Blake Harris

[mdkhusky]

I have never seen so many butt hurt people in my life as the last few days on here. Everyone relax people can share any info they want it's not a crime

 

[intlzncster]

The source is not affiliated with UConn in any capacity, officially or otherwise, and his identity is unknown.

Why is this so hard for you?

Show me the definition. I'm cool with it if you can show me the exact rule. I'm not evening being snarky. Rumors are things you start on your own, or make up in your head or heard from people who did the same. But that info was inner circle stuff.

And it's asked in the context of you being far more absolutist than most people on here. Even noted by some of the recruiting heads.

Hey, if it's not allowed as defined by the people who run the site (fishy/tom etc--and not people such as yourself), then fine, I've no problem with that. I've no problem with being wrong either.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The source is not affiliated with UConn in any capacity, officially or otherwise, and his identity is unknown.

Why is this so hard for you?

It's no more speculation than anything Chief reports about what he is hearing. Nor is it about anyone transferring, it's about going NBA or not, which is something we have always talked (speculated) openly about. The entire post only talks about exploring the NBA as both Purvis and Brimah did last year, to get information before returning.

 

[ctchamps]

My point is: what exactly is considered speculation? First or second hand knowledge? Only publicly verifiable quotes? Where's the definition of what is allowed and not allowed. Not snark. Again, you are going to be censoring posts in every single recruiting thread if so.

Show me the definition. I'm cool with it if you can show me the exact rule. I'm not evening being snarky. Rumors are things you start on your own, or make up in your head or heard from people who did the same. But that info was inner circle stuff.

And it's asked in the context of you being far more absolutist than most people on here. Even noted by some of the recruiting heads.

Hey, if it's not allowed as defined by the people who run the site (fishy/tom etc--and not people such as yourself), then fine, I've no problem with that. I've no problem with being wrong either.

Check the pinned post at the top of this forum. It's forbidden to speculate about transfers even though the source has veracity.

 

[intlzncster]

It's no more speculation than anything Chief reports about what he is hearing. Nor is it about anyone transferring, it's about going NBA or not, which is something we have always talked (speculated) openly about. The entire post only talks about exploring the NBA as both Purvis and Brimah did last year, to get information before returning.

Yup. That's what I'm saying. @fleudslipcon is going to do a whole hell of alot more censoring if that's the definition. There's about 30 posts in the past couple of weeks which need to get pruned.

Check the pinned post at the top of this forum. It's forbidden to speculate about transfers even though the source has veracity.

Ok fleudy, I'll back down. But you better get deleting pretty quickly then. There's a month or two of stuff to prune. Search chief first.

 

[ctchamps]

It's no more speculation than anything Chief reports about what he is hearing. Nor is it about anyone transferring, it's about going NBA or not, which is something we have always talked (speculated) openly about. The entire post only talks about exploring the NBA as both Purvis and Brimah did last year, to get information before returning.

Wrong player.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Show me the definition. I'm cool with it if you can show me the exact rule. I'm not evening being snarky. Rumors are things you start on your own, or make up in your head or heard from people who did the same. But that info was inner circle stuff.

And it's asked in the context of you being far more absolutist than most people on here. Even noted by some of the recruiting heads.

Hey, if it's not allowed as defined by the people who run the site (fishy/tom etc--and not people such as yourself), then fine, I've no problem with that. I've no problem with being wrong either.

Hey, I was trying to be helpful for the new guy, considering Fishy's pinned post.

And there was a mod who thought the same way I did, apparently.

But you're right, let the site owners take it from here.

I like the no speculation rule.

 

[ctchamps]

Yup. That's what I'm saying. @fleudslipcon is going to do a whole hell of alot more censoring if that's the definition. There's about 30 posts in the past couple of weeks which need to get pruned.

I got one of my posts deleted over the same issue. This is my vendetta against all you dupes and casual fans.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Yup. That's what I'm saying. @fleudslipcon is going to do a whole hell of alot more censoring if that's the definition. There's about 30 posts in the past couple of weeks which need to get pruned.



Ok fleudy, I'll back down. But you better get deleting pretty quickly then. There's a month or two of stuff to prune. Search chief first.

I have Chief on ignore for that very reason.

 

[intlzncster]

Hey, I was trying to be helpful for the new guy, considering Fishy's pinned post.
And there was a mod who thought the same way I did, apparently.
But you're right, let the site owners take it from here.
I like the no speculation rule.

Hey, I'm not being bitchy about it, just curious. I like the rule to an extent, I just don't know exactly where the line is.

And again, I'm happy to be wrong. And support whatever the guys who run this thing say. I'm just a mug.

