Kearly's Random Thoughts

[Hasselbeck]

I did it one weekend (believe for the Carolina game) and it was pretty exhausting. So I don't blame kearly at all. It would probably drive me nuts too to write out a long piece only to have idiots come in and troll.

 

[Tical21]

I'll go as far as to say that I liked them as much as anybody here. They were special. But that is kind of a bear of a project and to know you HAVE to write one after every game would definitely make it a burden. I'm sure Kip will still have plenty of good stuff to say after all the games, especially the big ones, and he'll probably even author some topics. But he'll do so because he wants to, not because he has to. Sorry if I'm speaking out place.

I'd love to try it, but I need to work on my image first. I don't think too many people are going to seek enlightenment from the guy that thought it was a good idea to take Anthony to war, and drag poor Russell Wilson through the mud in the process.

 

[EastCoastHawksFan]

this thread gave me the blues. I thought it was Kearlys Random Thoughts . I am highly disappointed and truly miss great insights on the Seattle Seahawks

 

[netskier]

The difference between work and play is the direction the money goes. For example, I will pay to ski when I want to, and the effort level approaches tackle football. In contrast, if someone pays me to ski to teach others how to ski better, then that is work, and actually lowers my ability to ski, and lessens my enjoyment of skiing.

Writing is similar.

Chimps forced to do their hobbies to get food lost their hobbies.

The negativity in these fora remind me of skiing in the rain. Rain makes it a lot less fun.

I suggest we ban the rain in at least one sub forum.

 

[seahawkswin1]

Random Thoughts is what made me the long time lurker. I was lucky enough to stumble upon it when trying to get my Seahawks fix. Oh what a fix it was. I can't find anyone who could put into words damn near exactly how I saw the game like you could. You see the little things that are the difference between winning and losing. You even noticed the bad within a good play and would point it out. Most of us just saw the front side of the play you saw the little battles within the play. Thank you so much for all the healing you have giving me after tough losses. I hope this thread brings back the little pieces that were cut away.

 

[Jville]

A reluctance to post "Random Thoughts" doesn't surprise. Kearly's admirable perseverance exceeded my expectations.

His posts in the face of uncalled for abuse is surely out of a love for the Seahawks and numerous .net members.

Kearly's skin is surely thicker than mine. All the subject hijacks are far to frequent and resulting impact on forum climate far too ugly for my tastes. In fact, this is my first post since June.

Insight into my own reluctance, along with the reluctance of others to post at seahawks.net can be found embedded in a series of confrontational posts recorded here >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/search.php?author_id=17138&sr=posts[/urltargetblank]
As is mentioned repeatably, "there are reasons we can not have nice things".

I so dearly miss the Radish.

 

[Hawknight]

I'd suggest you Pm him.

Kip used to put a ton of work into his post and as Scotte pointed out......

Well the fact of the matter is I don't blame the man for backing off.

From my observations Kip was more than willing to discus his opinions and even intelligently debate them but when you have to defend yourself week after week from trolls or people that just want to argue, it gets old.

I would hope that if Kip does start to post again, that people will show a little more respect that what has been shown in the past.

FWIW, this is my personal opinion and not from the standpoint of a Staff member.

I wish he could write his random thoughts on a thread and then just have it read only...lock it from anyones rant and raving.

I do miss them. my 2 cents

 

[Jville]

Insight into my own reluctance, along with the reluctance of others to post at seahawks.net can be found embedded in a series of confrontational posts recorded here >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/search.php?author_id=17138&sr=posts[/urltargetblank]

Surely calling out other posters like this isn't helping?

The reference is a forum record. Such a record can be very beneficial in providing useful insight into an author and the posts of an author.

I would hope that the more members that are made aware of those records ..... the more civil and respectful the climate on this forum will become.

 

[netskier]

I suggest that the mods create a poll to survey whether enough members support creating an Elevated Discourse sub forum as Kearly suggested in post 29.

