Bear Down Wildcats

The more I've thought about this, the more I say keep him out. I'm all for being an inclusive and welcoming community, but I'm even more about if you're going to come and take away from the community's collective experience, then GTFO. It's not like he just had stupid takes like R+F and others. He actively, intentionally, came around and took away from the community's enjoyment and experience. So if he wants to be a jerk, good riddance.

1stNGrant Frys wrote:

gumby wrote:I disagree that there are "so many horrible people here" ... though I don't hit all the forums. Think that is true of other sites, though.

Everyone is horrible. In the way we have all argued with each other for the past 10 years about the same topics, like how a beaten dog of a man looks at his old battle axe of a wife.

But everyone is fresh and shiny again, like a mistress who is getting deported soon, if we take my scarlet letter idea!

1 / 21 NEVER FORGET BEACHCAT

Ha! Ha! You have a point ...





































.... FINALLY!!!!

azcat49 wrote:Make him post in the football forum and only about AZ football

His words/takes would fit there

Actually, as a non-UA football fan I fucking love this idea. I would pop over every once in a while just to see him getting ragged on, but otherwise he wouldn't taint my enjoyment of the real team/sport

Makes no difference to me.

Maybe a sig-line that 'eats crow' until the end of the season...

OR

Until (IF) UCLA beats Arizona in the return game. Give him a reason to openly pull for UCLA even more.

BigSkyCatinMT wrote: Until (IF) UCLA beats Arizona in the return game. Give him a reason to openly pull for UCLA even more.

Absolutely not on this one. You're saying we would have to face the pain of losing at home to UCLA and then have BC come back? Don't torture us, man! We didn't make the bet!

He has to be banned because people need to own up to their actions.

He can submit for re-instatement only after Az makes the Final Four. That way he can learn to become a real fan...

"I slept with your fiancée."

"What?!"

"I slept with your fiancée, just kidding!"

--------

"I'll pay you a million dollars if you burn down this factory."

Whooooooosh!

"Thanks, here's a Mounds Bar instead."

He made the bet so I think he needs to cash the check he wrote.

I would allow him to stay though under these rules.
1) no posting at all to the red blue game
2) board or admins control his signature forever
3) anything similar or out of line is a permanent ban

While this appears to be a ton of work I say just make him stick to his word

EastCoastCat wrote:He has to be banned because people need to own up to their actions.

He can submit for re-instatement only after Az makes the Final Four. That way he can learn to become a real fan...

Guess it just doesn't bother me to have a guy around who can be reminded how wrong he was every time he says the next stupid thing.

dcZONAfan wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:If he's allowed back we should have control over his username and what we want to change it to.

this is a given haha

BitchCat97?

seriously though, it's hard to actually perma-ban someone. does anyone think he hasn't registered a new account and read this thread by now? this is how JWs come to be

dcZONAfan wrote:

azcat49 wrote:Make him post in the football forum and only about AZ football

His words/takes would fit there

Actually, as a non-UA football fan I fucking love this idea. I would pop over every once in a while just to see him getting ragged on, but otherwise he wouldn't taint my enjoyment of the real team/sport

But by rule he could only post about football. No BBall allowed or he is banned once again. It would be like a living hell on earth for him

dirtbags wrote:

dcZONAfan wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:If he's allowed back we should have control over his username and what we want to change it to.

this is a given haha

BitchCat97?

seriously though, it's hard to actually perma-ban someone. does anyone think he hasn't registered a new account and read this thread by now? this is how JWs come to be

Last poster to register and get approved was before the UCLA game. So if that's him, that's some serious foresight and a tacit acknowledgement that Arizona would win.

Yeah, that ain't Beachcat.


I have to say, if I made the bet he did, I'd never come back as Chicat. I have shame. I might register as a new member, but I'd lurk and contribute sparingly and never ever offer any semblance of the poster I had been previously.

