Bear Down Wildcats

He agreed (eagerly) to banishment if we beat the almighty UCLA at Pauley. Ban him.

I don't think the scarlet letter/sig shame would work either. He has always shown a remarkable capacity to ignore any amount of criticism thrown his way.

Ban him until the NBA Draft... and put him on probation after that.

He made a stupid bet and should be forced to fulfill it... to an extent. If he does not learn his lesson next time, no second chance. He's made that bet before and won... so he was cocky.

If he does not offer some value... vote again and send him to Siberia forever.

I had a hard time with this as I hate to ban any Wildcat fan but BC97 is so negative and gave his word that he'd leave the board....in Thai we say 'Som Nam Na' (Serves You Right)

Maybe this will help him grow the F up and be a real fan going forward.....not a Homer but a real fan. BTFD.

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:I had a hard time with this as I hate to ban any Wildcat fan but BC97 is so negative and gave his word that he'd leave the board....in Thai we say 'Som Nam Na' (Serves You Right)

Maybe this will help him grow the F up and be a real fan going forward.....not a Homer but a real fan. BTFD.

Bangkok, what's life like in Thailand. You've been there a while now.. must be a cool place.

Catintheheat wrote:Riverside Bruin never really bothered me much. I mostly ignored him. I would have put him on ignore if he really bothered me. Also I do not believe he broke any rules, he was just annoying. Usually when there is a bet something needs to be expected in return. He was just being his annoying self. He has spent years here and I believe throwing him out is a little bit cruel. It's like breaking an addiction, he will have to go through withdrawal and find some place else.

Since he didn't break any rules, I voted that he can stay.

Agree.

MrMeow wrote:

Catintheheat wrote:Riverside Bruin never really bothered me much. I mostly ignored him. I would have put him on ignore if he really bothered me. Also I do not believe he broke any rules, he was just annoying. Usually when there is a bet something needs to be expected in return. He was just being his annoying self. He has spent years here and I believe throwing him out is a little bit cruel. It's like breaking an addiction, he will have to go through withdrawal and find some place else.

Since he didn't break any rules, I voted that he can stay.

Agree.

So if we do not keep him accountable for his bets what is to keep anyone accountable for what they say and bet?

Chicat wrote:That's exactly what this thread and poll is about.

Dipshit made a stupid bet.
Dipshit repeated the terms of that bet repeatedly over many days.
Dipshit loses said bet.
Dipshit then comes back after losing the bet basically saying, "fuck all of you, I'm staying."

Question is, do we hold dipshit to his word and the terms of the bet?

It was obviously his intention to reneg when he made the bet. He never had any intention of honoring it.

If the bet had been between him and another poster and the terms were that whoever lost had the leave the board for good, would anyone have an issue with him reneging on the bet and sticking around? I certainly would.

Chicat wrote:If the bet had been between him and another poster and the terms were that whoever lost had the leave the board for good, would anyone have an issue with him reneging on the bet and sticking around? I certainly would.

Yes I would have an issue with it

I hope we allow him to end his self-ban and come back, just based on the simple reason that we're not all on the same page about what the issue is. This has turned into what we're somehow doing to him, rather than his own responsibility. I doubt the vote tally reflects a shared understanding of what we're voting on. Makes me realize the thread topics are more fluid than I thought, and we might as well give greater weight to an obsession with UCLA on this board.

MrMeow wrote:

Chicat wrote:That's exactly what this thread and poll is about.

Dipshit made a stupid bet.
Dipshit repeated the terms of that bet repeatedly over many days.
Dipshit loses said bet.
Dipshit then comes back after losing the bet basically saying, "fuck all of you, I'm staying."

Question is, do we hold dipshit to his word and the terms of the bet?

It was obviously his intention to reneg when he made the bet. He never had any intention of honoring it.

All the more reason to keep him gone. There are a few life lessons to be learned here.

A) Don't troll.
B) Don't bet against your team.
C) Don't make bets with results you won't be able to abide by.
D) Don't make bets with the intention of never paying up.
E) Don't be an asshole (although I guess that's covered by A through D)

Chicat wrote:If the bet had been between him and another poster and the terms were that whoever lost had the leave the board for good, would anyone have an issue with him reneging on the bet and sticking around? I certainly would.

It wasn't, though. Even then, I've seen people renege on those bets.

I just am not sure that this is so serious he should have to be gone forever. Yes, it was stupid, but who here hasn't posted something he/she regretted? BC has overall issues with his posting, which is why i figure if he wants people to overlook the stupid bet he made, he owes something in return.

Longhorned wrote:

splitsecond wrote:

MrMeow wrote:Looks like he's losing the popular vote badly. How's he doing in the electoral college?

losing bigly

I vote for weighting the poll more for posters in Nevada, Illinois, Indiana, and the California Central Coast.

