forevereagle

What analogy? I asked a question. It seems that there are lots of examples of people being told they cannot own something and I didn't specifically call any out.

Has prohibition of owning or consuming things worked in the past?

We doing this again?

On the one hand, these people kind of deserved to be outed given their behavior, but on the other hand, if we start to like and/or appreciate a data breach of any kind, we start to encourage more to happen. So this is bad and should be viewed as such, but it is hard to feel sorry for those who have been outed in the process.

Not sure if those a flugelhorns, mellophones, or euphoniums (not an expert at identifying these from the grainy video, but it appears that the ones farther down are different than center shot). If they are flugelhorns, then here is an article about them. They are used, as Silver stated, to mellow the sound. If they are either of the latter two, they are substitutes for the french horn and baritone, respectively, which are difficult instruments to march with due to the way they are held and size.

This game is not being promoted as a home game. It is being promoted as a road game that is easy to attend and accommodations are being made by the AD to make it easier, but I have not heard anything that suggests that it is being considered a home game.

Yeah, I don't use it on my normal drive, but I did when going to a concert not long ago and was able to shave some time off my drive where traffic slowed and there was an alternate route that was faster. Bonus was the hilarity of listening to the Terminator telling me where to turn.

Careful using that route. There are now a bunch of lights and it doesn't move very fast. Not sure it is going to do a lot for you. Download Waze and let it tell you the fastest route for the day and traffic conditions. Probably easier than figuring it out for yourself.

Not sure that I see chrome, but the face mask is definitely gray.

Either way, I don't see how this would qualify as the "least amount possible". They are not technically going after the max increase, but I don't think that would be wise to put it to a student vote.

Wouldn't the least possible to change nothing or decrease the fee? Also, stated in the article was that they cannot increase it more than 10% without a student vote, so it would seem that this is the most aggressive action to take without risking students saying no and getting no increase. How does the university win with you? You want them to increase the fee, but when they do, it is not enough. When was the last time you said some positive?

So you don't want those who are directly and most obviously profiteering on the backs of the athletes to be the ones to pay for it? That would be like the NFL asking communities to pay for stadiums that they use and profit from at little to no cost to themselves while they get to keep all the revenues generated.

Fair enough, but the ratio is unbalanced. And yes, focused around football and basketball.

The problem is that they are locked in to the university and cannot pursue employment. Sure, in theory, they have a limited window in which to work in the summer. The problem there is us. We expect them to be in summer workouts trying to become better players, not attempting to have a little spending money. To compound that, they don't compete well with other college students who can have more flexible schedules and can stay in the position once school starts. You had a big difference in college. You could choose to transfer at any time with no penalty. You could work outside of your studies. You could decide to take fewer hours for a year or two to work more. You could earn spending money to go out to a movie or go on a date. These players don't have any of those options or freedoms. Personally, given the personal attacks and pressure on these kids should be worth compensation on its' own. We sit here behind our keyboards and nail these guys for lack of effort, ability, and whatever else we deem needs harsh criticism. Don't make the grades because you were focusing on football? You must be stupid or something. Don't satisfy us with your performance on the field because you were focused on academics? You are a terrible player and should be benched. I wish we would stop calling them scholarships. These players are heavily steered towards easy degrees and academics are de-emphasized. We don't set up athletes well for success after college. They don't get degrees (for the most part) that will allow them to get good jobs out of school. There is little that is scholarly about what they are here to do.

Actually, I think the problem was that he took the ball and ran with it more than Mac wanted.

This seems like a great idea. Who cares about the students and future alumni and their thoughts and attitudes about UNT? It's not like we want them to possibly donate to the AD and university and attend games after they graduate. Easy to say "screw the students" when you aren't one.

So we went from an era where a lower percent of the population went to college and got a degree, thus making a degree very valuable due to scarcity, to an era where a much higher percent of the population went to college, driving down scarcity and thus lowering value. I stand by what I said.

It's not even Thursday!

Fixed.

You're right, what was I thinking?

Can this trope just die?

Hooray for unrealistic logic leaps!