So now major news services aren't good enough?

[dreamhoya]

as they say: "it is what it is" - in the end i love mcq and the administrator man! real cool show.

[kchoya]

The problem is the admins are not being consistent. If they want to squelch any and all discussions regarding transfers, that's fine. But don't have DFW post a link to Fox Sports last year about Macklin transferring, and don't have the admins consistently say not to post until verified by a major news source, and then change the policy when it suits their fancy and say only an official announcement by GUHoyas.com is sufficient.

The Admins can't deny that they vary their policy as they see fit.

What if Omar transfers to Middle Tennessee State and that school's athletic department puts out a press release, but there's no release by Georgetown. Would we still be prohibited from discussing it? Even President Obama, when he's on campus, said he talked to Omar and confirmed he's transferring, under the board's stupid policy we still wouldn't be able to talk about it.

[hoyatables]

Apr 14, 2009 9:50:55 GMT -5 kchoya said:

The problem is the admins are not being consistent. If they want to squelch any and all discussions regarding transfers, that's fine. But don't have DFW post a link to Fox Sports last year about Macklin transferring, and don't have the admins consistently say not to post until verified by a major news source, and then change the policy when it suits their fancy and say only an official announcement by GUHoyas.com is sufficient.

The Admins can't deny that they vary their policy as they see fit.

What if Omar transfers to Middle Tennessee State and that school's athletic department puts out a press release, but there's no release by Georgetown. Would we still be prohibited from discussing it? Even President Obama, when he's on campus, said he talked to Omar and confirmed he's transferring, under the board's stupid policy we still wouldn't be able to talk about it.

I have no problem with the admins changing the rules as they see fit, even if it would violate an arbitrary and capricious standard. Last time I checked, posters on a private message board don't require the same protections as citizens from public law enforcement.

[hoyaboy1]

Shocking that hoyatables supports the admins.

Obviously they can change the rules as they see fit - it's their board. That doesn't mean that they are right. The "poster's rights" argument in a silly strawman.

[whatmaroon]

Or, maybe the admins decided that, since there was a problem with transfer rumors in violation of board rules, they needed to apply a heightened standard, namely announcement on the official site. They then announced this policy on the board by putting a sticky at the top of the thread, clearly stating that the only transfers that could be discussed would be those listed on GUHoyas.com. Seems pretty clear and easy to comply with to me.

As to what the right policy should be, I think there should be a standard of particularized information. So, if Player X decides he's going to transfer and tells e.g. Barker and Barker prints "Player X told me he wants to transfer", IMO that should be fair game even if it doesn't appear on GUHoyas. I have yet to see anything that meets that standard.

[seaweed]

bunch of cry baby kids who don't get it. go away now and leave this board to fans who share the GU values of the admins, respecting privacy of players and their families.

I love the fact that people are citing Goodman as a "news" source - like tmz.com is news or something. Guess they don't teach thinking anymore.

[kchoya]

Apr 14, 2009 11:20:47 GMT -5 seaweed said:

bunch of cry baby kids who don't get it. go away now and leave this board to fans who share the GU values of the admins, respecting privacy of players and their families.

I love the fact that people are citing Goodman as a "news" source - like tmz.com is news or something. Guess they don't teach thinking anymore.

Ok, deleted lets just say that all discussion of players transferring, their off-season activities, and even their performance during the games are off limits. We wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of the players or their families.

Please explain to me how discussing news posted on a major sports website about a player transferring is violating anyone's privacy.

[seaweed]

see whatmaroon's post - if you have time to read goodman's gossip column you should have had time to read the thread pinned to the top of this board for the last 10 days or so.

[hoyalove4ever]

I respect the rules, but agree that they are a bit far-fetched.

In any event, I hope the story is wrong and Omar is staying. I was/am really hoping for him to see key minutes next year.

[kchoya]

Apr 14, 2009 10:17:38 GMT -5 hoyatables said:

Apr 14, 2009 9:50:55 GMT -5 kchoya said:

The problem is the admins are not being consistent. If they want to squelch any and all discussions regarding transfers, that's fine. But don't have DFW post a link to Fox Sports last year about Macklin transferring, and don't have the admins consistently say not to post until verified by a major news source, and then change the policy when it suits their fancy and say only an official announcement by GUHoyas.com is sufficient.

The Admins can't deny that they vary their policy as they see fit.

What if Omar transfers to Middle Tennessee State and that school's athletic department puts out a press release, but there's no release by Georgetown. Would we still be prohibited from discussing it? Even President Obama, when he's on campus, said he talked to Omar and confirmed he's transferring, under the board's stupid policy we still wouldn't be able to talk about it.