The one positive of beachcat is that he brings the rest of this community together

If he is truly gone we're gonna need another whipping boy to gang up on

I nominate gumby

Eh, just have to wonder who becomes the next whipping boy and is the community large enough to handle it? We don't have that many frequent posters.

Other than that, no strong opinions. BC was tiresome and irritating, but he wasn't the gigantic prick that a few of us are capable of being. The only ban-worthy thing he's done was the I-changed-my-mind schtick. And make no mistake, that's ban-worthy!

Lol, ari.

Chicat wrote:
I have to say, if I made the bet he did, I'd never come back as Chicat. I have shame. I might register as a new member, but I'd lurk and contribute sparingly and never ever offer any semblance of the poster I had been previously.

Not so easy to do without some kind of personal change. But can be done.

dcZONAfan wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:If he's allowed back we should have control over his username and what we want to change it to.

this is a given haha

And it Tucson Clip's idea.

Puerco wrote:Lol, ari.

That's too funny

I change my mind.... I nominate Puerco

Keep him banned, back up what you say

Nothing like a good Ban Poll to get the daily post count up.

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:

Chicat wrote:
I have to say, if I made the bet he did, I'd never come back as Chicat. I have shame. I might register as a new member, but I'd lurk and contribute sparingly and never ever offer any semblance of the poster I had been previously.

Not so easy to do without some kind of personal change. But can be done.

You'd have to post very infrequently and post some very meek opinions. Probably wouldn't be worth it.

It could be an undetermined arbitrary number, and then turn into a 19 game board suspension.

Alieberman wrote:The one positive of beachcat is that he brings the rest of this community together

If he is truly gone we're gonna need another whipping boy to gang up on

I nominate gumby

On second thought, let BC come back.

Timmy1973 wrote:It could be an undetermined arbitrary number, and then turn into a 19 game board suspension.

And he must undergo a pee test every Monday.

I nominate Ari to oversee this.

Timmy1973 wrote:It could be an undetermined arbitrary number, and then turn into a 19 game board suspension.

In the event that an admin has back surgery, it gets shortened to 1 game?

Eff BC. If there was a single redeeming thing about him, he might get a second chance. Or maybe a ban to the rivals forum since he's not a fan.

What I'd rather see is ban him and cordera to a single thread. It would be like Biosphere 3.

I'm against the scarlet letter/renaming him/etc stuff.

No need to be cruel. He made a bet, he lives by it, done and gone.

threenumberones wrote:Eff BC. If there was a single redeeming thing about him, he might get a second chance. Or maybe a ban to the rivals forum since he's not a fan.

What I'd rather see is ban him and cordera to a single thread. It would be like Biosphere 3.

Now you're talking. Cordera made some kind of bet too, right?

Chicat wrote:The long and the short of it was that for over a week Beachcat had a bet with the board that if Arizona beat UCLA he would disappear forever. You all know the outcome of the game. He disappeared for like 14 hours.

Can he stay? Poll lasts 48 hours.

There was a guy on Scout who said bet the house Trier was returning for the ASU game. We don't have a house.

I think he should stay but has to shame himself and eat massive crow.

can someone set it up so that the "curb your enthusiasm" theme music plays every time he posts?

No way Jose.

I was brought up to consider gambling as an unworthy pastime. The reason being not that it was evil or anything like that, but that your word is your bond and a gambling debt is a debt of honor. Constantly putting your honor at risk for trivial pastimes like gambling is not a worthy way of leading your life.

Note that those high and mighty words don't say never make a friendly bet, they say 1) don't get carried away, and 2) a gambling debt is a debt of honor.

BC got carried away and now wishes to besmirch his honor by welching on his gambling debt.

Personally I don't care what his posting style was; I don't care that he was a jerk or whether pissed anybody off or not.

He made a bet and should honor his debt.

If you want to consider his ban satisfied when we get to, say, July, fine.

But in the mean time try asking the Kray brothers to forgive a debt see where that gets you.

dirtbags wrote:can someone set it up so that the "curb your enthusiasm" theme music plays every time he posts?

