Search SiteSearch Options
Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Post New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 5  Next >
< Prev. Topic | Next Topic >

Perfect!

Posted: 02/04/2013 5:16 PM

Perfect! Post Rating (10 votes)


Green85 wrote: Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------
So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

Posted: 02/04/2013 5:24 PM

Re: Perfect! Post Rating (4 votes)

I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/04/2013 5:41 PM

I'll handle this layup!!! Post Rating (6 votes)

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

So why not just a simple link to show us your knowledge on the topic then Green85?

I provide them all the time.   Why can't you do the same?  

Particularly if you're going to lecture on the topic.

And providing what the applicable NCAA rules are or apparent facts such as Yahoo Sports stories or Lyles call logs is certainly fair game.  Which certainly make up a reasonable basis for an informed opinion on the subject.



<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> While it is frustrating, I try to take the tact that pity for ignorance tempered with some patience might actually help the ill-informed reduce the number of times they expose their laziness when it comes to acquiring knowledge.

Posters like beavermobile and bennybeaver have yet to figure out how to apply themselves to become more knowledgeable on a topic ... they prefer presumption and assumption without a basis in fact for the content of their posts.

---------------------------------------------
--- FirstDuck wrote:

85, I have a ton of respect for your continuing effort to maintain a civil, but accurate, discourse with some of these nimrods. I admit that I would hve given up long ago, because it is painfully obvious that they either don't want facts, of cannot deal with them.

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Wow!
Please take some time to educate yourself on the application of FERPA that has evolved over time. MANY institutions have extended the protections of FERPA to all kinds of student records on the adivce of legal counsel for those institutions. I spent time last Summer researching this topic and found more than a dozen articles and white papers explaining how FERPA had evolved in practical application. Several of the aritcles spoke specifically about student-athletes and their privacy rights. In some instances the institutions were pro-active to prevent exposure for laibility for sharing information, in other instances the concerns were raised by parents on behalf of their kids to understand application of the privacy.

You can easily find out about things by spending some time ... and it would prevent you from spewing inaccurate characterizations of the actions of people that have the authority and legal counsel to make appropriate decisions.

The University of Oregon is no "hiding" behind FERPA. In fact, the University of Oregon has an obligation to both the students and the public to err on the side of caution where privacy issues are involved.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>oreduk wrote:</strong> <strong>"As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster."


Exactly, but that doesn't stop you does it?  "perceived benefit"  lol,  and just an FYI,  redacted material is part of the FERPA, but of course you knew that but ignored it to further your BS posts,.....liar

</strong>Perhaps you can link the FERPA rule which required redaction for us then.

FERPA laws were designed to protect student academic records from becoming public against their wishes.

There are no academic records at risk here. 


</blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/04/2013 8:05 PM

Yawn Post Rating (5 votes)

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.

Do I hand you the entire NCAA rulebook when linking material like recruiting service rules, booster rules, stc?    Or do I post the applicable link or cut and paste the applicable material?

And which approach is clearly better?   

As always, I pass on the name calling contest which makes Green85 the clear "winner" in that category




Green85 wrote: I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/04/2013 8:14 PM

Pure Comedy at it's Finest Post Rating (3 votes)


Drakewing wrote: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!

Is that why we NEVER get to see it from DRAKEWING.    LOL







---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

So why not just a simple link to show us your knowledge on the topic then Green85?

I provide them all the time.   Why can't you do the same?  

Particularly if you're going to lecture on the topic.

And providing what the applicable NCAA rules are or apparent facts such as Yahoo Sports stories or Lyles call logs is certainly fair game.  Which certainly make up a reasonable basis for an informed opinion on the subject.



<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> While it is frustrating, I try to take the tact that pity for ignorance tempered with some patience might actually help the ill-informed reduce the number of times they expose their laziness when it comes to acquiring knowledge.

Posters like beavermobile and bennybeaver have yet to figure out how to apply themselves to become more knowledgeable on a topic ... they prefer presumption and assumption without a basis in fact for the content of their posts.

---------------------------------------------
--- FirstDuck wrote:

85, I have a ton of respect for your continuing effort to maintain a civil, but accurate, discourse with some of these nimrods. I admit that I would hve given up long ago, because it is painfully obvious that they either don't want facts, of cannot deal with them.

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Wow!
Please take some time to educate yourself on the application of FERPA that has evolved over time. MANY institutions have extended the protections of FERPA to all kinds of student records on the adivce of legal counsel for those institutions. I spent time last Summer researching this topic and found more than a dozen articles and white papers explaining how FERPA had evolved in practical application. Several of the aritcles spoke specifically about student-athletes and their privacy rights. In some instances the institutions were pro-active to prevent exposure for laibility for sharing information, in other instances the concerns were raised by parents on behalf of their kids to understand application of the privacy.