I demand a recount of the no votes only. EnFuego is paying for it.

A selfie of him giving Brycie a hummer would suffice?

I'm the 1 who instigated the bet. I did it sort of jokingly but he immediately agreed and not in a joking manner then repeating his intentions several times.

Again I don't really care but if it was me I would have posted at halftime. "Please let me out of the bet, Go Cats"

But Beachcat was instead hoping to see the Bruins win to tell us all he was right

Suspend him. Somebody volunteers to go take two puffs of their wife's inhaler. As soon as all traces of the PED are out of that poster's system, Beachcat can return.

Beachcat can be annoying as hell, though I personally have had nothing against the guy until this. A bet is a bet, and I consider welchers some of the scummiest people around. Also going against him is how he came back, immediately, and was just like, "Eh, I've decided to welch on my bet guys and you're just going to accept it." I think that a lengthy suspension + a scarlet letter (giving him a sheepish name, or allowing us to choose his name and avi pic whenever he starts acting like BeachCat) would be a fair middle ground if it is decided he is allowed to come back.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Chicat wrote:If the bet had been between him and another poster and the terms were that whoever lost had the leave the board for good, would anyone have an issue with him reneging on the bet and sticking around? I certainly would.

It wasn't, though. Even then, I've seen people renege on those bets.

Terrible, awful, soulless ghouls who don't deserve to be a part of communities as great as this one.

My only hope is that Beachcat right now goes to log into his account for the 43rd time since Sunday morning only to find that he's still locked out and he gets the shakes because he can't post his hot take that Bryce Alford is better than Allonzo Trier and will go nuts on us at McKale.

Chicat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Chicat wrote:If the bet had been between him and another poster and the terms were that whoever lost had the leave the board for good, would anyone have an issue with him reneging on the bet and sticking around? I certainly would.

It wasn't, though. Even then, I've seen people renege on those bets.

Terrible, awful, soulless ghouls who don't deserve to be a part of communities as great as this one.

My only hope is that Beachcat right now goes to log into his account for the 43rd time since Sunday morning only to find that he's still locked out and he gets the shakes because he can't post his hot take that Bryce Alford is better than Allonzo Trier and will go nuts on us at McKale.

Just my opinion, but the internet is home to awful, soulless people who use anonymity to engage in behavior they would never dream of in person.

Speaking of that, I haven't challenged anyone to meet up for a fistfight in a while.

Gotta tip my hat to all the thoughts/ posts on this subject. Initially, I didn't think the poll would be close, but 64- 34% made it interesting. There have been some good ideas presented, and not all out of malice or anger. Interesting discussion, well done. (I only wish other aspects of my life worked as well)

Alieberman wrote:I'm the 1 who instigated the bet. I did it sort of jokingly but he immediately agreed and not in a joking manner then repeating his intentions several times.

Again I don't really care but if it was me I would have posted at halftime. "Please let me out of the bet, Go Cats"

But Beachcat was instead hoping to see the Bruins win to tell us all he was right

Agree with this. If he said he didn't mean it at half time or apologized after I might feel different about it. Or if he asked to stay. But didn't he just say he thought about it and he is staying?

Fuck no. Make this board great again. #MTBGA

PHXCATS wrote:

Alieberman wrote:I'm the 1 who instigated the bet. I did it sort of jokingly but he immediately agreed and not in a joking manner then repeating his intentions several times.

Again I don't really care but if it was me I would have posted at halftime. "Please let me out of the bet, Go Cats"

But Beachcat was instead hoping to see the Bruins win to tell us all he was right

Agree with this. If he said he didn't mean it at half time or apologized after I might feel different about it. Or if he asked to stay. But didn't he just say he thought about it and he is staying?

Here was his quote:

Decided I'll be sticking around. It's only a message board. So before you start the "lock hik up!" chants, understand that your energy is probably better spent discussing AZ hoops than hurling personal insults and acting like you're 10 years old. My apologies to any actual 10 year olds here.

Notice the dickish tone and distinct lack of eating any crow whatsoever.

I stick by my initial stance that while we shouldn't kick him off for good there has to be consequences to making such a declaration and immediately reneging on it. Banned for rest of the season and can return in offseason. He does it again then he's gone for good. I think that's more than fair.

I've thought about it, and I feel I was rash in my decision and overall thought process. Like Spliff said above, who here hasn't said something they regret on this board? Just last week I went off on Scheer simply because I thought he said something that he actually didn't say.

