolling means something.

It does not mean “an argument I don’t like”. It does not mean “an argument I think it stupid”. It does not even mean “an argument that really makes me mad”.

It means “somebody is yanking your chain on purpose, and, and this is the most important part: usually doesn’t even believe what they are saying“. The easiest way to tell if it’s a troll is if they are saying something they know is not actually true. Not a matter of opinion; not “I disagree”; but counting two things and coming up with three. Or insisting that the moon landing happened in 1968. It has a long and storied history, originally on USENET, when we called it “fishing”. How do I know this? BECAUSE I DID IT A LOT, JACKWAGONS.

Here’s a really good example (found it in like 3 seconds). I had a Michigan fan going in circles calling me stupid for not being able to count, and mispelling the name of Albert Einstien, while everybody who knew what was going on was giggling behind their own computers in their mom’s basement. (No, YOUR mom’s basement!). In threads like these, I would say “anybody can fake a web page” when refuted with something they dragged up, make my own fake web page, post it in response, and then answer “it’s impossible to fake web pages” when they’d call foul, and they’d never realize they had a hook in their mouth. Or say I had 3 reasons they were wrong, post two (numbered 1 and 2, or even better, 1 and B), then when they called me stupid for not counting correctly, I’d insist I had no idea what they were talking about, and edit the quoted material accordingly. Then, when accused of changing the post, I’d tell them they were clearly idots – because you can’t change something that’s already been posted for these 3 reasons: 1, B. Lather, rinse, repeat, catch, release.

Another good example (difficult to find proto-thread in google groups given that searches prior to 2000 appear to be only intermittently working anymore) is when I made some Nebraska fans furious by insisting that they tied Kansas that one year (1994) when they actually lost to them. I also at a slightly later point had them convinced I was a Nebraska fan by the clever fiction of signing my posts “Husker M1EK” while changing absolutely nothing else.

So that’s fishing, or trolling as you n00bs like to call it now.

Again: things that are NOT trolling: “Somebody said something that I don’t like!”, or “Somebody keeps pissing me off”, or even “Somebody keeps pissing everyone off”. If they believe what they’re saying, it’s not trolling, not really.

Doo Doo De Doooo!


Dear sports “communities”: I really don’t have time for this. Really. But you’ve ground my gears so much I have to take three seconds away from curing cancer at my real jorb to do this for the sake of the entire internet.

I'm like a fatter, <a href=

prescription better looking, Peter Griffin.” width=”500″ height=”379″ />

Trolling means something.

It does not mean “an argument I don’t like”. It does not mean “an argument I think it stupid”. It does not even mean “an argument that really makes me mad”. Which is how some people are using it these days.

Pretty sure this is Reading Rambler

Charlie Sheen fits in at BSD

It means “somebody is yanking your chain on purpose, and, and this is the most important part: usually doesn’t even believe what they are saying“. The easiest way to tell if it’s a troll is if they are saying something they know is not actually true. Not a matter of opinion; not “I disagree”; but counting two things and coming up with three. Or insisting that the moon landing happened in 1968. It has a long and storied history, originally on USENET, when we called it “fishing”. How do I know this? BECAUSE I DID IT A LOT, JACKWAGONS.

Here’s a really good example (found it in like 3 seconds). I had a Michigan fan going in circles calling me stupid for not being able to count, and mispelling the name of Albert Einstien, while everybody who knew what was going on was giggling behind their own computers in their mom’s basement. (No, YOUR mom’s basement!). In threads like these, I would say “anybody can fake a web page” when refuted with something they dragged up, make my own fake web page, post it in response, and then answer “it’s impossible to fake web pages” when they’d call foul, and they’d never realize they had a hook in their mouth. Or say I had 3 reasons they were wrong, post two (numbered 1 and 2, or even better, 1 and B), then when they called me stupid for not counting correctly, I’d insist I had no idea what they were talking about, and edit the quoted material accordingly. Then, when accused of changing the post, I’d tell them they were clearly idots – because you can’t change something that’s already been posted for these 3 reasons: 1, B. Lather, rinse, repeat, catch, release.

Another good example (difficult to find proto-thread in google groups given that searches prior to 2000 appear to be only intermittently working anymore) is when I made some Nebraska fans furious by insisting that they tied Kansas that one year (1994) when they actually lost to them. I also at a slightly later point had them convinced I was a Nebraska fan by the clever fiction of signing my posts “Husker M1EK” while changing absolutely nothing else.

So that’s fishing, or trolling as you n00bs like to call it now.

Again: things that are NOT trolling: “Somebody said something that I don’t like!”, or “Somebody keeps pissing me off”, or even “Somebody keeps pissing everyone off”. If they believe what they’re saying, it’s not trolling, not really.

Doo Doo De Doooo!