I vote YES.

 

[hawknation2015]

Insight into my own reluctance, along with the reluctance of others to post at seahawks.net can be found embedded in a series of confrontational posts recorded here >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/search.php?author_id=17138&sr=posts[/urltargetblank]

Surely calling out other posters like this isn't helping?

The reference is a forum record. Such a record can be very beneficial in providing useful insight into an author and the posts of an author.

I would hope that the more members that are made aware of those records ..... the more civil and respectful the climate on this forum will become.

And what particular post do you have a problem with?

I think that is certainly true at times, but at the end of the day, I do try not to judge someone's character simply because I strongly disagree with one or more of their opinions. IMO, that's the root of the philosophical difference that led to this.

I think a marketplace of ideas is essential, and that includes disagreeing with others and having others disagree with you. None of us can be 100% right about everything. We all have biases and blind spots. That is part of what makes us human.

Unfortunately, kearly has shown that he finds it extremely difficult when his "truth" conflicts with someone else's "truth" and is willing to resort to some outlandish tactics to prevent that reoccurrence. But other than that, our disagreements of opinion give me no reason to think negatively of him or anyone else here with whom I enjoy discussing Seahawks football.

:th2thumbs:

 

[sam1313]

All I have to add is my personal thanks Kearly. I always loved reading RT, as you always had some unique, thought-provoking insight.

I guess I do have a question for powers that be though - why can't we have an intellectual posting category where those who post like jerks get banned from that forum? Is that possible? I might even throw a few extra bucks .Net's way to help establish that!

 

[Jville]

Insight into my own reluctance, along with the reluctance of others to post at seahawks.net can be found embedded in a series of confrontational posts recorded here >>> [urltargetblank]http://seahawks.net/search.php?author_id=17138&sr=posts[/urltargetblank]

Surely calling out other posters like this isn't helping?

The reference is a forum record. Such a record can be very beneficial in providing useful insight into an author and the posts of an author.

I would hope that the more members that are made aware of those records ..... the more civil and respectful the climate on this forum will become.

And what particular post do you have a problem with?

I think that is certainly true at times, but at the end of the day, I do try not to judge someone's character simply because I strongly disagree with one or more of their opinions. IMO, that's the root of the philosophical difference that led to this.

I think a marketplace of ideas is essential, and that includes disagreeing with others and having others disagree with you. None of us can be 100% right about everything. We all have biases and blind spots. That is part of what makes us human.

Unfortunately, kearly has shown that he finds it extremely difficult when his "truth" conflicts with someone else's "truth" and is willing to resort to some outlandish tactics to prevent that reoccurrence. But other than that, our disagreements of opinion give me no reason to think negatively of him or anyone else here with whom I enjoy discussing Seahawks football.

:th2thumbs:

To me, that reads like yet another nail in the coffin of "Random Thoughts".

It's too bad we can't have nice things.

 

[hawknation2015]

Surely calling out other posters like this isn't helping?

The reference is a forum record. Such a record can be very beneficial in providing useful insight into an author and the posts of an author.

I would hope that the more members that are made aware of those records ..... the more civil and respectful the climate on this forum will become.

And what particular post do you have a problem with?

I think that is certainly true at times, but at the end of the day, I do try not to judge someone's character simply because I strongly disagree with one or more of their opinions. IMO, that's the root of the philosophical difference that led to this.

I think a marketplace of ideas is essential, and that includes disagreeing with others and having others disagree with you. None of us can be 100% right about everything. We all have biases and blind spots. That is part of what makes us human.

Unfortunately, kearly has shown that he finds it extremely difficult when his "truth" conflicts with someone else's "truth" and is willing to resort to some outlandish tactics to prevent that reoccurrence. But other than that, our disagreements of opinion give me no reason to think negatively of him or anyone else here with whom I enjoy discussing Seahawks football.

:th2thumbs:

To me, that reads like yet another nail in the coffin of "Random Thoughts".

