Charles Fischer

Ha! Isn't that the truth...and that is why when guys come in blustering about how much they know football, and how I don't know diddly...they don't consider how silly some of their stuff will look later. I've been humbled so many times that I always make sure that I establish that, "it is my opinion is all." And that's what we're doing here, just sharing our opinions on Duck stuff.

I just discontinued the "FishDuck Feed" at the top of the site because I would have needed 12 to 18 new volunteers to help with it. I do not have the time or energy for the hours of phone calls to recruit and train that many people, let alone for two new departments. I would need a ton of people available during the day, and unfortunately...many retired people who have the time do not want to help. The majority of volunteers are already working full-time, and I cannot add to their plate as I am so very grateful for the time they give all of us as it is. In my managing of the site--I've also learned that if I come in with humor--they don't take me seriously, and I will have to deal with the same violation again. It is a very delicate balance of being tough, yet able to forget about a member's mistake and move on after he/she has acknowledged the error. This is a ton harder than it looks. (Hence why I asked for feedback, and thanks for taking your time to offer)

That was my own inclination, but yet...I do have to let people let off some steam. Great to see you join the forum and WELCOME!

The challenge is...trying to "train" people how to write when they are hyped up about the topic. A ton of good people would leave because..."I can't write anything about the team, Charles." Now that is an exaggeration, but I have had a TON of very sensitive people leave the site because I called them on one mild violation. With the 52,400 posts of last year, it is very hard to strike the right balance. Ideally, I agree with your premise, but executing it in reality is really tough. Discussing this stuff about players/coaches is what a forum is about, but I am trying to keep it civil without making it too rigid.

Well, I am not wild about this either...

Amen Duck-Brother! Felt great to read that, and it is true.

Our process is...when a moderator sees a violating post, he/she can hide it from public view with just two quick clicks. (That is why you rarely see a violating post, as our wonderful moderators catch them right away) Then they text me and I get to it when I can. I am often not around/available during the weekday, so I cannot get to violation emails until that evening, and it is too late for them to revise their post. And they cannot after one hour...

I'd rather see "that" than some of the emails I receive! Although when you have dealt with over 700 offenders over five years....you look for something new in the string of insults sent. Most think they are quite clever without realizing I truly have read what they wrote a hundred times before. But I did enjoy one recently when he wrote..."in the end Charles, you are just a petty little tyrant!" I could not resist responding with..."I am NOT....little!" I never said I was noble.

This is actually quite common. I do not recall the precise number, but the summer before the first Rose Bowl year of 1994...we had something like 13 players that HAD to pass all classes in summer school or they could not play. Apparently there were many big names of that team under this pressure. So the coaches were checking on every player, every day. They all passed! Later in 1997...the rumor is that our star running back that year had to pass a summer class, but had a hard time waking up. So the coaches assigned would not wait at class, but actually go to his apartment and pound on the door. He passed too!

Look who we are tied with! (Below us)

Yes.

Precisely my problem. What is that mechanism?

I am asking for a Duck-Buddy...really! If you know of two tickets available, then please email me charles@fishduck.com We thank you!

Actually Butterfield reminds me more of AJ Feeley and I have referred to this comparison before.

Again Mic, you need to read carefully. This is why I clash with some people, as they will not take ten seconds to read something after I've taken a ton of my time to create all this. And then they get mad at me... What is below is from the actual rule, and is listed in the first post of this thread. (Former Oregon players and coaches do not have Rule 26 protections once they leave Eugene, as they sometimes do objectionable things that deserve to be called out.) No such rules with current or former coaches at other teams, their players, their fans, journalists or anyone other than current Oregon coaches and players. So go for it and have fun!

I did that in the beginning and it spawned two new problems: 1) the offender repeated it without being told otherwise, and 2) he became accustomed to having an "Editing Maid" fix his posts for him, and I will not do that.

Please read the rule as written and referred to twice in the first post. All of this is concerning CURRENT coaches and players. Former coaches and players and the WORLD are fair-game.

True! As a new OBD member--I hope you will post your thoughts often. The water is SAFE in this Duck Pond...WELCOME!

Not to me. Dilly needs to surprise the Bruins with a new play, with constraints off of it like he did against Stanford IMHO. That can flip the game in our favor...

I think it is Good-or-Good, as a good coach could thrive at either location.

Boy are you right about pushing the envelope. Sometimes I get people pushing back in a major way, and then I point out that...."the problem isn't your opinion, it is the way you presented your opinion. It could have been written to express your thoughts without going personal on the player." In fact every violation last year...all 185 of them could have been avoided. I want everyone's opinion, but they have to be presented in a civilized manner. Some people can't do that, or (in my case before) we get heated in the moment and make a mistake. Occasional mistakes by the good people here get mulligans. Multiple violation offenders (three times or more) who take up too much of my time get banned.

Send all three the violation/notification/reminder emails? How would you do it?