Dear sports “communities”: I really don’t have time for this. Really. But you’ve ground my gears so much I have to take three seconds away from curing cancer at my real jorb to do this for the sake of the entire internet.

I'm like a fatter, better looking, Peter Griffin.

Trolling means something.

It does not mean “an argument I don’t like”. It does not mean “an argument I think it stupid”. It does not even mean “an argument that really makes me mad”. Which is how some people are using it these days.

Pretty sure this is Reading Rambler

Charlie Sheen fits in at BSD

It means “somebody is yanking your chain on purpose, and, and this is the most important part: usually doesn’t even believe what they are saying“. The easiest way to tell if it’s a troll is if they are saying something they know is not actually true. Not a matter of opinion; not “I disagree”; but counting two things and coming up with three. Or insisting that the moon landing happened in 1968. It has a long and storied history, originally on USENET, when we called it “fishing”. How do I know this? BECAUSE I DID IT A LOT, JACKWAGONS.

Here’s a really good example (found it in like 3 seconds). I had a Michigan fan going in circles calling me stupid for not being able to count, and mispelling the name of Albert Einstien, while everybody who knew what was going on was giggling behind their own computers in their mom’s basement. (No, YOUR mom’s basement!). In threads like these, I would say “anybody can fake a web page” when refuted with something they dragged up, make my own fake web page, post it in response, and then answer “it’s impossible to fake web pages” when they’d call foul, and they’d never realize they had a hook in their mouth. Or say I had 3 reasons they were wrong, post two (numbered 1 and 2, or even better, 1 and B), then when they called me stupid for not counting correctly, I’d insist I had no idea what they were talking about, and edit the quoted material accordingly. Then, when accused of changing the post, I’d tell them they were clearly idots – because you can’t change something that’s already been posted for these 3 reasons: 1, B. Lather, rinse, repeat, catch, release.

Another good example (difficult to find proto-thread in google groups given that searches prior to 2000 appear to be only intermittently working anymore) is when I made some Nebraska fans furious by insisting that they tied Kansas that one year (1994) when they actually lost to them. I also at a slightly later point had them convinced I was a Nebraska fan by the clever fiction of signing my posts “Husker M1EK” while changing absolutely nothing else.

So that’s fishing, or trolling as you n00bs like to call it now.

Again: things that are NOT trolling: “Somebody said something that I don’t like!”, or “Somebody keeps pissing me off”, or even “Somebody keeps pissing everyone off”. If they believe what they’re saying, it’s not trolling, not really.

Doo Doo De Doooo!


Dear sports “communities”: I really don’t have time for this. Really. But you’ve ground my gears so much I have to take three seconds away from curing cancer at my real jorb to do this for the sake of the entire internet.

I'm like a fatter, <a href=

oncology better looking, health Peter Griffin.” width=”500″ height=”379″ />

Trolling means something.

It does not mean “an argument I don’t like”. It does not mean “an argument I think it stupid”. It does not even mean “an argument that really makes me mad”. Which is how some people are using it these days.

Pretty sure this is Reading Rambler

Charlie Sheen fits in at BSD

It means “somebody is yanking your chain on purpose, and, and this is the most important part: usually doesn’t even believe what they are saying“. The easiest way to tell if it’s a troll is if they are saying something they know is not actually true. Not a matter of opinion; not “I disagree”; but counting two things and coming up with three. Or insisting that the moon landing happened in 1968. It has a long and storied history, originally on USENET, when we called it “fishing”. How do I know this? BECAUSE I DID IT A LOT, JACKWAGONS.

Here’s a really good example (found it in like 3 seconds). I had a Michigan fan going in circles calling me stupid for not being able to count, and mispelling the name of Albert Einstien, while everybody who knew what was going on was giggling behind their own computers in their mom’s basement. (No, YOUR mom’s basement!). In threads like these, I would say “anybody can fake a web page” when refuted with something they dragged up, make my own fake web page, post it in response, and then answer “it’s impossible to fake web pages” when they’d call foul, and they’d never realize they had a hook in their mouth. Or say I had 3 reasons they were wrong, post two (numbered 1 and 2, or even better, 1 and B), then when they called me stupid for not counting correctly, I’d insist I had no idea what they were talking about, and edit the quoted material accordingly. Then, when accused of changing the post, I’d tell them they were clearly idots – because you can’t change something that’s already been posted for these 3 reasons: 1, B. Lather, rinse, repeat, catch, release.

Another good example (difficult to find proto-thread in google groups given that searches prior to 2000 appear to be only intermittently working anymore) is when I made some Nebraska fans furious by insisting that they tied Kansas that one year (1994) when they actually lost to them. I also at a slightly later point had them convinced I was a Nebraska fan by the clever fiction of signing my posts “Husker M1EK” while changing absolutely nothing else.

So that’s fishing, or trolling as you n00bs like to call it now.

