| Posted By |
Message |
|
|
I love the PG. It has become sort of my internet home away from home and I would do everything in my power to not let a sour apple or a rule be the reason to not post anymore. Having said that, I feel disrespected as a fan when I cannot theorize about the performance of a fighter or question a fighter's heart. Yet it is perfectly fine when a direct and or indirect participant of the sport questions the integrity of fighters.
IMO, the fans who follow MMA are the most crucial element to this business and yet we are told to not bash or refrain from bashing fighters which includes questioning a fighter's heart and integrity and so forth. They way I see it, if we don't call fighters out about their hearts and integrity, things like matches being thrown and fighters faking injuries are more likely to occur. We, the fans, have a stake in this business and if our voices aren't heard, we can expect MMA to slowly make its way to becoming a sport of a joke like Boxing.
The counter response I am anticipating is, " This is the rule of the site and if you want to bash and question fighters' hearts and integrity, do so at your own leisure or at another site."
While I can respect the rules of any given site, it pains me to know and see someone can write an article or do an interview and bash fighters while we, the fans, are not allowed to do so in most prestige mma sites including this one.
I have had my doubts about many MMA related things including fighters but my voice can't be heard because of this rule. I can almost guarantee if I made the same claim as Schlemenko, I will have been warned or told to stop.
Again, I love this site and I would not want to jeopardize its growth in any way, but how is the opinion of one fighter, promoter, manager, reporter and or writer - more valid and more acceptable than the fans, who are an intricate part of this MMA equation? I truly believe this fighter basing rule needs to be re-evaluated. I think the Playground is filled with respectful and intellectual posters who can theorize about a fighter's performance without having to ridicule the fighter.
I don't think this rule needs to be black or white. I think it can be in the gray area and moderators can enforce this rule at his or her discretion.
Last edited 8/15/12 12:26AM server time by KungFuMaster
Edit note/reason: n/a
|
|
Post #1 8/15/12 12:20:01AM
|
|
|
difficult subject. there are many members of the playground that can respectfully criticize fighters without bashing, but there's always that 1% that fucks it up for everybody else. i think the rule is ok as long as we can respectfully criticize fighters. leniency is fine but calling them names gets non of us anywhere. i like how you are challenging the "Man". props
_______________________________________
|
|
Post #2 8/15/12 12:39:10AM
|
|
|
Fighter bashing fills the forums with just that, fighter bashing.
Which leads to pointless arguments between members defending their honor.
Which leads to bans.
_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016
|
|
Post #3 8/15/12 12:45:40AM
|
|
|
I honestly think the rules for this are fine as they are.
_______________________________________
|
|
Post #4 8/15/12 1:00:18AM
|
|
|
Posted by tcunningham
difficult subject. there are many members of the playground that can respectfully criticize fighters without bashing, but there's always that 1% that fucks it up for everybody else. i think the rule is ok as long as we can respectfully criticize fighters. leniency is fine but calling them names gets non of us anywhere. i like how you are challenging the "Man". props
I can understand some will abuse this rule if it was relaxed. What needs to be put in stone are guidelines to help posters state their opinions in a professional and non-degrading manner. For instance, the rule can state something like - "Theorizing is OK but outright accusations without proof or probable cause will not be tolerated." Something like that...
|
|
Post #5 8/15/12 1:05:58AM
|
|
|
i almost referred to a fighter as a doormat & gatekeeper earlier. figured it'd be best if i didnt.
_______________________________________
Never Trust A Man Who Does Not Make All Of His Picks
|
|
Post #6 8/15/12 1:06:23AM
|
|
|
Posted by Budgellism
I honestly think the rules for this are fine as they are.
To be honest, I will live if the rule does not change.  However, according to the rule, we can't even speculate that Overeem could be juicing.
|
|
Post #7 8/15/12 1:09:30AM
|
|
|
Posted by george112
Fighter bashing fills the forums with just that, fighter bashing.
Which leads to pointless arguments between members defending their honor.
Which leads to bans.
