Penn State: Burn Everything Down: Item The Second

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

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