Again: things that are NOT trolling: “Somebody said something that I don’t like!”, or “Somebody keeps pissing me off”, or even “Somebody keeps pissing everyone off”. If they believe what they’re saying, it’s not trolling, not really.

Doo Doo De Doooo!


I don’t know how much stomach I’ll have to write on this, heart because Joe Paterno was pretty much my #1 hero growing up, ailment so I need to get this out quickly.

In regards to the legion of apologists for Paterno infesting Homer Central; I say this, anemia short and to the point:

STOP SAYING THAT PATERNO “DID GO TO THE COPS” BECAUSE HE REPORTED THE INCIDENT TO CURLEY AND SCHULTZ. YES, WE ARE AWARE SCHULTZ WAS IN CHARGE OF THE UNIVERSITY POLICE. NO, THAT IS NOT WHAT WE MEAN BY “THE COPS”. 

University Police are a small step up from mall cops. There are some real cops in downtown State College. THOSE ARE “THE COPS”.

Shut up, apologists. I command you to shut up.

Sincerely,

M1EK

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Posted on by
9

Well, abortion there’s some kind of exhibition game going on tomorrow against Indiana State, ed but we all know that can’t be a real game that counts, salve right? Because it wouldn’t be fair; wouldn’t be “success with honor” to beat up on a team from a conference whose stadiums average around 16,000 seats and from a league which offer substantially lower athletic scholarships than our league does…

Division I FCS schools are currently restricted to giving financial assistance amounting to 63 full scholarships. Unlike Bowl Subdivision schools, Championship Subdivision schools may divide their allotment into partial scholarships, but Championship Subdivision schools are limited to 85 players receiving any sort of athletic financial aid for football. Because of competitive forces, however, a substantial number of players in Championship Subdivision programs are on full scholarships.

According to the fine folks at BSD, there’s nothing wrong with doing the football equivalent of having the Texas Rangers not only play a game against the Round Rock Express but have it count in the standings for both teams. After all, both teams play the same game by the same rules, right? Balls and strikes and whatnot?

Huh. Doesn’t seem right to me. But I’m assured by the homers at BSD that it still doesn’t matter because everybody does. So I’m sure that if I look at the top-flight programs in the BCS conferences, I won’t find anybody who didn’t schedule a 1-AA team. Let’s start!

Team 1-AA games
Ohio State None
Michigan None
Nebraska Chatanooga
Florida State Charleston Southern
Miami Bethune-Cookman
Virginia Tech Appalachian State
Pitt Maine
Oklahoma None
Texas None
Texas A&M None
Noter Dame None
Oregon Missouri State
UCLA None
USC None
Alabama Georgia Southern
Auburn Samford
Florida Furman
Georgia Coastal Carolina
LSU Northwestern State

It goes on like that. Point is that the biggest SEC teams and ACC teams seem to schedule a 1-AA team every single season; and most top-flight programs from other conferences did not. (Of course they schedule one once in a while – Hi Michigan!; but not every single season like Penn State has done lately). An interesting aside: Most of the teams on that list with 9-game conference schedules actually didn’t schedule a 1-AA game.

So, homers, I breathlessly await your apology. Everybody doesn’t do it. And after that, I guess you need to decide who you want to be more like: Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA; or Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, Pitt? Just let me know, K?

Will the BSD commentariat get the point?


Dear sports “communities”: I really don’t have time for this. Really. But you’ve ground my gears so much I have to take three seconds away from curing cancer at my real jorb to do this for the sake of the entire internet.

I'm like a fatter, <a href=

site better looking, Peter Griffin.” width=”500″ height=”379″ />

Trolling means something.

It does not mean “an argument I don’t like”. It does not mean “an argument I think is stupid”. It does not even mean “an argument that really makes me mad because they keep making it at me”. Which is how some people are using it these days.

Pretty sure this is Reading Rambler

Charlie Sheen fits in at BSD

It means “somebody is yanking your chain on purpose, and, and this is the most important part: usually doesn’t even believe what they are saying“. The easiest way to tell if it’s a troll is if they are saying something they know is not actually true. Not a matter of opinion; not “I disagree”; but counting two things and coming up with three. Or insisting that the moon landing happened in 1968. It has a long and storied history, originally on USENET, when we called it “fishing”. How do I know this? BECAUSE I DID IT A LOT, JACKWAGONS.

Here’s a really good example (found it in like 3 seconds). I had a Michigan fan going in circles calling me stupid for not being able to count, and mispelling the name of Albert Einstien, while everybody who knew what was going on was giggling behind their own computers in their mom’s basement. (No, YOUR mom’s basement!). In threads like these, I would say “anybody can fake a web page” when refuted with something they dragged up, make my own fake web page, post it in response, and then answer “it’s impossible to fake web pages” when they’d call foul, and they’d never realize they had a hook in their mouth. Or say I had 3 reasons they were wrong, post two (numbered 1 and 2, or even better, 1 and B), then when they called me stupid for not counting correctly, I’d insist I had no idea what they were talking about, and edit the quoted material accordingly. Then, when accused of changing the post, I’d tell them they were clearly idots – because you can’t change something that’s already been posted for these 3 reasons: 1, B. Lather, rinse, repeat, catch, release.