EDIT: Looks like you were spot on. You too @fleudslipcon h/t

 

[Fishy]

The transfer speculation rule isn't new.

It's about 20 years old.

The reason being is that the board is big enough to create its own noise and speculation here can create a story where one might or might not exist. It's easy to envision a scenario where a player has to answer questions based on something that started here.

There's no upside to that, so we just don't do it.

 

[Storrs South]

I'm really sorry I did not mean to start an argument. The rules are the rules and I broke one of them, so be it. I'll be more careful with what I throw up here in the future. PM if you want updates in the future. Go Huskies!

 

[intlzncster]

The transfer speculation rule isn't new. It's about 20 years old.

The reason being is that the board is big enough to create its own noise and speculation here can create a story where one might or might not exist. It's easy to envision a scenario where a player has to answer questions based on something that started here.

There's no upside to that, so we just don't do it.

OK, so no mention of transfer at all unless it's already in the media? I'm cool with the rule. I just want to be clear for the future. Cheers.

 

[Fishy]

I'm really sorry I did not mean to start an argument. The rules are the rules and I broke one of them, so be it. I'll be more careful with what I throw up here in the future. PM if you want updates in the future. Go Huskies!

No biggie - don't sweat it.

 

[Fishy]

OK, so no mention of transfer at all unless it's already in the media? I'm cool with the rule. I just want to be clear for the future. Cheers.

Bingo.

 

[Jimdish255]

Hey, I'm not being bitchy about it, just curious. I like the rule to an extent, I just don't know exactly where the line is.

And again, I'm happy to be wrong. And support whatever the guys who run this thing say. I'm just a mug.

I'm confused that if you have information directly from a source and you choose to censor it, don't people end up less informed and more prone to speculation? I generally like to err on the side of more information but realize lines have to be drawn because of a small percentage who would act in an irresponsible or detrimental way. On the other hand we seem to give ourselves a lot of credit for being able to impact the direction of the program by sharing our opinions which are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. It's up to everyone inside and outside the program to exercise a healthy skepticism of anything they read on any message board. Most times, highly skeptical or unsourced information is called out by other posters anyway and tends to have a short shelf life.

 

[nomar]

Fishy, is it "official" that Huskymagic is transferring from this board?

 

[ctchamps]

I'm confused that if you have information directly from a source and you choose to censor it, don't people end up less informed and more prone to speculation? I generally like to err on the side of more information but realize lines have to be drawn because of a small percentage who would act in an irresponsible or detrimental way. On the other hand we seem to give ourselves a lot of credit for being able to impact the direction of the program by sharing our opinions which are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. It's up to everyone inside and outside the program to exercise a healthy skepticism of anything they read on any message board. Most times, highly skeptical or unsourced information is called out by other posters anyway and tends to have a short shelf life.

Valid reason which is why censoring is dangerous and wrong. But so are unsubstantiated statements. There are very few rules in this forum. The transfer speculation rule is one. Even sensible people can have moments when they lose it and so it's best to leave potential transfers off the table no matter who the source is.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

I'm confused that if you have information directly from a source and you choose to censor it, don't people end up less informed and more prone to speculation? I generally like to err on the side of more information but realize lines have to be drawn because of a small percentage who would act in an irresponsible or detrimental way. On the other hand we seem to give ourselves a lot of credit for being able to impact the direction of the program by sharing our opinions which are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. It's up to everyone inside and outside the program to exercise a healthy skepticism of anything they read on any message board. Most times, highly skeptical or unsourced information is called out by other posters anyway and tends to have a short shelf life.

Primary source:

"I am thinking of taking up origami." Jon T. Basketballplayer (with the quote recorded by a real name of a real guy)

Not a primary source:

I just asked my buddy who talked to Jon T. Basketballplayer, and he said he's quitting to pursue his origami passion!

The first is ok, the second is not.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Wrong player.

Then I missed the original post (or you pruned it). Fair enough.

 

[husky99]

IMO, the best thing to do is not say anything at all.

But there are some on here who disagree. For those folks, there's always private messaging. Just be very vague...

I am guilty of this the other day and mr. Wonderful is correct

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

mr. Wonderful is correct

OMG. I'm going to cherish this moment forever. Thank you.

 

[intlzncster]

OMG. I'm going to cherish this moment forever. Thank you.

That makes twice in one thread: 2017 Recruiting: - Blake Harris?

You should retire.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

That makes twice in one thread: 2017 Recruiting: - Blake Harris?

You should retire.

Na, I'll just say something stupid and blow all the good vibes. It's the Boneyard way.

 

[UCweCONN]

Fishy, is it "official" that Huskymagic is transferring from this board?

Can he take JSM1970 with him?