Jump to content

PrepGridiron

Administrators
  • Posts

    3,948
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

PrepGridiron last won the day on December 29 2018

PrepGridiron had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

6,123 profile views

PrepGridiron's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Very Popular
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

3.2k

Reputation

  1. I’m with all of this post by Hawg. I hid the post, however, because it wishes ill on someone’s kid which if it were any of ours would cause us to boil. I’m perfectly ok unhiding the post if the original poster wants to keep only the first two words.
  2. Unless there is new, smart legislation crafted, I don't immediately see a benefit to a repeal.
  3. Please provide a source for this as I'd like to know if I have been previously misinformed. 230 does not allow sites to censor without penalty.
  4. I don't want to oversimplify, but Section 230 allows service providers on the internet to be immune from liability for third party content. It is what protects Yelp from being sued by Acme Corp for libelous comments made by John Doe on Yelp's website.
  5. I understand the fundamental issue with the REAL problem you identified, but hear me out. Right now, as owner of the site, I have the choice to censor any content about a particular football team, i.e., if I wanted only good comments about De La Salle (as an example), I could delete, flag, edit how I see fit and as site owner that is my prerogative. Now, I don't/won't do that because users would most likely leave and because I generally believe open dialogue serves everyone, but I have that prerogative. What you are suggesting is a line that I don't know where it exists, that is to say when does someone become a publisher through censorship of third party content? The ancillary question to that is who decides that line. Personally, I think it should be self-governed, so if someone doesn't like how Twitter or others flag certain information, then that person shouldn't use their site. And if enough people don't use their site, Twitter will have to make business choices on whether they should censor so much. One uses their site, however, because of the size of the audience on the platform and the realization that one can't just go to another platform with that same audience.
  6. I understand the basics. This site (like many others) will completely change if we automate censorship and my guess (could be completely wrong) is that folks will leave and again this site will de facto crumble.
  7. It won't run every small internet site off the map due to lawsuit liability, it will run every small internet site that provides a forum for third party discourse off the map because it will become too cost prohibitive to moderate the content
  8. No, i didn’t just read how attacking 230 is attacking smaller companies. I’ve understood 230 and it’s uses for many years. And, yes, you are correct anyone can sue anyone at any time, but Section 230 provides cover whether you are a big company or a small one. The way 230 is being portrayed, however, is inaccurate. 230 has nothing to do with “true news” or “fiction entertainment”. Sites are still held liable for what they say whether true or fiction; 230 does not insulate them from that. Rather 230 allows sites to not be held responsible for what third parties say when the site is a forum.
  9. I know I haven’t been around at all, but I want to say one thing that’s been on my mind. For most of you that don’t know, I have a bit of background in these things and I can tell you nearly unequivocally that if section 230 is repealed, I will shut down this site immediately. Now that may be welcome news to some, but I can assure you that it will be a dark day in the big picture.
  10. This topic has drifted some. The USAA topic is important. It should be discussed. Information should presented and should be allowed to be challenged. I encourage another topic to be created, but let's focus on facts related to the program and the development of the school. I believe, the facts will ultimately show the character of those involved.
  11. Thank you, Dustin, we are on your time. Please let us know when you have to run. I read somewhere you praising Coach Propst for all his assistance, would be great to find out how much impact he's had in the work you've been doing.
  12. This is great. I've read a few pieces in the news and I don't think it is getting enough coverage, but it does sound like you are going to put together quality academics. Last question and if you have some time (I know you are busy fielding a number of press requests) I'd like to open up the question up to the members: So much work needs to get done before August 2020. Are you confident in your ability to meet such quick deadlines Thanks, Dustin and good luck with the project. Its a brave step and you are commended for getting into the arena.
  13. Question 4: Can you educate us on the academic side of USA?
  14. Question 3: Will USA be recognized by the AHSAA, or will you operate as a true independent?
  15. Its tough to find good programs, there is arguably only so many across the country. Question 2: I’m assuming there are many private investors involved in USA. Can you divulge some of your corporate partners, sponsors, etc. at this time?IMG started as a tennis academy, then added other sports as time went on. Will USA be a football-only academy, or do you have plans to add other sports down the road? What’s your short-term enrollment goal?
×
×
  • Create New...