Another good example (difficult to find proto-thread in google groups given that searches prior to 2000 appear to be only intermittently working anymore) is when I made some Nebraska fans furious by insisting that they tied Kansas that one year (1994) when they actually lost to them. I also at a slightly later point had them convinced I was a Nebraska fan by the clever fiction of signing my posts “Husker M1EK” while changing absolutely nothing else.

So that’s fishing, or trolling as you n00bs like to call it now.

Again: things that are NOT trolling: “Somebody said something that I don’t like!”, or “Somebody keeps pissing me off”, or even “Somebody keeps pissing everyone off”. If they believe what they’re saying, it’s not trolling, not really.

Doo Doo De Doooo!

Penn State football starts in eight days!

Posted on by
3

This is my short, cheapest sharp, pregnancy reading of the CodeNEXT ‘draft’ that came out this week.

I’ve been describing it as “activist flypaper” for years – and am sad to state that may have been overly optimistic. My quick reading of the code makes it look even worse than what we have today. I don’t think many, so far, disagree at a high level, too. It basically zones the entire city outside downtown and corridors to a maximum of 2 stories (even the parts where the new transect code applies, much less the huge swaths of the city which still get essentially the old code) and adds additional restrictions on ADUs compared to current code. It adds code obstacles for even downtown redevelopment by promulgating stupid ideas about minimum lot width and floor plates. The plan, folks, is a bad plan. Even if you like planning, it’s a bad plan. For a freedom urbanist, it’s horrible.

This is not a step forward; it’s a step back. My strategic take is going to be to try to support those making individual recommendations for change1 but to also urge everybody to look at the plan as a whole and remember “worse than nothing”, which this thing is. Rather, it’s worse than doing nothing. Current code, as suburban as it is, is still better than this piece of garbage.

If you want a longer reading by a more qualified person with a different strategic outlook on it than I have, you could not do better than to read Chris Bradford’s take.
This is my short, website like this sharp, sales reading of the CodeNEXT ‘draft’ that came out this week.

I’ve been describing it as “activist flypaper” for years – and am sad to state that may have been overly optimistic. My quick reading of the code makes it look even worse than what we have today. I don’t think many, so far, disagree at a high level, too. It basically zones the entire city outside downtown and corridors to a maximum of 2 stories (even the parts where the new transect code applies, much less the huge swaths of the city which still get essentially the old code) and adds additional restrictions on ADUs compared to current code. It adds code obstacles for even downtown redevelopment by promulgating stupid ideas about minimum lot width and floor plates. The plan, folks, is a bad plan. Even if you like planning, it’s a bad plan. For a freedom urbanist, it’s horrible.

This is not a step forward; it’s a step back. My strategic take is going to be to try to support those making individual recommendations for change ((register on the site linked above, then wade through hundreds of pages of code through a bad internal scroll window to make comments that will doubtl but to also urge everybody to look at the plan as a whole and remember “worse than nothing”, which this thing is. Rather, it’s worse than doing nothing. Current code, as suburban as it is, is still better than this piece of garbage.

If you want a longer reading by a more qualified person with a different strategic outlook on it than I have, you could not do better than to read Chris Bradford’s take.
Well, bronchi there’s some kind of exhibition game going on tomorrow against Indiana State, hepatitis but we all know that can’t be a real game that counts, right? Because it wouldn’t be fair; wouldn’t be “success with honor” to beat up on a team from a conference whose stadiums average around 16,000 seats and from a league which offer substantially lower athletic scholarships than our league does…

Division I FCS schools are currently restricted to giving financial assistance amounting to 63 full scholarships. Unlike Bowl Subdivision schools, Championship Subdivision schools may divide their allotment into partial scholarships, but Championship Subdivision schools are limited to 85 players receiving any sort of athletic financial aid for football. Because of competitive forces, however, a substantial number of players in Championship Subdivision programs are on full scholarships.

According to the fine folks at BSD, there’s nothing wrong with doing the football equivalent of having the Texas Rangers not only play a game against the Round Rock Express but have it count in the standings for both teams. After all, both teams play the same game by the same rules, right? Balls and strikes and whatnot?

Huh. Doesn’t seem right to me. But I’m assured by the homers at BSD that it still doesn’t matter because everybody does. So I’m sure that if I look at the top-flight programs in the BCS conferences, I won’t find anybody who didn’t schedule a 1-AA team. Let’s start!

