With the start of free agency, we have seen a pretty big spike in the number of new posters to the website. With the draft right around the corner, I fully expect that number to grow.
I thought that this would be a good time to re-post the Community Guidelines that have been laid out here at DBN.
I don't want this to sound like I am trying to come down on certain posters or newbies. Here at DBN, we are always happy to have new, intelligent posters that bring new angles to discussions. This is just a friendly reminder to everyone here on the website that we need to follow the rules and guidelines that makes this the best Browns website on the face of the planet (it's true, Joe Thomas told me that).
Again I will only highlight a few hot button issues, but I urge you to check out the entire list here. If you ever need this link in the future it is in the top right box under the search bar. There are some reminders and notes on there that even I forget at times.

A) Intelligent Discussions: If you visit the Cleveland.com discussion boards, how many posts do you find that are actually worth reading about the Browns? Not many. And, a significant amount of people who do talk about the Browns do so without much thought, posting comments such as "mangini sucks...can't we just ship rogers and take crabtree omg that would be amazing".
The thought itself is not stupid - the way that people go about conveying the thought is what can sound ignorant. A more appropriate way to post a take on the sentence above would be something like the following:
"Honestly, I think this offseason has been a train wreck so far. I know it's still early, but I'm very weary of some of the unusual decisions Mangini has made thus far, like his "issues" with Shaun Rogers and the releasing of a beloved player like Joe Jurevicius.
Hopefully everything comes together around draft time - getting a player like Crabtree might be enough to offset the voids left by Jurevicius and Winslow."
I hope you see the difference. If not, it doesn't mean you need to leave DBN. Just enjoy reading the discussions and hold back posting yourself until you feel you're more comfortable conveying your thoughts better. Granted, you might feel hatred towards a coach or player, but it really annoys a lot of other people when statements are made without proper justification. In the end, everyone else might disagree with you, but that's fine as long as you backed up your argument in the first place.
B) Using the Reply Button: This, above all else, can be one of the most frustrating things. Every time you respond with a general comment in a DBN post, FanPost, or FanShot, you can use the general reply box at the bottom of a page. This positions your comment to the far left of the page. However, if you want to address someone specifically, you must use the "reply" link underneath that person's post. This allows the discussion to flow smoothly. Consider the following situations:
Situation 1 (Incorrect Way):
-ChrisP: I think Braylon Edwards should just be dealt away.
-------rufio: Why would you think that? We wouldn't have any weapons on offense then.
---------------Brad: Right, unless you believe Paul Hubbard emerges out of no where.
-------Nick: I'm all for dealing Edwards - if we get a first round pick and future picks only, of course.
-ChrisP: Rufio, we could get Crabtree and just as easily replace him.
Whoa, where did that last post come from? Consider the following situation now:
Situation 1 (Correct Way):
-ChrisP: I think Braylon Edwards should just be dealt away.
-------rufio: Why would you think that? We wouldn't have any weapons on offense then.
---------------Brad: Right, unless you believe Paul Hubbard emerges out of no where.
---------------ChrisP: Rufio, we could get Crabtree and just as easily replace him.
-------Nick: I'm all for dealing Edwards - if we get a first round pick and future picks only, of course.
Now, as a reader, it's easy to understand exactly who and what I am responding to. Granted, it could have been comprehendible either way in short threads such as this one, but imagine the confusion that can be caused when 20 people respond with long opinions in each one. You would be breaking the discussion up in situation one, which only causes frustration.
C) Posting Ethics: The following should go without saying. However, we do not condone racism, excessive foul language, or verbally attacking another user. If your post falls under these categories or something similar to them, if you really feel the need to have at it with somebody, contact them personally via email. Do not do it on DBN. This specifically includes political discussion as well!
D) Attacking New Users: This one goes out to many of our veteran members, who have been doing this lately. If a new user posts something they shouldn't, or if they post something that seems unjustified (like they pulled it out of their...err..."hat"), that does not mean you need to respond with something overly sarcastic.
I would much rather you click the "actions > flag" button underneath a user's comment if you find it inappropriate. This will draw my attention to a specific post quicker than usual, and then I can handle it from there. Our goal is to mold new users into quality users, but that doesn't always happen over night. If you think a poster said something without explaining why they said it, don't say "go to Cleveland.com with that crap". Instead, I'd rather see "Can you explain why you said that? I can't take your statement seriously unless I hear a logical reason backing it up." Eventually, it should click in their mind that explaining their opinions or sources is necessary.