You can easily find out about things by spending some time ... and it would prevent you from spewing inaccurate characterizations of the actions of people that have the authority and legal counsel to make appropriate decisions.

The University of Oregon is no "hiding" behind FERPA. In fact, the University of Oregon has an obligation to both the students and the public to err on the side of caution where privacy issues are involved.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>oreduk wrote:</strong> <strong>"As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster."


Exactly, but that doesn't stop you does it?  "perceived benefit"  lol,  and just an FYI,  redacted material is part of the FERPA, but of course you knew that but ignored it to further your BS posts,.....liar

</strong>Perhaps you can link the FERPA rule which required redaction for us then.

FERPA laws were designed to protect student academic records from becoming public against their wishes.

There are no academic records at risk here. 


</blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/04/2013 8:29 PM

Re: Pure Comedy at it's Finest Post Rating (4 votes)

Says the nets biggest prevaricator of all time!!!

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Drakewing wrote:</strong> YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!

Is that why we NEVER get to see it from DRAKEWING.    LOL







---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

So why not just a simple link to show us your knowledge on the topic then Green85?

I provide them all the time.   Why can't you do the same?  

Particularly if you're going to lecture on the topic.

And providing what the applicable NCAA rules are or apparent facts such as Yahoo Sports stories or Lyles call logs is certainly fair game.  Which certainly make up a reasonable basis for an informed opinion on the subject.



<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> While it is frustrating, I try to take the tact that pity for ignorance tempered with some patience might actually help the ill-informed reduce the number of times they expose their laziness when it comes to acquiring knowledge.

Posters like beavermobile and bennybeaver have yet to figure out how to apply themselves to become more knowledgeable on a topic ... they prefer presumption and assumption without a basis in fact for the content of their posts.

---------------------------------------------
--- FirstDuck wrote:

85, I have a ton of respect for your continuing effort to maintain a civil, but accurate, discourse with some of these nimrods. I admit that I would hve given up long ago, because it is painfully obvious that they either don't want facts, of cannot deal with them.

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Wow!
Please take some time to educate yourself on the application of FERPA that has evolved over time. MANY institutions have extended the protections of FERPA to all kinds of student records on the adivce of legal counsel for those institutions. I spent time last Summer researching this topic and found more than a dozen articles and white papers explaining how FERPA had evolved in practical application. Several of the aritcles spoke specifically about student-athletes and their privacy rights. In some instances the institutions were pro-active to prevent exposure for laibility for sharing information, in other instances the concerns were raised by parents on behalf of their kids to understand application of the privacy.

You can easily find out about things by spending some time ... and it would prevent you from spewing inaccurate characterizations of the actions of people that have the authority and legal counsel to make appropriate decisions.

The University of Oregon is no "hiding" behind FERPA. In fact, the University of Oregon has an obligation to both the students and the public to err on the side of caution where privacy issues are involved.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>oreduk wrote:</strong> <strong>"As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster."


Exactly, but that doesn't stop you does it?  "perceived benefit"  lol,  and just an FYI,  redacted material is part of the FERPA, but of course you knew that but ignored it to further your BS posts,.....liar

</strong>Perhaps you can link the FERPA rule which required redaction for us then.

FERPA laws were designed to protect student academic records from becoming public against their wishes.

There are no academic records at risk here. 


</blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/04/2013 8:55 PM

Re: Uh Oh.The hammer is coming per Beavis insider Post Rating (3 votes)

Will somebody put this benny guy out of his misery.

He is, without a doubt, the most stubborn poster I've even encountered on the intertubes. Something must be wrong with the guy's brain.

Posted: 02/04/2013 10:15 PM

Re: Yawn Post Rating (3 votes)



---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.


---------------------------------------------

Benny?

What part of:

Green85
Cas Center
Rating: 3.3/5 this site
4429 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message

Nominate | Report

Posted: Today 5:13 PM
Re: Well Post Rating (3 votes)
Here's a quote from the FIRST SEARCH I did on this topic:

"Any record that contains personally identifiable information that is directly related to the student is an educational record under FERPA. This information can also include records kept by the school in the form of student files, student system databases kept in storage devices such as servers, or recordings or broadcasts which may include student projects."

Here's the link:

www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/C...A-overview.aspx

Just TRY a little ... it will make you so much better informed.






...did you not understand?

Posted: 02/05/2013 8:52 AM

Re: Yawn Post Rating (3 votes)

I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better - and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts. If you are proud of that image, and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity. Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.
---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.

Do I hand you the entire NCAA rulebook when linking material like recruiting service rules, booster rules, stc?    Or do I post the applicable link or cut and paste the applicable material?