I have no problem with the admins changing the rules as they see fit, even if it would violate an arbitrary and capricious standard. Last time I checked, posters on a private message board don't require the same protections as citizens from public law enforcement.

jeez, I hate the fact that 40% of the posters on this board went to law school. No, I'm not asking that the admins follow the constitution or any other legal standard. I understand it's a private board, there are no free speech rights, yadda yadda yadda.

Look, it's not like this news came from some random blog or some kid's facebook page. Fox Sports is part of a international conglomerate. They actually pay Goodman a salary for his services. Is it the New York Times? No. But I think it's ridiculous that a legitimate news source posts a list of players transferring and we can't talk about it on here. A rumor is something everyone is talking about but there's no discernible source. Here, we have a source.

I also find it highly hypocritical that DFW says, last year, "I'm not sure that should be enough to write a story, but it's out on the wire" and then posts a link, and then comes back this year and says "I am growing increasingly irritated at a small number of you 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' on transfer candidates." Legally defensible? Yes. But it still stinks.

[RBHoya]

^^I agree that seems to be what happened, they tighetened the rules due to the recent string of threads citing chatter, blogs and unofficial stuff. Still, it's at least little funny that not only was the Macklin tranferring thread allowed to stay open citing only a link to Fox Sports, but it was started by DFW himself. It's not inconsistent given the rules change, but it's a little amusing anyway. Despite the pinned thread (which I guess I didn't read) I didn't realize that the rule changed from needing a link to a credible news outlet to needing a link to a GUHoyas story. If I had realized that I would have known that thread would get locked and not taken the time to post in it

I think it's a little bit of a fine line, because let's be honest--our program and our AD/SID are notoriously closed-lipped about these kinds of things. In this case, the cat has been out of the bag for a while, and the AD is, for whatever reason, taking its time in putting out a statement. Maybe there is a good reason for that, but either way it's being talked about among fans. It seems sometimes that the AD wants total control over everything public that is written about the program, and if something comes out that they don't like they lean on DFW to take it down. Maybe that's not how it is but that's the impression I get. And I just think that sort of shows a disregard for the reality of the modern era. It's 2009, not the 80s anymore, and in the internet era everybody has a voice. You can't control everything, and IMHO it's wrong for them to pressure the Hoyatalk folks to censor messages so that the only points of discussion that are "in bounds" are things that they are ok with us talking about (ie good things). That's silly. I know this doesn't generally apply to issues other than transfers, which is why it's not really a huge deal, but in principle I think it's wrong for the AD to try to censor/control the content of an independent site by pressuring it's owner. It's like the Chinese government trying to make sure every article written in every chinese newspaper is pro-government.

For those who talk of leaving--and not that I'm advocating leaving by any means, as I will always read every outlet on the internet that covers our team--there are a few other outlets. One, try casualhoya.com, as the folks over there are not afraid of posting items without sources. Second, there is the hoyareport.com pay board, where there is a lot more latitude on this kind of stuff (though they'll pull anything that is especially personal/non-basketball related). And then, for those who don't want to pay for premium content, there is a free board on Rivals as well. It is rarely used except by fans of other teams who don't catch on that Hoya fans don't really check it, but it is an existing Georgetown Baskeball message board infrastructure that can be used for open discussion of issues that are team-related but not acceptable on this board. Located here: georgetown.rivals.com/forum.asp?fid=1608

Again not suggesting any of these in place of hoyatalk, but they are options in addition to it.

[SoCal Hoya85]

While I have agreed with the Moderators transfer policy and its enforcement, I also believe they have gone overboard in this instance. If I can't find or discuss information that is being reported in credible news outlets than I will look for it and discuss it elsewhere. Still, it would be a loss if this board started to become more and more irrelevant because it has done a good job in creating an online community of Hoya fans.

[hoyatables]

Apr 14, 2009 11:47:48 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Apr 14, 2009 10:17:38 GMT -5 hoyatables said:

I have no problem with the admins changing the rules as they see fit, even if it would violate an arbitrary and capricious standard. Last time I checked, posters on a private message board don't require the same protections as citizens from public law enforcement.

jeez, I hate the fact that 40% of the posters on this board went to law school. No, I'm not asking that the admins follow the constitution or any other legal standard. I understand it's a private board, there are no free speech rights, yadda yadda yadda.