I like giving people the benefit of the doubt; new users typically are new to giving their thoughts on a public forum - patience is key. Sometimes, someone truly is out of line, and they will be warned and or banned at my discretion.
E) Having Fun: Don't get the wrong idea - the most important thing, above all else, is to have fun at DBN. Don't hold back your opinions. Don't be afraid to challenge someone else's opinion. Free speech is not being violated or censored. Just make sure you're ready to justify your statements, and everything will be fine. Before you know it, you'll be a "respected" member trying to guide new members down the proper path as well.
0 recs | 163 comments
golanbatracatgmail.com
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
As much as we don’t see eye to eye on football stuff, I like you. You crack me up.
Bernie19Kosar - March 20, 2010
I just figured my email address should be included in the Community Guidelines.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
I second what B19K said, we may not always see eye to eye on anything really, but you do make me laugh a lot.
North Coast Flea - March 20, 2010
Hah
danvail - March 20, 2010
I’ll rec that, and maybe one day have to shoot you an email to discuss a certain topic. ;-)
doggrad87 - March 21, 2010
i guess this wouldn’t be the proper forum to invite someone to become a fan of the bills…
Dawg Nuts - March 20, 2010
You can, just gotta do it the clean way.
Bernie19Kosar - March 20, 2010
I don’t like what you are saying, maybe you would be happier cheering for Buffalo. (Would that be PC enough?)
North Coast Flea - March 20, 2010
Or you could go the way of *&%^$ I think we all know what goes there.
Bernie19Kosar - March 20, 2010
your post reminded me of this:
http://www.holytaco.com/25-awesome-joseph-ducreux-memes
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
I ask that this said “slim shady” please rise
and that all of the imposters stay seated.
TheRealSlimShady - March 20, 2010
Did you appropriately stay seated as well?
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Some of those are pretty good. I like the Sir Mixalot one.
North Coast Flea - March 21, 2010
I’d like to add another additional comment:
Don’t use
subject lines obnoxiously, as you can see here.
Most of us
here at Dawgs by Nature find it very annoying to read.
It may not
be an official rule / guideline, but rather simple DBN etiquette.
Thanks for
your cooperation, it is appreciated.
Simmsinns - March 20, 2010
Totally Simminns. Couldn’t agree more with that.
Also, if you’re responding to a direct comment, use reply. It gets annoying trying to weed out comments.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
at first i was like :/ but then i was like :D
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
That comment was tricky, I know.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
Well done though. Well done.
Andrew Tolliver - March 24, 2010
well said.
Cleveland.com… shudder
There’s a whole world out there looking in!
LondonBrown - March 20, 2010
Really?
Section ‘C’ states otherwise. Weather you like it or not, the first amendment protects hate/offensive speech. You may disagree with one’s words and argue, but you can’t forcibly zip their lips.
But I also understand that we don’t want people killing each other on here.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Free speech doesn’t protect any speech anywhere, and DBN is not the public sphere.
rufio - March 20, 2010
What?
Oh, I forgot, it’s 1984.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Not quite.
Free speech doesn’t protect private spaces. Free speech doesn’t protect against screaming “fire” in a crowded movie theatre, etc. And for good reason.
This is not a public board. If someone wants to create their own board for hate/offensive speech, they have the right to do so in my understanding. This board is about football, is not public, and those who run this board have the right to cease any conversation that they deem inappropriate.
In other words, lips can be forcibly zipped on this site.
rufio - March 20, 2010
free speech also doesn’t protect against threats, inciting violence…just some other examples.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
I’m not talking about yelling out something to cause a panic. That’s completely different. Don’t know why you brought that up.
DBN isn’t really "private", but it has rules that are necessary and fine with me. But you can’t say that there is freedom of speech and have rules to prevent certain speech. It doesn’t make sense.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
DBN is most certainly a privately owned entity. The Associated Press is a private entity. The AP owns this website, owns the domain, and owns the physical servers on which the site resides.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
I’m here. It’s not that private.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Private ownership. Whether or not it’s private (like a country club) makes no difference in the application of the first amendment. If a space (a building, a vacant lot, a stadium, a domain) is privately owned, the owners can place nearly unlimited restrictions on speech.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
exactly. the idea of something being private is that not only can they exclude people from using it, but they can exclude words from being used. in a public place, anything goes. that is why cleveland.com has so much crap.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Yes, thank you.
rufio - March 21, 2010
While it isn’t that hard to believe that you would not gain access to a private club, private ownership is very different from the private you seem to be thinking of.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
It is private because:
a) you have to apply or at least just check a box to join.
b) there are moderators. cleveland.com is public. that in a way is the problem with it.