And which approach is clearly better?   

As always, I pass on the name calling contest which makes Green85 the clear "winner" in that category




<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------
Avatar

Posted: 02/05/2013 9:38 AM

Re: Yawn Post Rating (3 votes)


Green85 wrote: I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better - and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts. If you are proud of that image, and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity. Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.

"carpetbomb:


As i've stated before, with liarbeaver and many others draped in orange, they have to continue to stay ignorant and lie and write new conspiracy theories on a daily basis as the truth for them is too much bear.

Posted: 02/05/2013 9:43 AM

Uhh no Post Rating (4 votes)


Green85 wrote: I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

Uhh no.    Another Pure BS Green85 lie is all we have as expected.
You've got NOTHING.   Which is why you handing us the reading material we've already seen which obviously does not show a clear foundation for Mullen's actions

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

LOL.   Actually you handed us basically NOTHING bacause you have NOTHING!


The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

LOL  If I'm the one that's insulting, then *** do you think you're doing?

I'm the one posting key rules or clips from stories to support my opinion.   You're the one basically supplying NOTHING!

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better -

Green85 is the one CONCEDING DEFEAT here by providing basically NOTHING since you really have nothing.   And then complicating it further by engaging all the name calling.  

 and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts.

Uhh.  I think you have it backwards on this one

In terms of substance  Benny Beaver >> Green85
In terms of  no name calling Benny Beaver >>> Green85

If you are proud of that image,(that's obviously far better than yours - LOL) and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity.

Yawn.  Another Green85 lie supported as usual by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!   So when you can't actually argue your point just ramp up the cheap shots?  And then lecture how they need to be "Just like me"?     Uhh....I think not.   

 Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.

Translation  -  Green85 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in terms of a reasonable rebuttal.   You could have saved all the rhetoric and just put that in there.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.

Do I hand you the entire NCAA rulebook when linking material like recruiting service rules, booster rules, stc?    Or do I post the applicable link or cut and paste the applicable material?

And which approach is clearly better?   

As always, I pass on the name calling contest which makes Green85 the clear "winner" in that category




<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/05/2013 10:04 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (2 votes)

Benjamin -

Could you explain the connection between players in question and forfeiting past games?

Please?






Please?

Posted: 02/05/2013 10:32 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (2 votes)

Let's review ...
you posted about FERPA and how Oregon was "hiding behind" a law that did not apply.

I told you that there have been MANY documents published about the extension of FERPA and the legal counsel that has advised institutions to interpret FERPA in the widest possible teerms to limit liablity.

I then provided a simple link so you could start learning about FERPA. I quoted information that explained the concept of FERPA and the definition of records covered by the law.

Here are a few questions to test your understanding of FERPA:

1. True or False FERPA covers privacy for student records.
2. True or False FERPA covers privacy for records maintained by the school.
3. True or False FERPA covers any information directly related to the student's education, including grades and academic status.
4. True or False Athletic Depratments offer scholarshipS to athletes and maintain records.

The answers to those questions will help you understand the application of FERPA and the NECESSARY redaction of student names and information from the public documents released by the University of Oregon.

I have not responded to your other stuff ... and never intended to do so in this thread. I only responded to your allegation about Oregon and FERPA.

I encourage you to take some time to read about FERPA and the legal counsel offered to administrators that are tasked with the liability of institutions that fall under this law.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

<strong>Uhh no.    Another Pure BS Green85 lie is all we have as expected.</strong>
<strong>You've got NOTHING.   Which is why you handing us the reading material we've already seen which obviously does not show a clear foundation for Mullen's actions</strong>

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

<strong>LOL.   Actually you handed us basically NOTHING bacause you have NOTHING!</strong>


The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

<strong>LOL  If I'm the one that's insulting, then *** do you think you're doing?</strong>

<strong>I'm the one posting key rules or clips from stories to support my opinion.   You're the one basically supplying NOTHING!</strong>

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better -

<strong>Green85 is the one CONCEDING DEFEAT here by providing basically NOTHING since you really have nothing.   And then complicating it further by engaging all the name calling.   </strong>

 and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts.

<strong>Uhh.  I think you have it backwards on this one</strong>

<strong>In terms of substance  Benny Beaver >> Green85</strong>
<strong>In terms of  no name calling Benny Beaver >>> Green85</strong>

If you are proud of that image,(<strong>that's obviously far better than yours - LOL</strong>) and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity.

<strong>Yawn.  Another Green85 lie supported as usual by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!   So when you can't actually argue your point just ramp up the cheap shots?  And then lecture how they need to be "Just like me"?     Uhh....I think not.   </strong>

 Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.

<strong>Translation  -  Green85 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in terms of a reasonable rebuttal.   You could have saved all the rhetoric and just put that in there.</strong>

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.