(From Official Press Release to Credentialed Media such as FishDuck) EUGENE, Ore. — Oregon left tackle T.J. Bass has been named the Pac-12 offensive lineman of the week for the second week in a row, the conference office announced on Monday. This is the fourth time in his career Bass has earned the honor, matching former Duck Penei Sewell for the most in the award’s history (since 2019). Bass also joins Sewell as the only players to receive the award in consecutive weeks. Playing 52 snaps at left tackle, Bass helped the Ducks rush for 306 yards and seven touchdowns in Oregon’s win at Arizona, the program’s most rushing touchdowns since 2017 and most vs. a FBS opponent since 2012. The Ducks did not allow a sack for the fifth time in six games this season, with Bass not allowing a pressure, hurry, QB hit or sack in 24 pass-blocking opportunities, according to Pro Football Focus. PFF gave Bass an 82.4 overall grade and a terrific 84.3 run-blocking grade, both tops among Oregon offensive linemen. Bass and the Oregon offensive line also did not allow a tackle for loss against the Wildcats, the first time Oregon has done that since 2010. No. 12 Oregon (5-1, 3-0 Pac-12) will return to action following its bye week on Oct. 22 vs. No. 11 UCLA (6-0, 3-0 Pac-12) at Autzen Stadium (12:30 P.M. PT, FOX or FS1). 2022 Oregon Pac-12 Weekly Award Winners Sept. 19 – Brandon Dorlus (Co-Defensive Lineman) Sept. 26 – Mase Funa (Defensive Lineman) Oct. 3 – T.J. Bass (Offensive Lineman) Oct. 3 – Brandon Dorlus (Defensive Lineman) Oct. 10 – T.J. Bass (Offensive Lineman)

That is interesting Phunteratc, as the first one is the only one I dealt with and left the other two...but did not feel good about them. In fact things went so badly with the person who wrote the first one--that this person left the forum for good. I know I can't please them all, and don't really try to. But at times I don't think people cut me any slack for the difficult spot I am in trying to keep things civil. Thanks for your feedback!

I hope that many members will take the five minutes to read this, ponder it and give me feedback. Our rules have evolved nicely, but there is a grey area that I am having trouble with and will continue to over time. It has to do with criticizing current players and coaches, as we allow it and encourage it when it is pertaining to player performance and coaching decisions. We do not allow anyone to get personal in their posts toward players and coaches. (This only pertains to current coaches and players; everyone else in the world is fair-game) The thinking is that since we are a "high-brow" site, and parents do read stuff here about their sons as players....a line should be drawn, and I agree with that sentiment. Obvious Examples: "Lupoi is a Bonehead." "Something has always really bothered me about Moorhead. This guy has documented serious health problems and is obese. And he looks like he's 70 years old. Well, he just turned 48!" “Our basketball players have embarrassing low intelligence.” “Dan Lanning needs to get a good tailor. He looks sloppy during press conferences and games. Not anything like a leader of young men should look. Lanning looks like he should be selling insurance or maybe used cars.” “So Dillingham brought in a Dodo to lead a flock of Ducks, who are trying to be Eagles. Sounds about right. I wonder who is the bigger Dodo...the Dodo that brought in a Dodo, thinking he had an Eagle or the actual Dodo? Dillingham worked with Nix at Auburn." Above are actual examples of obvious violations where the OBD member got personal in his/her criticism, and we deleted the posts. (And the OBD members received a notification/reminder email from me) What is the Problem? It is the grey areas....as to how far members can go before we cross the line as personal? "I don't want to see Turnover-Thompson playing anymore." (I did not like having a label like that pinned on a player...but is it that bad?) "Please, please, please...Never play Ty Thompson again...Horrible." (This one is referring to player performance, but still makes me uncomfortable) "TT is like someone who has an UZI but doesn’t know when to pull the trigger and where to put the bullets." (This one is also referring to player performance, but doesn't it imply intelligence?) See what I mean? The three above are much tougher, as I get responses from OBD members who tell me that, "Charles, I can't write anything without being in violation! Can't I express my thoughts about a player doing poorly?" Look, I don't want to be blowing my time on trying to establish where the line is...and no matter what I do, someone gets bent-out-of-shape when they get an email from me. Leave the Benign Ones? Most would say that many of my violation emails sent are for benign offenses, and that is true. But I’ve learned the hard way that the analogy provided by NJDuck is true; you must pull a weed, (remove the violating post) even if it is small and benign. If you leave it, others on the forum will now see the “new low-bar” and begin doing the same behavior, thus I have more weeds to deal with. And the original one left alone feels emboldened and does the violation again, and thus I have a bigger weed to deal with. Pull them all, even if benign? If they break the rules, then it is a violation no matter how high or low the level? FishDuck Feedback please! How do you want this forum moderated as both someone who is posting and dealing with me, and as someone reading it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From the Rules: No. 26: Do not get personal in judgments of the current Players or Coaches: We allow commenting about the current players and coaches as that is what message boards and forums are all about. Second-guessing coaches and judging player performance is what everyone does, but we must not get personal or nasty toward them. Questioning a play-call or whether a tackle should have been made (Performance-related) is fine, and give your thoughts as to why in one direction or the other. Whether a coach should be retained or a player replaced is also fair-game because they know they are in the public sphere and that goes with the territory. Let's discuss, but Ad Hominem attacks on them are forbidden. (Former Oregon players and coaches do not have Rule 26 protections once they leave Eugene, as they sometimes do objectionable things that deserve to be called out.) No such rules with current or former coaches at other teams, their players, their fans, journalists or anyone other than current Oregon coaches and players. So go for it and have fun!