Cleveland.com is a perfect example of a Public good on the internet. In an economic sense, a public good is nonexcludable (people cannot b prevented from using it) and nonrival in consumption (using it doesn’t decrease others ability to use).
c) DBN and all of the other SBN websites are what economists would call a natural monopoly. use doesn’t decrease others ability to use it. however, it can be prevented from being used (excludable). a natural monopoly is private. it is something like Television, or Sirius Radio.
Because of how SBN sites are set up they ARE private.
Yes ANYONE can join, but at the same time, anyone can get kicked out. golan here has experienced this (just temporarily though…good to have ya back). There are moderators to keep this from being Cleveland.com. the problems over there (stupid posters, etc…) are the problems public goods face everywhere.
yes it is “free” to join but you do not have free reign like you do on other sites.
I agree with the freedom of speech part.
However, some of the things that have violated the speech here are questionable free speech as is.
holmes was a supreme court justice involved in Schneck vs. US. this case set up the idea of “clear and present danger” and first heard the example of shouting fire in a crowded theater.
All of these are examples of free speech that is either not covered by the constitution (in the court cases) or questionably covered (the holmes quote). The holmes quote perfectly encapsulates the idea of free speech. some comments have come quite close to touching the other man’s nose and may have actually touched it in some cases.
and like everyone was saying, this is a private place and the moderators are there to enforce the rules of DBN.
It might not seem logical to you, but to me it makes sense, especially when you accept that DBN is private.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
This is all wrong.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
did you just highlight everything I said and say it was all wrong? what was the purpose? I was agreeing with you.
these are legitimate reasons why it is private. In an economic sense, it is considered a natural monopoly. while the term seems out of place, that is what it is. Cleveland.com is a public good in the sense of the internet in general, yahoo, or other public sites.
what was the point of doing this? to get my goat again like you tried to do last night? Well, it doesn’t work because
a) I know its coming and I see your intent
b) I KNOW I am right from an economic sense…wanna look it up and prove me wrong?
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Cleveland.com is actually private.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
can people get kicked off of cleveland.com?
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Yes
gahnki - March 20, 2010
I did not know that. from what I have read there, it seems like the people have pretty much free reign. I guess it is a natural monopoly but one that is severely flawed by an influx of inferior goods.
I have a couple other questions then
a) what kinds of moderators do they have?
b) What do you have to do to be kicked off?
bross09 - March 20, 2010
It’s a privately capitalized newspaper so the website is privately owned. I don’t know what mods they have, but that has nothing to do with the public or private designation.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
Public/private is not a good way to frame it — think of it as government/not-government. First amendment only applies to government.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
I am not talking about how it is owned. I am talking about the GOOD provided. a good that cannot be prevented from being used (nonexcludable) is a public good. a good that can be prevented from being used is private.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
I honestly have no idea what argument you are attempting to make.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
Yeah. It seems like a moving target here.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
??
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Meaning that rather than just admit you were wrong/confused, you are changing what you are saying. Moving target.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
I was not changing one bit what I was saying though…that is why I was confused.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
I really don’t feel like explaining it then.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Okey dokey.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
You’re right, cleveland.com might be a public good, but even if that’s true it has no legal bearing at all. Those terms are just a way of describing who can use a certain good. In the case of free speech what matters is whether something is government run (public) or privately run.
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
The “public” v. “private” that is being discussed here is the type of ownership — if it is “publicly” owned, that means that it is owned by a government entity. As such, with certain exceptions that I don’t want to get into here (such as where the government is acting as a private entity), the first amendment restricts the type of regulation of speech that can occur. As I said downthread, but will repeat here: “The first amendment only protects speech against regulation by the federal government (and the fourteenth amendment extends the first amendment’s protection against the state and local governments). Because Dawgs by Nature is not run by the federal government, or by any state or local government, there is no first amendment issue here.”
Replace “Dawgs by Nature” with “cleveland.com” and just about every other website, and my statement still applies. In other words, if it’s not “publicly” owned, then it is private — this has NOTHING to do with whether you need to sign up for the website or whether you check a box. That is probably why golanbatrac said that you were wrong.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
I am not talking about publicly owned, or privately owned companies.