Team 1-AA games
Ohio State None
Michigan None
Nebraska Chatanooga
Florida State Charleston Southern
Miami Bethune-Cookman
Virginia Tech Appalachian State
Pitt Maine
Oklahoma None
Texas None
Texas A&M None
Noter Dame None
Oregon Missouri State
UCLA None
USC None
Alabama Georgia Southern
Auburn Samford
Florida Furman
Georgia Coastal Carolina
LSU Northwestern State

It goes on like that. Point is that the biggest SEC teams and ACC teams seem to schedule a 1-AA team every single season; and most top-flight programs from other conferences did not. (Of course they schedule one once in a while – Hi Michigan!; but not every single season like Penn State has done lately). An interesting aside: Most of the teams on that list with 9-game conference schedules actually didn’t schedule a 1-AA game.

So, homers, I breathlessly await your apology. Everybody doesn’t do it. And after that, I guess you need to decide who you want to be more like: Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA; or Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, Pitt? Just let me know, K?

Will the BSD commentariat get the point?

  1. register on the site linked above, then wade through hundreds of pages of code through a bad internal scroll window to make comments that will doubtlessly be used as evidence of a public input process but not be taken seriously [↩]

Open Letter to BSD

Posted on by
Reply

This is my short, cheapest sharp, pregnancy reading of the CodeNEXT ‘draft’ that came out this week.

I’ve been describing it as “activist flypaper” for years – and am sad to state that may have been overly optimistic. My quick reading of the code makes it look even worse than what we have today. I don’t think many, so far, disagree at a high level, too. It basically zones the entire city outside downtown and corridors to a maximum of 2 stories (even the parts where the new transect code applies, much less the huge swaths of the city which still get essentially the old code) and adds additional restrictions on ADUs compared to current code. It adds code obstacles for even downtown redevelopment by promulgating stupid ideas about minimum lot width and floor plates. The plan, folks, is a bad plan. Even if you like planning, it’s a bad plan. For a freedom urbanist, it’s horrible.

This is not a step forward; it’s a step back. My strategic take is going to be to try to support those making individual recommendations for change1 but to also urge everybody to look at the plan as a whole and remember “worse than nothing”, which this thing is. Rather, it’s worse than doing nothing. Current code, as suburban as it is, is still better than this piece of garbage.

If you want a longer reading by a more qualified person with a different strategic outlook on it than I have, you could not do better than to read Chris Bradford’s take.
This is my short, website like this sharp, sales reading of the CodeNEXT ‘draft’ that came out this week.

I’ve been describing it as “activist flypaper” for years – and am sad to state that may have been overly optimistic. My quick reading of the code makes it look even worse than what we have today. I don’t think many, so far, disagree at a high level, too. It basically zones the entire city outside downtown and corridors to a maximum of 2 stories (even the parts where the new transect code applies, much less the huge swaths of the city which still get essentially the old code) and adds additional restrictions on ADUs compared to current code. It adds code obstacles for even downtown redevelopment by promulgating stupid ideas about minimum lot width and floor plates. The plan, folks, is a bad plan. Even if you like planning, it’s a bad plan. For a freedom urbanist, it’s horrible.

This is not a step forward; it’s a step back. My strategic take is going to be to try to support those making individual recommendations for change ((register on the site linked above, then wade through hundreds of pages of code through a bad internal scroll window to make comments that will doubtl but to also urge everybody to look at the plan as a whole and remember “worse than nothing”, which this thing is. Rather, it’s worse than doing nothing. Current code, as suburban as it is, is still better than this piece of garbage.

If you want a longer reading by a more qualified person with a different strategic outlook on it than I have, you could not do better than to read Chris Bradford’s take.
Well, bronchi there’s some kind of exhibition game going on tomorrow against Indiana State, hepatitis but we all know that can’t be a real game that counts, right? Because it wouldn’t be fair; wouldn’t be “success with honor” to beat up on a team from a conference whose stadiums average around 16,000 seats and from a league which offer substantially lower athletic scholarships than our league does…

Division I FCS schools are currently restricted to giving financial assistance amounting to 63 full scholarships. Unlike Bowl Subdivision schools, Championship Subdivision schools may divide their allotment into partial scholarships, but Championship Subdivision schools are limited to 85 players receiving any sort of athletic financial aid for football. Because of competitive forces, however, a substantial number of players in Championship Subdivision programs are on full scholarships.

According to the fine folks at BSD, there’s nothing wrong with doing the football equivalent of having the Texas Rangers not only play a game against the Round Rock Express but have it count in the standings for both teams. After all, both teams play the same game by the same rules, right? Balls and strikes and whatnot?

Huh. Doesn’t seem right to me. But I’m assured by the homers at BSD that it still doesn’t matter because everybody does. So I’m sure that if I look at the top-flight programs in the BCS conferences, I won’t find anybody who didn’t schedule a 1-AA team. Let’s start!

