ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Bobby Bell joins WPI's Out of Bounds Podcast (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=189342)

Phobia 08-19-2008 04:15 PM

DaFace,
If these websites don't compete try posting a link to ChiefsPlanet or any other site on WPI. I've seen people banned for it over there. So my attitude towards it has changed in recent months.

Every website on the internet is competing for clicks.

DaFace 08-19-2008 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phobia (Post 4927901)
DaFace,
If these websites don't compete try posting a link to ChiefsPlanet or any other site on WPI. I've seen people banned for it over there. So my attitude towards it has changed in recent months.

Every website on the internet is competing for clicks.

I don't think there's any argument that WPI's forums are different than ChiefsPlanet from a philosophical standpoint. They fully embrace censorship, while one of the fundamental tenets of ChiefsPlanet is the lack of it. I guess that's why I hesitate so much with actually saying "No WPI articles on ChiefsPlanet." It just strikes me as going against some of the basic principals of this place.

FAX 08-19-2008 04:20 PM

For what it's worth (and that isn't much), I didn't see this particular thread as "spam". I viewed this as news relating to Bobby Bell - one of the greatest Chiefs of all times - and, therefore, perfectly reasonable. I also like the WPI articles - even the ones that suck a lot - because they're Chiefs related. What I don't like (and what I consider to be spam) are the endless posts that are simply stating stuff like, "We said that on WPI last week." or "WPI has an article about that on our site." Those are the posts that I absolutely consider to be extreme spamish.

Also, I am fully aware that Mr. GoChiefs makes those posts for the primary purpose of irritating peeps. It's the only conceivable reason - and it works. However, were I a mod, I would have a difficult time sorting out those dastardly posts from the decent ones. That's why I think Mr. GoChiefs needs to voluntarily desist from that behavior because it's good and right and nice. And I am convinced that, somewhere in the furthest regions of Mr. GoChiefs' troubled soul, there still exists some goodness and rightness and niceness if only we could reach it.

FAX

Hammock Parties 08-19-2008 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX (Post 4927907)

Also, I am fully aware that Mr. GoChiefs makes those posts for the primary purpose of irritating peeps.

That's not even remotely true. I just want to bring Chiefs news to Chiefs fans.

DaFace 08-19-2008 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX (Post 4927907)
However, were I a mod, I would have a difficult time sorting out those dastardly posts from the decent ones.

Yup.

Phobia 08-19-2008 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 4927906)
I don't think there's any argument that WPI's forums are different than ChiefsPlanet from a philosophical standpoint. They fully embrace censorship, while one of the fundamental tenets of ChiefsPlanet is the lack of it. I guess that's why I hesitate so much with actually saying "No WPI articles on ChiefsPlanet." It just strikes me as going against some of the basic principals of this place.

I'm not suggesting you do that but if I were again given the keys to this site I'd probably put up some reasonable boundaries, such as 3 WPI articles in a week's time. That way he's forced to pick the quality articles and leave the chaff at home. I'm not saying my way is the only way or that you should choose that path but I don't think that type of solution is unreasonable. It's also something that has worked towards gochiefs' rehabilitation in the past, limiting him to one thread starter per day. He needs limits and boundaries - possibly because they're not imposed elsewhere.

In any case, I support whatever you decide. I know that's been weighing on you heavily.

FAX 08-19-2008 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4927910)
That's not even remotely true. I just want to bring Chiefs news to Chiefs fans.

Hmmm. How is the act of posting something like, "We reported that on WPI last week." bringing Chiefs news to Chiefs fans?

FAX

Phobia 08-19-2008 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX (Post 4927930)
Hmmm. How is the act of posting something like, "We reported that on WPI last week." bringing Chiefs news to Chiefs fans?

FAX

We pointed this hypocrisy out on fatchatter 2 days ago.

Deberg_1990 08-19-2008 04:42 PM

I support Claythan and his mission to bring 100% Chiefs news to Chiefs fans.

Chiefs news for the people, by the people.














If only he were sincere.

2112 08-19-2008 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX (Post 4927930)
Hmmm. How is the act of posting something like, "We reported that on WPI last week." bringing Chiefs news to Chiefs fans?

FAX

He's trying to bring traffic to his pay site. In other words he's trying to make a profit off of CP.

FAX 08-19-2008 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phobia (Post 4927933)
We pointed this hypocrisy out on fatchatter 2 days ago.

We're surrounded!!!

Take cover!!

FAX

Deberg_1990 08-19-2008 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimension2112 (Post 4927945)
He's trying to bring traffic to his pay site. In other words he's trying to make a profit off of CP.


I wonder if he gets a kickback for each new subscriber?

2112 08-19-2008 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 4927953)
I wonder if he gets a kickback for each new subscriber?

He might, who knows?

FAX 08-19-2008 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimension2112 (Post 4927945)
He's trying to bring traffic to his pay site. In other words he's trying to make a profit off of CP.

That would be the obvious conclusion, Mr. Dimension2112. However, Mr. GoChiefs stated here that he is only trying to "bring Chiefs news to Chiefs fans".

Based on that assertion, I assumed that his well-meaning generosity and authentic concern was intended for the benefit of Planeteers. However, when you are merely posting notices referring to a recent "scoop" that is only available on WPI, one must assume that your assessment of his motivation is more accurate.

FAX

KCJohnny 08-19-2008 05:50 PM

I am old enough to have watched Bobby Bell play. In a trio that included Willie Lanier (HOF) and Jim Lynch, BB was faster, smarter, and more physical than any OLB in the game at the time, largely due to Henry Stram's vicious definsive alignments that bet the farm against the run and trusted an assassin secondary to take away the deep ball. Emitt Thomas has just been honored for his substantial contributions to that secondary. Johnny Robinson and Jim Marsalis were also key contributors to the Chiefs' dominance.

To put in perspective just how good the Chiefs D was with Bobby Bell in the lineup, the 1969 Chiefs gave up just 177 points all season (14 games). Please compare with the 2000 Ravens. Defense wins championships!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.