And I realized banning BC97 would be the same as when I put him as a foe a month or so ago. At first I thought, ahhhhhh, life is so much better. But then I realized I had nobody to make fun of. And, since I really only like making fun of people who truly deserve it, I needed BC97's posts. I needed a good laugh. And now we won't have that, because almost everyone around here is sane and knows what they are talking about. Even ASUHater is mostly sane this year. Think about that. We need BC97 back, and it will be really fun under whatever conditions we decide he has to come back with.

BRING HIM BACK
BRING HIM BACK
BRING HIM BACK

*This announcement was paid for by the "BC97 for bitchboy of the board" campaign

It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

Olsondogg wrote:It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

See, that's why I think the suspension is more about how he behaves than the bet. If he wasn't consistently trolling and dropped the non-apology at the end, people would be willing to overlook the bet, at least IMO.

That's a reason I tend to skew towards letting him control his own destiny. Keep with posts that show the reason no one minds that he got banned to begin with and let him go for good. If he actually values posting here, he can show it and make amends by cutting the bs.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

See, that's why I think the suspension is more about how he behaves than the bet. If he wasn't consistently trolling and dropped the non-apology at the end, people would be willing to overlook the bet, at least IMO.

That's a reason I tend to skew towards letting him control his own destiny.

And that's exactly why I skew towards upholding the ban. He brings absolutely nothing to the board. That in combination with the bet is a peace out situation.

SCCats wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

See, that's why I think the suspension is more about how he behaves than the bet. If he wasn't consistently trolling and dropped the non-apology at the end, people would be willing to overlook the bet, at least IMO.

That's a reason I tend to skew towards letting him control his own destiny.

And that's exactly why I skew towards upholding the ban. He brings absolutely nothing to the board. That in combination with the bet is a peace out situation.

This.

He is what he is, he's not changing or behaving. People don't change.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

See, that's why I think the suspension is more about how he behaves than the bet. If he wasn't consistently trolling and dropped the non-apology at the end, people would be willing to overlook the bet, at least IMO.

That's a reason I tend to skew towards letting him control his own destiny. Keep with posts that show the reason no one minds that he got banned to begin with and let him go for good. If he actually values posting here, he can show it and make amends by cutting the bs.

Yeah, if he had come in and said, "Holy crap, what a game. I'm an idiot. That will teach me to bet against the Cats ever. Any chance we can say bygones and I can stick around? Willing to eat as much crow as possible to make that happen." and then watched for the responses, I'm sure most people, especially in the afterglow of such a huge win would have been fine with him staying.

But to just announce he's sticking around and that "it's just a message board" and then to finish it off by saying to hold the elementary school-level insults and taunts? What an asshole.

Olsondogg wrote:Fuck no. Make this board great again. #MTBGA

In the spirit of "Low-energy Jeb," "Lyin Ted" and "Little Marco," can we call him "Welching Beach?"

Chicat wrote:That's exactly what this thread and poll is about.

Dipshit made a stupid bet.
Dipshit repeated the terms of that bet repeatedly over many days.
Dipshit loses said bet.
Dipshit then comes back after losing the bet basically saying, "fuck all of you, I'm staying."

Question is, do we hold dipshit to his word and the terms of the bet?

In other words, if you replaced "Dipshit" with "Superstar Poster," he'd still be gone. A bet is a bet.

Really?

On the other hand, SP would never make such a wager.

So .............. being a horrible poster IS a factor.

rgdeuce wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Fuck no. Make this board great again. #MTBGA

In the spirit of "Low-energy Jeb," "Lyin Ted" and "Little Marco," can we call him "Welching Beach?"

Outside of this thread I hope he's never mentioned again. I know I'll do my part. That dude literally offered nothing.

gumby wrote:

Chicat wrote:That's exactly what this thread and poll is about.

Dipshit made a stupid bet.
Dipshit repeated the terms of that bet repeatedly over many days.
Dipshit loses said bet.
Dipshit then comes back after losing the bet basically saying, "fuck all of you, I'm staying."

Question is, do we hold dipshit to his word and the terms of the bet?

In other words, if you replaced "Dipshit" with "Superstar Poster," he'd still be gone. A bet is a bet.

Really?

On the other hand, SP would never make such a wager.

So .............. being a horrible poster IS a factor.

And if SP did make such a wager, SP would eat a ton of crow and be contrite and understand that membership is a privilege, not a right. Dipshit went the opposite route.

Dipshits are like that. I kinda wonder if he has a choice, if you know what I mean. Is there a shrink in the house?

Ultimatums are only valid when enforced. Lesson learned. Buh bye.

Olsondogg wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Fuck no. Make this board great again. #MTBGA

In the spirit of "Low-energy Jeb," "Lyin Ted" and "Little Marco," can we call him "Welching Beach?"

Outside of this thread I hope he's never mentioned again. I know I'll do my part. That dude literally offered nothing.