I am talking about it in basic goods. Private goods of any kind can be prevented from being used. Public goods cannot. I was under the impression that you could not get kicked off of cleveland.com message boards. in this sense, from an economists standpoint, it is a public good.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Uhhhhhhh?!?! I have a degree in economics (with honors) from a well-respected university and what you are saying makes zero sense — particularly in this context of websites. As you may also have inferred, I am also a lawyer, and the basic legal principles I was explaining are the reason (whether you think they make sense or not) why the first amendment does not apply to this website, to cleveland.com or to any other nongoverment-owned website.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
well. I am an economics major and it made sense to me. maybe we got taught different concepts.
I agree with you on the first amendment thing too.
I am studying a bit of law in my free time and your points seem like what I have come across about the first amdendment.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
I think I discovered the cause of the economic crisis.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
bross09 = Ben Bernanke
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
lol. He did write one of my econ textbooks…
bross09 - March 20, 2010
haha look what I started. I even said that I agreed with the rules in place here, and people kept going.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Yes.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
You reference this, like, every day. It’s annoying. You don’t have unlimited rights because you own a computer.
gahnki - March 20, 2010
What if every day was the same day?
We are watching you.
Villeslgr - March 20, 2010
Gotta say, Groundhog Day is a much better title than Endless Day.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
Yeah, I was trying to bring some culture to the site.
Villeslgr - March 20, 2010
the direct translation is “A day without end,” even worse.
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
If you don’t like it, ignore it. Pretty much what I do when you talk.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Then you’re missing a lot of worthwhile comments.
rufio - March 21, 2010
this attitude, and you belief about what is private and what is not, is going to cause many people (myself included) to do the same to you.
rolub - March 23, 2010
I’ve brought it up twice in the last 10 months. I didn’t like his tone.
And if you read the other comments, I already apologized for bringing it up.
Brownie's Year - March 23, 2010
Only applies to public spaces. This website is not a public space.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
duh
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
I guess you didn’t get my agreement with the regulations in my last sentence.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
That was pretty vague for a thesis sentence.
rufio - March 20, 2010
That part is meant to be read in the context in which it appears, which is this:
In that sense, it means you won’t be violated or censored just because you hate the moves Holmgren is making, as long as you attempt to justify your statements. Now, if you say “Holmgren blows, he’s a fat ass,” that’d be subject to removal because there’s really no justification to bringing that up as a legitimate reason Holmgren’s offseason moves aren’t favored by a particular person.
Anything else is fair game to be subjected to my discretion as well as the community’s (which is why we have the “Flag” button, which highlights a post as red for me so I can take a closer look at it).
Chris Pokorny - March 20, 2010
Also, since the quote appears under the “Having Fun” section, it was meant to tie things up by saying, “you can voice your opinion freely, just be responsible.” Perhaps I should change the wording to that since it conveys the same meaning without the “free speech” verbiage being subject to interpretation.
Chris Pokorny - March 20, 2010
I know Chris. I just stirred the pot a little. My bad.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
I know you understood, as evidenced by your last statement in your initial post; I was just responding to your stirring of the pot nonetheless :)
Chris Pokorny - March 20, 2010
by the way chris. we should maybe just close comments to the recap of the press conference. Partially because of Me I admit, it has turned into a crapfest of dumb comments, many of which I believe have been flagged. Maybe just take down the 2nd al sharpton pic b/c then I think the whole stupid thread will go away.
bross09 - March 20, 2010
It will go away when you stop talking on there. Just don’t worry about it.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
I am pretty much done…
bross09 - March 20, 2010
Sometimes it’s good to just give in for the sake of the site and people’s eyes. Weather it is to stop responding or try to make amends.
Notice how golan and I ended our argument on that said thread? Jokes were said and we both gave up at the same time. I now have zero problems with golan.
Like BK said, it’s all about fun. Yes, name calling and arguments will never go away, but that is what makes us smarter. Prolonged arguments just aren’t healthy.
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
Indeed. However, the first amendment only protects speech against regulation by the federal government (and the fourteenth amendment extends the first amendment’s protection against the state and local governments). Because Dawgs by Nature is not run by the federal government, or by any state or local government, there is no first amendment issue here.
TheDriveStillHurts - March 20, 2010
DBN isn’t part of America, and the 1st amendment doesn’t apply to it.