Well, just to be clear, kearly and I did not begin this "feud" until several months after he said he would never again write another "Random Thoughts." I rarely posted in those threads, and when I did, I was always civil.

People tell me this is not the first time he has pulled the plug on "Random Thoughts," so perhaps he will change his mind again. I agree it makes the forum better, but I can also understand the kind of time commitment it requires.

 

[EastCoastHawksFan]

Can we get back to football?

 

[hawknation2015]

Can we get back to football?

:13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13:

 

[jdemps]

Can we get back to football?

ETA: 6 hours.

 

[BlueTalon]

Unfortunately, kearly has shown that he finds it extremely difficult when his "truth" conflicts with someone else's "truth" and is willing to resort to some outlandish tactics to prevent that reoccurrence.

Sorry, but this is a pile of crap. Speaking as one who has disagreed with Kip on numerous occasions, I can tell you firsthand that your statement is not true. But in the process of disagreeing, many people can't resist the temptation of accompanying the disagreement with some kind of snarky remark or personal insult.

One of my personal mottos is "What you believe is only as good as why you believe it." I have strong opinions, but I like to have good reasons for them, and I usually do. But if I disagree with someone like Kip, I'm interested in knowing what are his reasons for believing what he does -- and if his reasons are good (and they usually are), then it compels me to reassess my reasons for believing what I do. The end result may or may not be a change of my opinion, and often we may agree to disagree, but the process is always stimulating and enlightening.



Regarding a couple of suggestions in this thread: I like the idea of having an anti-shack forum. I do not like the idea of locking a thread after the first post. One of the great things about Kip's Random Thoughts (or anyone else's in depth analysis, for that matter) is the discussion that proceeds from it. Preemptively shutting down that discussion, and diverting it to another thread, would make the process of having the discussion much more cumbersome. But in an anti-shack forum, discussion would be free as long as it is civil. I'm assuming civility would be enforced through permission to enter the forum and/or the quick use of the ban hammer, either of which I would be perfectly fine with.

 

[chris98251]

Unfortunately, kearly has shown that he finds it extremely difficult when his "truth" conflicts with someone else's "truth" and is willing to resort to some outlandish tactics to prevent that reoccurrence.

Sorry, but this is a pile of crap. Speaking as one who has disagreed with Kip on numerous occasions, I can tell you firsthand that your statement is not true. But in the process of disagreeing, many people can't resist the temptation of accompanying the disagreement with some kind of snarky remark or personal insult.

One of my personal mottos is "What you believe is only as good as why you believe it." I have strong opinions, but I like to have good reasons for them, and I usually do. But if I disagree with someone like Kip, I'm interested in knowing what are his reasons for believing what he does -- and if his reasons are good (and they usually are), then it compels me to reassess my reasons for believing what I do. The end result may or may not be a change of my opinion, and often we may agree to disagree, but the process is always stimulating and enlightening.



Regarding a couple of suggestions in this thread: I like the idea of having an anti-shack forum. I do not like the idea of locking a thread after the first post. One of the great things about Kip's Random Thoughts (or anyone else's in depth analysis, for that matter) is the discussion that proceeds from it. Preemptively shutting down that discussion, and diverting it to another thread, would make the process of having the discussion much more cumbersome. But in an anti-shack forum, discussion would be free as long as it is civil. I'm assuming civility would be enforced through permission to enter the forum and/or the quick use of the ban hammer, either of which I would be perfectly fine with.

Would that not in other words be called an elitist society then, we don't know you or don't think your mature or good enough to comment on this material so you can't come in.

 

[netskier]

No. Let every one in, who agrees to follow the rules, but kick them out as soon as they don't. This would be totally egalitarian.

 

[hawknation2015]

many people can't resist the temptation of accompanying the disagreement with some kind of snarky remark

Sorry, but this is a pile of crap.

LOL, whatever you say man. If I said it that way, I think someone's head might explode!