Same here. But it wasn't just offering nothing, he was literally a detriment to the board.

Being a shitty poster shouldn't be reason to get you banned.

Unless your shitty posts ban yourself.

Then I can't help you.

wtf why even have the poll. he should be a man of his word and stay away. I doubt there are many who want him here.

you're upsetting the regular posters and lurkers here if you keep him around. why do we need someone who's just going to bring the mood down here and derail a bunch of threads. we're having a great season despite all the odds. can't we just enjoy it without some stupid troll starting shit

Jwsisliving wrote:wtf why even have the poll.

When he came back after his half a day in exile and posted his "I'm back - deal with it" bullshit I unilaterally decided to ban him. After hearing from a few posters who thought he should be allowed to be a total piece of shit and welsh on the bet I said I wasn't against leaving it up to the board to decide. And here we are.

Essentially, since he didn't do anything truly ban-worthy, it probably wasn't something to be left up to a single mod to decide. And since the bet was with the entire board, the entire board should get a vote.

whatever the outcome, i appreciate you letting others chime in, @chi. thanks for being fair and for embracing the co-op & community aspects of this board.

I'm with a lot of others on here, ban his ass till the season is over, then he can come back on probation.

A bet is a bet, and a bet is even more of a bet when the person who loses fairly acts like a total ass afterwards.

This can be his chance to learn humility, and if he doesn't we can at least say we were good people and tried to help out a poster who seems to be a little challenged sometimes...

Burn her!

(Until the end of the season, then probation. No...., ban,then force to wear Bobby Hurley mask, then probation.)

In defense of the guy, it is pretty apparent there are some underlying mental health concerns. If he isn't a concern troll or a wolf in sheep's clothing troll, he is a case study for generalized anxiety disorder. I've felt bad for the dude on multiple occasions.

rgdeuce wrote:In defense of the guy, it is pretty apparent there are some underlying mental health concerns. If he isn't a concern troll or a wolf in sheep's clothing troll, he is a case study for generalized anxiety disorder. I've felt bad for the dude on multiple occasions.

Most people who have an idiosyncratic and inconsequential obsession (like an irrational anxiety about UCLA basketball's superiority over Arizona basketball) have a filter that prevents them from bringing that obsession into basically every conversation with people who don't think UCLA is better than Arizona.

Chicat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:It was more than fair to consider a return before he came back with the response Chi posted mere moments after "leaving".

He provides nothing of substance to the board. If people want him back, restrict him to his own forum/thread so that those that want to engage that shit can go there. Otherwise, it pollutes otherwise good threads.

See, that's why I think the suspension is more about how he behaves than the bet. If he wasn't consistently trolling and dropped the non-apology at the end, people would be willing to overlook the bet, at least IMO.

That's a reason I tend to skew towards letting him control his own destiny. Keep with posts that show the reason no one minds that he got banned to begin with and let him go for good. If he actually values posting here, he can show it and make amends by cutting the bs.

Yeah, if he had come in and said, "Holy crap, what a game. I'm an idiot. That will teach me to bet against the Cats ever. Any chance we can say bygones and I can stick around? Willing to eat as much crow as possible to make that happen." and then watched for the responses, I'm sure most people, especially in the afterglow of such a huge win would have been fine with him staying.

But to just announce he's sticking around and that "it's just a message board" and then to finish it off by saying to hold the elementary school-level insults and taunts? What an asshole.

I agree with that totally. The response he gave post-game was ridiculous and the single least mature reaction to the situation possible.

I skew towards letting him have a chance to earn his way back. If nothing else, this thread should be a lesson about exactly how thin his act has gotten. It isn't even like politics, where the fights tend to happen. Arizona basketball is the one area you would think we would all be united, and it's his Arizona basketball takes that everyone hates.

I like second chances though. I understand why people don't think a second chance is warranted here, even if I would give him one last shot.

I'm with Spiff. Have hope. Believe that people are redeemable. Give him a second chance to not be a dick.

Put me down in the time limited ban with probation camp.

I don't read his stuff as much as some of you guys.

Heh!

The anonymity of the internet has abased human beings into sociopaths with avatars.

This is a well-trodden road of experience. If he breaks his own repeatedly-sworn vow, we would be the fools to give him another blind chance.

Give him his arena to earn his credibility back in the AR forum. His penance should not disrupt the more populous sections of this board.

Poll ends with 65% No. But I'm sure if I included a third option of "Yes, but only after the season" that probably would have won.

Anyone not ok with that?

Cool with me, but I'd frame it to him as such: your ban is indefinite, but after the season you may petition to the community for a return. Privilege not a right just like Chi said.

And in his petition if he's a dbag and hasn't learned a thing, well then I think we got our second chance answer. We would also avoid the awkward period of policing him after his return.