North Coast Flea - March 21, 2010
The community guidelines suck. Can’t we just forget Bernie19Kosar and stick with our own ideas?
elsandito - March 20, 2010
Bernie is 100% correct, though. Some people (myself most definitely included) need reeled in a good bit.
golanbatrac - March 20, 2010
Wow. You know Chris personally wrote the guidelines?
Nice.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
There goes all the fun.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
instead of saying that, we could just say, “I think you would find this ”http://cleveland.com"
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
dammit! i meant:
I think you would find this site more enjoyable
It seems that if i try to put that sentence in quotations it messes up the link.
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
Instead of RickRolling we should have Cleveland.comimng, if someone posts in all caps, !!!!!!!!!!!!!1111, etc., just write some long response agreeing in kind and say, Bro!!! You’re so right!! Manwieni is an idiot!!!?? Why trade Quinn/Andreson?? HE’S THE BEST QB TO COME TO THE BROWNS SINCE??? Since nobody bro!!! Because our QBS suck!!
Don’t believe me?? Watch this Quinn/Anderson/Bradford/Claussen/McCoy/Delhomme/Wallace could never do this.
Villeslgr - March 21, 2010
I just got Pluto Pranked. =[
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
lol. I have started to notice (just from occasionally glancing at the comments) one user there who is really an idiot.
bross09 - March 21, 2010
There’s more than one. That place is littered with idiots.
StuckInPa - March 21, 2010
yeah. just one who seems to annoy everyone, post on every article, and might not even have an active brain (I think he called DA a HOF QB).
bross09 - March 21, 2010
I think if I ever get agitated here, i’ll just go over there and unleash some fury, then come back.
Villeslgr - March 21, 2010
Saying it to someone like Salty Dawg is probably acceptable ;)
Chris Pokorny - March 20, 2010
Your comment makes me salty.
Bernie19Kosar - March 20, 2010
I almost wish he would post like once a month, just as a reminder to all of us not to take the intelligent conversation here for granted.
notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
The boss just shot down your interpretation of the DBN Constitution.
Owned.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
You realize that I just copied and pasted what he wrote right?
Bernie19Kosar - March 20, 2010
heh. Our dedicated members can’t even read the original guideline link; how in the world am I going to convince the newcomers to do so? :p
Chris Pokorny - March 21, 2010
jaws. - March 20, 2010
way to steal my thunder!

notthatnoise - March 20, 2010
These are bad.
Where’s the “Joe Thomas does heart surgery……While blocking the Williams’ at the same time”?
Brownie's Year - March 20, 2010
God didn't create man. He created Joe Thomas.
SpecialBrownie - March 20, 2010
I don’t think I’m man enough to be comfortable with pantsless Joe Thomas.
danvail - March 21, 2010
Joe Thomas is comfortable in any clothing…He is man enough to wear hot pants and be more of a man than any of us.
bross09 - March 21, 2010
I had to pull the shirt down to cover his junk…
That was extremely awkward to type. I need some rubbing alcohol.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
This could be my new avatar
Bernie19Kosar - March 21, 2010
That guy looks more like Frodo from Lord of the Rings.
Brownie's Year - March 21, 2010
It’s a more elegant take upon Joe Thomas. Call it, artistic interpretation.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
he appears to be taking a break, having just pancaked hundreds of defenders.
Dawg Nuts - March 21, 2010
Will this by “stickied” in any way on the front page?
skipkirk - March 20, 2010
I only say this because the ‘Community Guidelines’ link on the right doesn’t really do much in terms of getting people to read it. If I’m new here the first thing I’m looking for is a new post, not the guidelines. So if this could “attract” more readers then cool.
skipkirk - March 20, 2010
BTW, how bout a new draft discussion page?
rockybrown - March 20, 2010
So, if I post: “EXPLETIVE the world”, you can hold me accountable?
And if I post: “I´m dissatisfied with the ruling class”, it´s alright?
Or is intending EXPLETIVE already wrong, even if coded EXPLETIVE is left to our imagination?
mooncamping - March 21, 2010
Intending is fine like: F%$k you, go root for Buffalo. Just don’t purposefully use an intended expletive against someone.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
This. “f%#@ you, go root for buffalo” is a running joke. that type of vulgarity isn’t likely to get deleted because it isn’t a personal attack. it isn’t necessarily the profane words themselves that offend, its the context.
