Saint_LB

First of all, Joe, I wasn\'t invited. That was pretty much my point. I thought this forum promoted everyone participating but I guess I was wrong. Second of all, I wouldn\'t care to participate, because I am not much into googling and such to get info to try to paint a picture that I am some sort of expert which I am not. I think the person that you should be scolding is the author of this thread who would even hint at the idea of having a forum where only four could talk, and the rest could listen. I think if you guys screw around long enough, you will have just what you want, Those four guys lingering here and the rest of us going somewhere else where the air is a little fresher.

Whether you think you can or think you can't...you're right!

lynwood

Amen

WhoDat

Sure - dunno how this would be much different than what we do now, but I\'m always up for a good debate.

I\'d nominate at least two other guys: Saintfan and BnB. However, it\'s up the the rest of the group.

Also, I would propose the following:

1. Other posters pick the topic, by suggestion and a vote or something like that.

2. No topic can be \"revisited\" more than once in a month, and let\'s try to limit it to like 3 or 4 times a year.

3. This should be a round robin type thing. If Billy starts, it then goes to Whodi, then Kool, then me, then back to Billy. This shouldn\'t be a free for all.

4. This should really be us sounding off on our opinions. That means saying, \"I think that the defense will get better b/c...\" and not \"you\'re crazy for thinking the defense will get better b/c...\" Yes, we should respond to one another, but no one wants to read bickering - there\'s already plenty of that on the board.

5. Debates/discussions last no more than a week.

6. Keeping other posters out of the mix is going to be difficult. If you\'re serious about making this an on-going thing, I would talk to Halo. See if it is OK with him and if he can set something up. Otherwise, the first debate will go like this: Billy posts, Whodi posts, 17 other members post, Kool tries to post, Billy posts, Whodi posts, Whodat, 5 other, Billy, 4 other, JoeSam, Whodi, JoeSam, locked.... LOL.

Those are my suggestions.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

JKool

I suppose, having read through some stuff here, I\'m sympathetic to Shadow, LB, and Lyn\'s points. I\'m not sure what I think about the idea overall anymore. While I believe it would be fun (and interesting) for me, I\'m not sure we should really bore the other guys around here who are both interesting, smart, and well informed - and who would like to play along.

I think WhoDat\'s suggestions are quite acceptable, if this were to happen. At this point though, I may need to be convinced that it is a good idea for the board in general.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

GumboBC

WOW!! How to respond to some of this?

First, I was trying to think of something different for the board. And I thought this would be an interesting experiment. So many times some of the debates are really interesting but sooner or later it gets so far off topic that it becomes about something entirely different.

Now, I picked 3 other members and myself because of some of the past debates we have had. Again, I thought it would be interesting.

Maybe we could do this on a regular basis and rotate \"teams\". It doesn\'t have to be only the 4 of us who participate in this.

In any event, my motive for suggesting the \"closed\" debates is to try to form some kind of conclusion on some of the more interesting debates. Not that it\'s going to prove anything, but it might be interesting.

Oh, WhoDat -- I like your suggestions..

JKool

It might be interesting to have three teams - yea, nea, and \"neither of those two\". I always wondered why debates weren\'t structured that way?

For the record, Billy, I did (do) think it was an interesting idea. I just see how it might be taken the wrong way.

SCSaintsFan

As someone who mostly \'lurks\' might I suggest/komment...

Have someone propose your topic to debate.

Each group would then submit 1 opening argument per member.

After openning vollies are launced (grin) Each one could pose 1 rebuttle post.

I would limit the rounds, to only a couple. Perhaps the teams could even collaberate offline and provide a unified single response and perhaps, not get as heated.

I don\'t mind the banter. But, it should be inclusive enough so the teams could rotate to get as much involvement as possible.

I wouldn\'t want to actually be part of the debate, but well thought out arguments are nice to read.

just my .03
adjusted for inflation.

Kwestions, Kwalmes, Kweries, Kommments...Kall!

JKool

Interesting ideas SCSF!

Perhaps we could just get a list of people who would be interested and randomly generate teams each week? That sounds good to me.

Also, I like the idea of constraining the number of posts. That is a good idea.

Furthermore, it seems to me that people who wanted to put in their two cents (or three ) could merely start a regular thread about the same topic in the general forum - thus, in a sense, no one would be excluded?

WhoDat

Man. It\'s rare that I wade into something to support a Billy idea, but I\'ve tried holding my tongue on this all morning and I can\'t.

Layoff people. LB, Lynwood - I can understand where you\'re coming from, but I see nothing in Billy\'s original post to suggest he implied that the four people he listed knew more than any other members on the board. I don\'t believe that was his intent, and I think maybe your response reflects more on yourselves than on ole Billy Boy.

Look, it\'s long been decided that I know more than anyone else on this board. LMAO. Kidding. But seriously, I think Billy included the people that he did b/c, like he said, of our history. I dunno about Johnnie Granola (JKool), but the rest of us have been involved in colorful debates. That is also why I also suggested that we include Saintfan and BnB. I would pull in JoeSam, but somebody needs to moderate. The point is, these guys are always good for something. Saintfan makes me challenge my view. BnB makes me pee on myself laughing. Kool is the middleman who can synthesize opposing arguments like no one else. Billy, Whodi, and I - we\'re the instigators.

Billy was just suggesting an idea that I think would be fun, even if I\'m not involved. You watch \"Around the Horn\" on ESPN? PTI? Something like that is what I envision. I don\'t watch those shows b/c I think those guys know the most - it\'s entertainment. Did you used to listen to Buddy D? Anybody really think he\'s all that insightful? It\'s fun b/c he\'s a character. (was I should say )

In any case, I think you guys should cut Billy some slack. The guy wasn\'t trying to insult anyone. That\'s also not to say that you don\'t bring a lot to the board. There\'s just a history here. We have fun beating up on each other, and maybe it is egotistical, but I think that other people do enjoy watching us do it. It\'s entertaining if nothing else.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

SCSaintsFan

Perhaps too,

After the moderator declared the end of the debate, then they could put up a poll and let everyone vote as to who won. keep the poll open until the start of the next scrimmage er I mean debate.

[Edited on 28/3/2005 by SCSaintsFan]