Team 1-AA games
Ohio State None
Michigan None
Nebraska Chatanooga
Florida State Charleston Southern
Miami Bethune-Cookman
Virginia Tech Appalachian State
Pitt Maine
Oklahoma None
Texas None
Texas A&M None
Noter Dame None
Oregon Missouri State
UCLA None
USC None
Alabama Georgia Southern
Auburn Samford
Florida Furman
Georgia Coastal Carolina
LSU Northwestern State

It goes on like that. Point is that the biggest SEC teams and ACC teams seem to schedule a 1-AA team every single season; and most top-flight programs from other conferences did not. (Of course they schedule one once in a while – Hi Michigan!; but not every single season like Penn State has done lately). An interesting aside: Most of the teams on that list with 9-game conference schedules actually didn’t schedule a 1-AA game.

So, homers, I breathlessly await your apology. Everybody doesn’t do it. And after that, I guess you need to decide who you want to be more like: Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA; or Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, Pitt? Just let me know, K?

Will the BSD commentariat get the point?


On the urging of BSD Mike, erectile who is currently by fiat significantly less of a jerk than Jerky McJerkyJerk, seek I want to offer my sincere reconciliatory apology to anybody at that site whose feelings were hurt by being grouped into a grouping they disagreed with. I myself find great emotional torment in being described as a “hater”, and I have been assured by significantly non-jerky persons that this may be the result of grouping certain thinkers into a group they do not think they should have been part of, despite this being technically a temporal paradox as I think the grouping happened AFTER the haterlabelerating.

The currently de-jerked former jerky former moderator will love this, politically

Re-enactment

Since this point, every so often, M1EK’s name will be invoked with disgust in various quarters as a hater. Hate hate hate hate. Those who know me know this not to be true, but I hate being called a hater. No, this is not how I feel:

Definitely not me

This is definitely not me

So obviously given my own state of Hurt Feelings, I’m sorry if your feelings were hurt too. Let’s go back to the posting that immediately preceded my ban from BSD. This comment, which I received from somebody I don’t know from Adam:

Question…

did you move out of PA on your own, or were you chased-out by your “neighbors” with pitch-forks/shovels & scythes…because they want to keep Happy Valley – happy (just like all others want to keep this fine BSD Blogisphere)

…get it now?

Go “enable” yourself on a longhorn…

Old School… MEETS New School!

by BlueWhiteLife on Aug 29, 2008 7:30 AM PDT up actions

is doubtlessly still in the queue for “moderator had best respond PUBLICALLY and make clear this behavior will not be tolerated”. The fact that the current new current moderator of BSD has not rectified this injustice makes me want to send him back to the Jerk Shop for more Jerkiness. Jerk.

But let’s be clear: that attack, made directly on my person, was clearly deserved. The comment to which it referenced is here:

Beating up on the weak sisters

isn’t what Penn State football is about. Not in my opinion, anyways. You can go ahead and be proud of a game you’d be making fun of if UM or OSU scheduled them – but I’m not going to enable this despicable behavior.

I wasn’t about to take your parking space anyways. The drive from Texas is a bit too much to pull off.

by M1EK on Aug 29, 2008 6:56 AM PDT upactions

This horrible comment above wasn’t actually MADE to that user, nor, really, to any user directly, but clearly it merited that vicious personal attack in response. Oh dear sweet baby Jebus watching your Baby Einstien tapes, it makes me shudder to think of how mean I was even today. And, so, for that, I’m sorry. So very sorry. 

(awesome image of Jim Tressel photoshopped on the Sorry dude from South Park lost to the sands of history)

I’m sorry for referring to your site as infested by groupthink. It is no excuse that I was banned for attempting to defend myself in language which was 25% as vigorous as that with which I was attacked. It is no excuse that the moderator did not step in and moderate; i.e., indicate that attacks against those with unpopular opinions were just as bad as attacks FROM those with unpopular opinions. My course of action at the time should have been to grin and take it.

I’m so very sorry. Sorry.

(some other awesome image I can’t even remember also lost to the sands of history. Fickle internet.)

I’ve been assured by the old less jerky previous jerk that if I were to seek reconciliation from commenters like the above, that I’d receive it. Obviously I think several years of cultural cement won’t be undone quite that easily, given the obvious evidence above that has been ignored for years. Hence the tone of this article, which you may have noticed is slightly unserious. But here’s hoping! With that in mind, let me reiterate these key points, some of which I’ve said on other forums (not just the easily defensible home court you guys like to hide out on):