Look, it's not like this news came from some random blog or some kid's facebook page. Fox Sports is part of a international conglomerate. They actually pay Goodman a salary for his services. Is it the New York Times? No. But I think it's ridiculous that a legitimate news source posts a list of players transferring and we can't talk about it on here. A rumor is something everyone is talking about but there's no discernible source. Here, we have a source.

I also find it highly hypocritical that DFW says, last year, "I'm not sure that should be enough to write a story, but it's out on the wire" and then posts a link, and then comes back this year and says "I am growing increasingly irritated at a small number of you 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' on transfer candidates." Legally defensible? Yes. But it still stinks.

Ha -- if there's something more predictable than a legalistic answer on this board, it is that it will inevitably provoke a detailed legalistic response. Bait taken . Hoyaboy1's calling me out (didn't realize a reputation as an admin stoolie preceded me) was a side benefit.

[strummer8526]

This seems to be a new one to add to the list:

1. Facilities
2. On-campus arena
3. Jumping the Shark
4. The Princeton offense: yay or nay
5. Foeva / Eighties race-baiting
6. Esherick
7. Hanging sources on draft positions

...and now, introducing 8. The policies of the moderators. I must say, this is a welcome addition to the list. I'm truly inspired by our ability to carry on discussions to the point of nausea about what sort of "standard" should apply to posting rumors. Personally, I think this should fall under some kind of heightened scrutiny, similar to classifications based on gender. The mods do seem to have an important interest in preventing these sorts of discussions. But I guess we can debate whether their thread-locking policy is over or under inclusive.

[Buckets]

I find it strange that we're not allowed to discuss a potential transfer "out of respect for the player's family", while posts along the lines (I don't have the time to go through and cite specific examples) of "DaJuan Summers is doomed for failure because he is an ungrateful, lazy SOB who is apparently unable to think like a rational human being" are allowed to stay on the board. So we're not allowed to discuss it while a potential decision is going on, but once it's been made the rules disappear and we can mercilessly bash his decision?

[jgalt]

Apr 14, 2009 12:55:00 GMT -5 Buckets said:

I find it strange that we're not allowed to discuss a potential transfer "out of respect for the player's family", while posts along the lines (I don't have the time to go through and cite specific examples) of "DaJuan Summers is doomed for failure because he is an ungrateful, lazy SOB who is apparently unable to think like a rational human being" are allowed to stay on the board. So we're not allowed to discuss it while a potential decision is going on, but once it's been made the rules disappear and we can mercilessly bash his decision?

Comments like that have been deleted and reprimanded.

[HoyaSox04]

Apr 14, 2009 13:03:02 GMT -5 jgalt said:

Apr 14, 2009 12:55:00 GMT -5 Buckets said:

I find it strange that we're not allowed to discuss a potential transfer "out of respect for the player's family", while posts along the lines (I don't have the time to go through and cite specific examples) of "DaJuan Summers is doomed for failure because he is an ungrateful, lazy SOB who is apparently unable to think like a rational human being" are allowed to stay on the board. So we're not allowed to discuss it while a potential decision is going on, but once it's been made the rules disappear and we can mercilessly bash his decision?

Comments like that have been deleted and reprimanded.

jgalt, that would mean that the truth would get in the way of making a point, and you know we can't have that on this board!

[professorhoya]

Apr 14, 2009 11:51:39 GMT -5 RBHoya said:

For those who talk of leaving--and not that I'm advocating leaving by any means, as I will always read every outlet on the internet that covers our team--there are a few other outlets. One, try casualhoya.com, as the folks over there are not afraid of posting items without sources. Second, there is the hoyareport.com pay board, where there is a lot more latitude on this kind of stuff (though they'll pull anything that is especially personal/non-basketball related). And then, for those who don't want to pay for premium content, there is a free board on Rivals as well. .

Did you not read the stickyed thread? All talk of Posters transferring to other Boards or Forums will not be tolerated. Only when it has been announced in GUHoyas that a Poster is transferring will such discussion be allowed. Thank You.

[Boz]

Lock this thread.

;D

[strummer8526]

Apr 14, 2009 12:55:00 GMT -5 Buckets said:

I find it strange that we're not allowed to discuss a potential transfer "out of respect for the player's family", while posts along the lines (I don't have the time to go through and cite specific examples) of "DaJuan Summers is doomed for failure because he is an ungrateful, lazy SOB who is apparently unable to think like a rational human being" are allowed to stay on the board. So we're not allowed to discuss it while a potential decision is going on, but once it's been made the rules disappear and we can mercilessly bash his decision?

I can personally attest to the fact that those sorts of posts result in stern warnings, after which I calm down and wait for the next player to Edited me off, usually about a year later.