I would much rather somebody spent some time fixing the hotspot links so they were big enough on a tablet for a finger to press them.

gumby wrote:

Timmy1973 wrote:It could be an undetermined arbitrary number, and then turn into a 19 game board suspension.

And he must undergo a pee test every Monday.

I nominate Ari to oversee this.

I haven't been around long enough to know who's who, but this was my thought. His appeal based on the simple right of free speech should be granted and his eligibility reinstated immediately, but he shouldn't be allowed to post until testing indicates his level of "welching sack of shit" reaches 0.00000%. Testing to be performed every 7-10 days.

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.

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.

If he eagerly entered into an agreement that he'd leave and never come back if Arizona beat UCLA, I'm not sure that constitutes the board cruely throwing him out.

And why does being annoying for several years give him more rights than being annoying for a short amount of time?

Also, I probably need help understanding something very basic that others here seem to understand. This idea that a poster can simply be ignored, or put on ignore, and the problem is solved.

I put Beachcat on ignore and I couldn't see how it helped. With him on ignore, threads would inexplicably turn into conversations about UCLA, and perplexing discussions about things like Syracuse being a more desirable coaching destination than Arizona. It would seem like the only way ignoring a poster like that is if everyone ignored him, or put him on ignore.

If that's the answer, then haven't we achieved that in a perfectly humane way by allowing him to willingly leave on his own accord? And then when he came back and said he'd stay here and continue to troll after all, we ignored him. There.

ChooChooCat wrote:Meh you can't make a statement like "I'll leave this site forever if Arizona beats UCLA" and show up the next day saying "I decided to stay." I say give him a season long suspension and let him back during the offseason. There has to be a punishment for bitching out of a bet like that.

I'm with Choo 100% on this. We don't want to be like PGU here and ban folks cuz they annoy us, but what kind of world do we live in where u can make stupid baseless bets w no consequences (the world of the internet obviously).

This is a quality forum , best sports message board I've ever been on , and we need to hold some accountability to our posters.

I agree w a season ban and let him back in offseason.

Not sure how to vote though w that caveat, I guess vote no???

Alieberman wrote:I don't care. But if he is allowed back we should limit him to only allow him to post in the Travel / Leisure forum

There's a travel/leisure forum??

PieceOfMeat wrote:I'm against the scarlet letter/renaming him/etc stuff.

No need to be cruel. He made a bet, he lives by it, done and gone.

I think its much crueler to banish someone forever based on careless boastfulness.

The Scarlet Letter is just good fun and most of all BeachCat will learn a lesson about weighing your words.

PennZona20 wrote:

Alieberman wrote:I don't care. But if he is allowed back we should limit him to only allow him to post in the Travel / Leisure forum

There's a travel/leisure forum??

Exactly

Ban BeachCat with the Corderas/Rise&Fires/Enfuegos of the world running loose???..............please. Let him stay.

dmjcat wrote:Ban BeachCat with the Corderas/Rise&Fires/Enfuegos of the world running loose???..............please. Let him stay.

Once again, Beachcat is not gone because he's an incredibly terrible poster, even though that's exactly what he is.

Maybe I misunderstood what this thread is about. Sounds like most here think the question is whether we should ban Beachcat for being an annoying troll. If so, please change my vote to allow him to stay. Thanks. I thought this was about whether he should be allowed to return after he promised to leave forever if Arizona won.

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 wasn't like he had nothing to gain if UCLA won. He'd have presented himself as a realist among irrational fanatics, which is his schtick after all. So anyway, no, he shouldn't get special troll protections that allow him to troll risk-free. Thanks for clarifying, Chi.

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?

Peace out BC

His Screen name should just be Heh

If his name isn't RiversideBruin97 you all have failed.

Maybe we should just let Bug decide his fate:

BC would either be gone, or would have to be forever grateful to the one poster he despises the most. It'd be like a knife twisting in his gut every time he hit 'submit'.

MrBug708 wrote:His Screen name should just be Heh

That's good but I would go "Meh" instead.