  1. Go read my “About” page. Seriously. Do it. Come on, do it.
  2. Joe Paterno runs the cleanest program in college football. Period. When people at Ohio State claimed “everybody does it”, I helped them understand that, NO, THEY DON’T, and there’s somebody on their eastern border who might be able to help them learn how not to DO IT any more either. Well, if by “helped them understand” you mean “beat it into their skulls for the benefit of the 100 readers who lurk”, because as we know, no commenters’ minds ever get changed by participating in comments, but readers’ sometimes can.
  3. It is NOT an accident that Penn State has never received a major violation. It is NOT an accident that two schools of the relative few that try the absolute hardest to play by the rules haven’t been caught violating the rules. It’s not that there’s no major media presence in State College or that no cub/club reporter could make their career bringing down the big catch. It’s because we try harder.
  4. Joe is a crafty mofo when he is in full possession of his faculties. I hope he’s back. He seems somewhat better.
  5. I root for us in EVERY DAMN GAME despite sometimes being a smart-ass about rooting against us when we play Indiana State. Before big games I have been known to pull the (significantly broken) old trumpet out of the garage and play the fight song for good luck. In Austin, Texas.
  6. My prediction for this year is very difficult to make. I can see us going anywhere from 7-5 to 11-1 (flier at 12-0). The last time I went out on a limb and made a prediction, it was 8-4 for Clark’s big year. Was wrong then. Was right the previous year with 8-4 for Morelli.
  7. I was firmly on Team Devlin in the sense that he should have been given the starting job for Iowa that year, and that game alone. Clark was clearly sub-par (clearly); and if you don’t play your 1(b) guy when the 1(a) guy got knocked out with a concussion and clearly isn’t back yet, the right decision is clearly to transfer.
  8. I am firmly on Team Bolden. I firmly believe he showed better skills AND better potential playing against those damn good defenses the first few games of the season when the running game thought it was better to place all of the burden on a true freshman quarterback. I clearly thought he was right to seek a transfer after the bowl game, which was a complete disaster that should have scared away many potential quarterback recruits. I am surprised it apparently didn’t.
  9. Be a fan. Drink Kool-Aid! But understand that people who don’t drink Kool-Aid don’t just hate; they may just have a more discriminating palate.
  10. I continue to read BSD, especially now that you’re virtually the only game in town. Feel free to blow me: some kisses.
  11. I’m actually sorry if any of your feelings were ACTUALLY hurt, or undeservedly so.

Sincerely,

The Bigger Man

Arist depiction of M1EK

Artist depiction of M1EK

  1. register on the site linked above, then wade through hundreds of pages of code through a bad internal scroll window to make comments that will doubtlessly be used as evidence of a public input process but not be taken seriously [↩]

Homers Still Think All Non Homers Are Haters

Posted on by
Reply

No, tablets no rx you insufferable jackass Reading Rambler:

It wasn’t me; I actually love Penn State too much to be an unquestioning blind sheep about it. It’s you homers who secretly hate the institution.

As for the actual list of douchiest colleges, I found it pretty funny – and I liked many of the things they  found douchey – and still look back on those things with fondness. I had a tailgate band whose sole purpose was to get us free beers after the game (note: this was not even allowed back then – if in uniform, which of course we were, – and I’m pretty sure Dr. Bundy would kill you today if he found out). I and some folks in the dorm watched Strange Brew so many times that we had a beer and donuts breakfast one morning that resulted in my Spanish teacher commending me on my excellent participation after the 10:10 class finished. (Note: Do not have beer and donuts for breakfast. It only takes one beer at this time of the morning, and the donuts will not do you good!)

Hooker Joe Paterno would have been hilarious, too.

But back to the general point the homer was trying to make: Mistaking constructive criticism for hate, that’s a paddlin’ noodlin’.

I had to reuse this as I just made it for a work thread and it was SO MUCH WORK to only use once!

This is exactly what I look like right now.

Homers Still Don’t Get The Devlin Issue

Posted on by
Reply

Mostly sports. Mostly Penn State. Mostly bile.

Mike Dahmus.

M1EK.

That’s all.
This is where I’ll dump my stupid thoughts on sports, prothesis mostly Penn State, mostly football.

Why here?

I have a lot of stupid thoughts about sports, mostly Penn State, mostly football. They range from short crap to medium crap. Not exactly ideal for a blog. More ideal for commenting at other peoples’ blogs who actually spend a lot of time producing content. BUT BUT BUT!

The previous pantload at this blog you might have heard of banned me for being insufficiently homer (well, actually, for fighting back against the homers – preventing me from using the same tactics and language the homers were allowed to use against me). More on that someday in the future. Trust me, you won’t care, but I’ll tell you anyways! The new pantloads in charge may or may not feel differently, but the homer kool-aid drone culture that’s sprung up there over the years makes it unlikely anything will change.

Twitter is too short, Facebook is too non-sporty, and the google plus box is unproven in this regard.

My bona-fides: I’m some jackass who was posting voluminously about college football on USENET before most of you even knew what the internet was. I had my own web server inside IBM in nineteen-dickety-ninety-three. I was ‘fishing’ before trolling was invented, and know that it’s an art, NOT just whatever you call it whenever somebody posts something that hurts your feelings or doesn’t match the opinions of everybody else in the group hug. “M1EK” was one of the first regular homages to B1FF. If you don’t know who B1FF was, look on the wikipordia, son.