Dawg Nuts - March 21, 2010
Which is why my disclaimer in the second sentence tries to clear that up.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
Its only a personal attack if you are secretly phil savage.
bross09 - March 21, 2010
I´m neither obsessed, nor supressed, nor depressed, nor possessed by him, so it must still be me.
mooncamping - March 22, 2010
You just described Kwoog.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
I think this should be moon’s theme song even over the one I came up with.
North Coast Flea - March 22, 2010
regardless of the itty bitty print this site is still 99.5% win. (.5% reserved for buffalo)
sleepy042 - March 21, 2010
You probably already know this, but for anyone who doesn’t, holding CTRL and pressing the plus sign (right next to your backspace key usually) will increase font size in Firefox.
Chris Pokorny - March 21, 2010
My Asus acts like a Mac. And you just have to move your fingers over the pad to enlarge.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
How does that work? I got a new Dell Inspirion around Christmas and sometimes it does weird things if I touch the pad or the laptop around the pad. Screen size changes windows open up. I just figured my computer was janky.
Villeslgr - March 21, 2010
If you move a finger to the left and a finger to the right at the same time=enlarge. Bring the fingers together=shrink. Three fingers up or down go to the top or bottom accordingly and two fingers left, right, up, down in the same motion scroll the page. A tap from a finger clicks.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
Touch tapping / gestures can be turned off in the control panel in Windows 7. (Control Panel/Mouse — somewhere in the Advanced options for the touchpad is an option to enable touchpad tapping — uncheck that box).
golanbatrac - March 21, 2010
Sweet, thanks to both of you, that was really annoying.
Villeslgr - March 21, 2010
Touch-tapping drives me up a wall. Disabling it is always the second thing I do when I buy a computer.
golanbatrac - March 21, 2010
what’s the first?
notthatnoise - March 21, 2010
Turns it on.
Bernie19Kosar - March 21, 2010
Bingo.
golanbatrac - March 21, 2010
Porn.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
That’s three.
golanbatrac - March 21, 2010
And four.
Bernie19Kosar - March 21, 2010
And erasing the history so the Mrs. doesn’t find out is five.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
I laughed at this.
rufio - March 21, 2010
My ASUS has a rather perfect touch tap system. You need a good amount of force to actually click so it works well for me.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
You might have to update that when they move to Toronto…
LondonBrown - March 21, 2010
Can footbal remain the last of the big 4 to not cross the boarder? I hope so.
Brownie's Year - March 21, 2010
Well,it has crossed the border, just not in the NFL, and it will potentially jump the ocean before the border.
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
I meant in the sense of having a NFL team outside of America.
Brownie's Year - March 21, 2010
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
The London Silly Nannies?
Brownie's Year - March 21, 2010
I think it would have to be The London Blitz.
golanbatrac - March 21, 2010
That might offend some people.
gahnki - March 21, 2010
The Berlin Wall?
SpecialBrownie - March 21, 2010
Brownie's Year - March 21, 2010
The London Fog
Dawg Nuts - March 22, 2010
We were making WWII references.
Reference fail.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
i understand the WWII references, i was merely throwing out another option for a mascot. didn’t realize it was exclusive. plus, my response was to golan, not you.
trying to stick it to someone for no reason fail.
Dawg Nuts - March 22, 2010
additionally, the berlin wall isn’t really a WWII reference, its a post-WWII reference. just sayin.
Dawg Nuts - March 22, 2010
It was a cause of WWII though, more Cold War yes, but influenced by WWII.
Not knowing enough history to try to re – stick it to the sticker fail.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
The Berlin Wall did not cause WWII.
golanbatrac - March 22, 2010
From* not of. Good call.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
1. berlin wall was not a cause of WWII.
2. my knowledge of WWII history is likely as good if not better than yours.
done with this argument.
Dawg Nuts - March 22, 2010
I explained my grammatical mistake to Golanbatrac. It was a cause from* not of. So, indeed.
I don’t know you enough to care or argue about it. And this isn’t an argument, it’s a discussion. Two very different things.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
yeah, i know. no problem, let’s just electronically hug and make up.
Dawg Nuts - March 22, 2010
All is right with the world.
Joe Thomas smiles down upon us.
SpecialBrownie - March 22, 2010
amen.
North Coast Flea - March 22, 2010
I actually think it’ll be funnier to say “go root for buffalo” once they move to Toronto.
danvail - March 22, 2010
god that would be so terrible for the NFL. Have to keep some of these traditional teams where they are
jaws. - March 23, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.