Some of my words have been banned

[Renee Lee]

Originally Posted by Steve Romer

Actually I do blame them blame for being trigger happy. None of the rules were violated in any of the posts I saw that were closed, but you saw one. Well I read the thread I didn't see one troll posting. Not one rules violation. No uncivil behavoir and not one.

You either missed them, or they've been deleted. Hold on.

From the "request" thread, which the mods had on a very short leash:

Not to mention, both of these guys have ties to Crossfit dating back to before most of the current HQ team were even associated with @F (apart from Couch).

You don't think that using jargon from igx is disrespectful, inflammatory and bordering on uncivil?

There was NOT anything inflammatory in the original thread ( "The Black box seminar..." on page 2 in the Community forum), but again...that was their call and where i disagree.

When I saw the thread you started, "I hear Sears is the new Nutritional Guru," I read a lot of snark from you...I'm not surprised that the mods found it inflammatory...plus that one devolved into Scott calling Barry Cooper the resident windbag.

Anyway, I think you expect the main CF Boards to tolerate a lot more shit than they've ever been willing to accept. Put borderline snarkiness on top of a topic they're tired of dealing with/moderating and you've got yourself pseudo-banned.



PS, Greg, Steven and others, I'm sorry that nitpicking over semantics has been my introduction to this forum...It wasn't my intention.

[Scott Dyck]

I didn't call him a windbag by name, at least. If I hadn't outed myself here most people wouldn't have known who I was talking about, probably.
It's the inconsistency, Renee. Barry wrote the book on snarky, incendiary, and disrespectful. I mean, he probably literally wrote a book on it. But since he's a staunch defender of teh couch, it's permitted.

[Renee Lee]

Originally Posted by Scott Dyck

I didn't call him a windbag by name, at least. If I hadn't outed myself here most people wouldn't have known who I was talking about, probably.
It's the inconsistency, Renee. Barry wrote the book on snarky, incendiary, and disrespectful. I mean, he probably literally wrote a book on it. But since he's a staunch defender of teh couch, it's permitted.

Hah.

Actually, Scott...I assumed it was Barry before I even saw your post here. (Mainly because I agree, lol) I'm sure it was obvious to most regulars.

He absolutely is snarky, but I don't think his stance is why his posts are permitted.

[Garrett Smith]

http://rickross.com/faq.html

Can some multi-level-marketing and commercial schemes be seen as somewhat cultic?

Yes, some commercially motivated groups stress total commitment, avoid answering critical questions and seem to employ "cult like" manipulative techniques to achieve what can be seen as undue influence. Though most lack the intense focus upon a central leader like a classic cult, I have received repeated complaints about alleged abuse within some commercial groups.

--

What kind of relationship do destructive group leaders have with their followers?

The leadership most often defines what is right and wrong and group followers are essentially expected to defer making meaningful value judgments regarding almost any issue of significant importance. And any member of the group who questions or doubts the authority of the leader is likely to be labeled wrong, rebellious, suppressive, negative and in some situations even "demon possessed" or "satanic".

No area of a member or follower's life appears to be immune from such a group's scrutiny and/or criticism. A kind of learned dependency often develops. Group followers appear highly dependent upon their leaders to resolve problems and provide them with an ongoing sense of clarity and purpose.

[Steve Romer]

Renee

I didn't know snark was a rules violation and if that is the case many more people should be banned at the CF forums.

I agree CFHQ have the right to ban anyone they want to ban including me, but by banning people whose only sin asking tough asking about the actions of CFHQ tells us they are not interested finding the best path to fitness.

[Mike ODonnell]

Originally Posted by Renee Lee

the resident windbag.

I guess that is my title around here by post #s? Damnit.

Edit...Nope, just saw Dr G has more than me.....sorry G.....

[George Mounce]

Bah, you aren't anyone on the CF forums until your name is in red. (Even after 3000+ posts helping hundreds of people). At least they allow my IP again, that was banned for about 6 months as well, and I'm allowed to post in the daily comments (of course under many aliases - and no CF spies you won't see them here).

By the way OP, did you even read Gant's reply?

Just because someone show's up on a CF anything doesn't mean they are into the whole aspect.

Dave Tate is well respected, and until you put what he has on your back, I think you might want to realize that just because someone is on a CF video and gives feedback, it doesn't mean they buy into CF marketing philosophy. Dave Tate makes strong people animals. So does Rip and quite a few others.

Whether someone associates themselves with CF is up to them alone. I for one wouldn't say a bad word at all about Greg or Robb, they both provide excellent information (was even happy to see Greg's book in my Ironmind catalogue I got a couple days ago) and both have been associated with CF for quite some time. Doesn't change my mind about them one bit.

[Clay Jones]

Originally Posted by Renee Lee

PS, Greg, Steven and others, I'm sorry that nitpicking over semantics has been my introduction to this forum...It wasn't my intention.

Hey, some of us grammarians appreciate a little nitpickiness now and then.

Sadly, it seems the CF board has taken a turn for the worse over the past few years--It used to be a much more collegial place to post, the mods were a little less hair trigger, and the quality of post was a bit higher. Really, when David Wood was moderating things seemed to run pretty smoothly. It is really different, now, tho I will give the mods some credit for keeping it civil.

The IGX trolling does have a tendency to shut threads down, tho. Not surprising.

I always wondered why posters would have "personal info: N/A" posted in their profile. Now I know.

[Patrick Donnelly]

Originally Posted by Steve Romer

Some of my words have been banned without warning at the CrossFit forum for talking about the Robb Wolf firing...

No shit! What the hell did you expect? It's clear the mods there have their panties all up in a bunch over this, yet you and others keep bringing the topic up. Of course it's going to piss them of even more. I'm not saying it shouldn't be discussed, just that you need to take a moment to use that brain of yours if you think the CrossFit forums are the place to do it. Honestly, the moderators read these boards too, and they'll punish you there for stuff you say here, and they sure as hell read IronGarm. They're not the "CF.com Mods" - they're "the Mods." If you really want to discuss this with people in a sensible manner, go and talk with your local affiliate gym owners. I'm sure they'll have tons to say on the topic and you might even be able to slowly turn some of them towards abandoning the CrossFit name like Greyskull or really pushing for change from CFHQ (most likely by threatening to unaffiliate in droves, as only threats to CFHQ's money are actually threats to CFHQ) - whichever you what you want to see happen.

Originally Posted by George Mounce

Bah, you aren't anyone on the CF forums until your name is in red.

Yeah. They gave you a waaaaaaaay more awesome title than me.



I can't even imagine all the shit Greg is getting for letting these topics go on in his forums.

[Steve Romer]

Originally Posted by Clay Jones

The IGX trolling does have a tendency to shut threads down, tho. Not surprising.

What is IGX trolling?