Penn State bona-fides? Because, after all, as the BSD homers will tell you, anybody who is critical of the program must not be very legit. Well, I was borned in Bellefonte, my grandma still lives around the corner from Joe Paterno (and used to go to church with them’ns), I was in the Blue Band for four years – 1989-1992, had a tailgate band which is still one of the fondest memories of my time there, and am some jackass. That is, in fact, me in the masthead with Joe.

Now I’m some jackass living in Austin, Texas (within earshot of the Big Cow Stadium), who watches FOO BAW! on the televisificator every weekend and has enough stupid opinions to fill comment sections but not enough to really fill blog posts all that often. So, again, they’ll be short when they happen.

Expect content here once in a blue moon. I can’t even get up the bile to post about transportation more than once a month now. Maybe this will be better. Maybe you should go suck an egg.
Mostly sports. Mostly Penn State. Mostly bile.

This is where I’ll dump my stupid thoughts on sports, info mostly Penn State, population health mostly football.

Why here?

I have a lot of stupid thoughts about sports, mostly Penn State, mostly football. They range from short crap to medium crap. Not exactly ideal for a blog. More ideal for commenting at other peoples’ blogs who actually spend a lot of time producing content. BUT BUT BUT!

The previous pantload at this blog you might have heard of banned me for being insufficiently homer (well, actually, for fighting back against the homers – preventing me from using the same tactics and language the homers were allowed to use against me). More on that someday in the future. Trust me, you won’t care, but I’ll tell you anyways! The new pantloads in charge may or may not feel differently, but the homer kool-aid drone culture that’s sprung up there over the years makes it unlikely anything will change.

Twitter is too short, Facebook is too non-sporty, and the google plus box is unproven in this regard.

My bona-fides: I’m some jackass who was posting voluminously about college football on USENET before most of you even knew what the internet was. I had my own web server inside IBM in nineteen-dickety-ninety-three. I was ‘fishing’ before trolling was invented, and know that it’s an art, NOT just whatever you call it whenever somebody posts something that hurts your feelings or doesn’t match the opinions of everybody else in the group hug. “M1EK” was one of the first regular homages to B1FF. If you don’t know who B1FF was, look on the wikipordia, son.

Penn State bona-fides? Because, after all, as the BSD homers will tell you, anybody who is critical of the program must not be very legit. Well, I was borned in Bellefonte, my grandma still lives around the corner from Joe Paterno (and used to go to church with them’ns), I was in the Blue Band for four years – 1989-1992, had a tailgate band which is still one of the fondest memories of my time there, and am some jackass. That is, in fact, me in the masthead with Joe.

Now I’m some jackass living in Austin, Texas (within earshot of the Big Cow Stadium), who watches FOO BAW! on the televisificator every weekend and has enough stupid opinions to fill comment sections but not enough to really fill blog posts all that often. So, again, they’ll be short when they happen.

Expect content here once in a blue moon. I can’t even get up the bile to post about transportation more than once a month now. Maybe this will be better. Maybe you should go suck an egg.
From Homer Central – special emphasis on the derision in the comments as if this was somehow settled.

Sad to say, urticaria homers, this really was never addressed satisfactorallily. Clark had a concussion. If Devlin was really “1B” instead of “second string”, there would have been absolutely no doubt he would have started against Iowa. Even a true second string at most schools with a sane coaching staff would have started in that game given Clark’s injury.

Black Shoe Diaries commenter - in general

Black Shoe Diaries commenter - in general

It truly is the kind of blind faith you guys claim you don’t have to pretend that the staff somehow knew more than everybody else in the world who saw Clark’s clearly compromised physical condition and decision-making ability on display against Iowa (when he played so well and so smart in every other game that year – and no, I’m not being sarcastic at all). The fact that we saw the same exact evidently concussed decision-making (but from the coaches, not the players) at play in last year’s Outback Bowl (as well as other times throughout the Paterno era) should tell you this was not an isolated incident.

Devlin did the only thing anybody with a non-concussed brain would have done after that season: assume correctly that the only way he would have played in a meaningful game the next year is if Clark was too injured to walk onto the field (which is, of course, the only way he played against Ohio State). While nobody owes you a starting job, there ought to also be an assumption that if you are the backup, that when the starter is compromised, you are the guy. Otherwise, why the hell are you there? It’s not a college kids’ responsibility to be nothing more than your insurance policy.

And if such a kid transfers, it’s not because they were afraid to compete – it’s because they know that if they fell even one percent short, it was over and done with even if the guy that beat them out ended up with impaired decision-making (or threw 48 intderpceptions).

Grow up, homers. Grow up.