I'm not campaigning for the complete removal of the fighter bashing rule. I just want to see it - relaxed a bit to allow more potential discussions regarding fighter's motives, heart, integrity and so forth.
|
|
Post #8 8/15/12 1:12:30AM
|
|
|
I doubt this rule will be changed or relaxed but I just wanted to give my two cents in response to the thread about fighters faking injuries. It seems sort of unfair that THEY can blatantly speculate and make accusations and we have to do so in such discrete manners to avoid being banned. It is what it is.....I will live.
|
|
Post #9 8/15/12 1:28:47AM
|
|
|
I think bashing should be considered as someone making an asinine statement with no regard to the discussion.But in all honesty too much censoring,trying to be PC and making too many rules takes fun away.For the most part i think the majority of people are just making their own honest observations on things,Who is anyone to judge what someone elses opinion on people or things are?.If i think someone sucks or is a douchebag...Thats my opinion.........And if the rules are i can't call someone a dbag..then thats how it is..Not being able to type that on an internet forum isnt going to ruin my day.
Last edited 8/15/12 1:46AM server time by iwannabesedated
Edit note/reason: n/a
|
|
Post #10 8/15/12 1:45:42AM
|
|
|
There is a fine line to walk here....for example when I said earlier that Rua was all heart and no conditioning on a recent post I also mentioned that maybe a camp switch that had a greater focus in the cardio aspect of the game would be good for him. This post was not insulting to anyone and it will be a question that many people will ask him soon enough. Maybe it will be Ariel Helwani instead of some random fan but walking that line is key. Now saying Overeem was /is guilty of juicing is not bashing as it a provable fact backed by science. Saying he cheated or is a cheater is safe as well as his actions are directly against the rules. Saying he is a scared little bitch etc....and attacking him as a person is lame and shouldnt be tolerated. You know what I mean?
|
|
Post #11 8/15/12 2:57:31AM
|
|
|
well obviously bisping is fair game right ?
|
|
Post #12 8/15/12 4:05:05AM
|
jjeans
Emma Watson Picture Incoming
|
Posted by aussiemma
well obviously bisping is fair game right ?
No but Nick Diaz would be as he's retired
See my point... Fighter bashing should not be allowed at all, this is a mature forum.
_______________________________________
Never pick against a Russian, currently 31-9 (77%) in the UFC since 2012. #DoItForWatson
Dirty Blue
|
|
Post #13 8/15/12 4:10:41AM
|
|
|
Posted by KungFuMaster
We, the fans, have a stake in this business and if our voices aren't heard, we can expect MMA to slowly make its way to becoming a sport of a joke like Boxing.
Our voices are heard. Are you satisfied with the UFC's product? I tend to be. If anything, the UFC has a proven track record of catering to the fans' wishes. (Just a couple weeks ago, they had a phone poll, and at the end of the night of fights, the fans chose who will fight for the title next. The UFC listened. This was right after the UFC's decision to go with the winner of Shogun vs. Vera as the de facto #1 contender met a lot of backlash from these fans that have unheard voices you speak of.)
While I can respect the rules of any given site, it pains me to know and see someone can write an article or do an interview and bash fighters while we, the fans, are not allowed to do so in most prestige mma sites including this one.
You show me one credible journalist that has been permitted to "bash" fighters while writing for a credible website.
Anyway, this seems to be your major point for permitting bashing:
They way I see it, if we don't call fighters out about their hearts and integrity, things like matches being thrown and fighters faking injuries are more likely to occur. We, the fans, have a stake in this business and if our voices aren't heard, we can expect MMA to slowly make its way to becoming a sport of a joke like Boxing.
So making up stuff about a topic you have no insight into is a good way to help the sport?
Last edited 8/15/12 5:26AM server time by lohmann
Edit note/reason: n/a
|
|
Post #14 8/15/12 5:19:44AM
|
|
|
i don't think calling michael bisping a douche is fighter bashing. Is hard to say where to draw the line though.
|
|
Post #15 8/15/12 7:30:17AM
|