Do I hand you the entire NCAA rulebook when linking material like recruiting service rules, booster rules, stc?    Or do I post the applicable link or cut and paste the applicable material?

And which approach is clearly better?   

As always, I pass on the name calling contest which makes Green85 the clear "winner" in that category




<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/05/2013 10:35 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (1 vote)

So mad.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

<strong>Uhh no.    Another Pure BS Green85 lie is all we have as expected.</strong>
<strong>You've got NOTHING.   Which is why you handing us the reading material we've already seen which obviously does not show a clear foundation for Mullen's actions</strong>

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

<strong>LOL.   Actually you handed us basically NOTHING bacause you have NOTHING!</strong>


The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

<strong>LOL  If I'm the one that's insulting, then *** do you think you're doing?</strong>

<strong>I'm the one posting key rules or clips from stories to support my opinion.   You're the one basically supplying NOTHING!</strong>

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better -

<strong>Green85 is the one CONCEDING DEFEAT here by providing basically NOTHING since you really have nothing.   And then complicating it further by engaging all the name calling.   </strong>

 and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts.

<strong>Uhh.  I think you have it backwards on this one</strong>

<strong>In terms of substance  Benny Beaver >> Green85</strong>
<strong>In terms of  no name calling Benny Beaver >>> Green85</strong>

If you are proud of that image,(<strong>that's obviously far better than yours - LOL</strong>) and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity.

<strong>Yawn.  Another Green85 lie supported as usual by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!   So when you can't actually argue your point just ramp up the cheap shots?  And then lecture how they need to be "Just like me"?     Uhh....I think not.   </strong>

 Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.

<strong>Translation  -  Green85 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in terms of a reasonable rebuttal.   You could have saved all the rhetoric and just put that in there.</strong>

Posted: 02/05/2013 10:49 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (2 votes)

Beenie since you don't want to seek the Ferpa info please look for a sanitarium near you where you can seek the help you so obviously need.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I quoted the information ... I ANSWERED your question.

<strong>Uhh no.    Another Pure BS Green85 lie is all we have as expected.</strong>
<strong>You've got NOTHING.   Which is why you handing us the reading material we've already seen which obviously does not show a clear foundation for Mullen's actions</strong>

I provided a legitimate suggestion for you. I even gave you a link so you could start learning about what you are posting about.

<strong>LOL.   Actually you handed us basically NOTHING bacause you have NOTHING!</strong>


The fact that you think it is appropriate to insult me over your lack of initiative indicates exactly what kind of person you are.

<strong>LOL  If I'm the one that's insulting, then *** do you think you're doing?</strong>

<strong>I'm the one posting key rules or clips from stories to support my opinion.   You're the one basically supplying NOTHING!</strong>

If you think it is a victory for people to give up on you, then you have very shallow goals for yourself. On the other hand, if you can take a little advice on how to make yourself better -

<strong>Green85 is the one CONCEDING DEFEAT here by providing basically NOTHING since you really have nothing.   And then complicating it further by engaging all the name calling.   </strong>

 and then act on that advice - you will be amazed at how others will begin to perceive you. You are projecting an image with your posts.

<strong>Uhh.  I think you have it backwards on this one</strong>

<strong>In terms of substance  Benny Beaver >> Green85</strong>
<strong>In terms of  no name calling Benny Beaver >>> Green85</strong>

If you are proud of that image,(<strong>that's obviously far better than yours - LOL</strong>) and choose to ignore feedback to help you, then you have made a choice to stay where you are ... unfortunately for you that is wallowing in your own ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity.

<strong>Yawn.  Another Green85 lie supported as usual by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!   So when you can't actually argue your point just ramp up the cheap shots?  And then lecture how they need to be "Just like me"?     Uhh....I think not.   </strong>

 Pity is the best I can muster for someone that makes a choice like this.

<strong>Translation  -  Green85 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in terms of a reasonable rebuttal.   You could have saved all the rhetoric and just put that in there.</strong>

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:

You didn't provide the answer because you apparently don't have it.  But you want to act like you do.      

So what we really have is a hypocritical lecture from someone that refuses to practice what they preach.

Do I hand you the entire NCAA rulebook when linking material like recruiting service rules, booster rules, stc?    Or do I post the applicable link or cut and paste the applicable material?

And which approach is clearly better?   

As always, I pass on the name calling contest which makes Green85 the clear "winner" in that category




<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> I provided a link in a separate post.
And I used EXACTLY the guidance I provided in the post below.

Again, being ignorant can be corrected with effort.
Refusing to make an effort to fight ignorance is choosing to be stupid.

Make a life changing choice TODAY ... choose to make an effort to LEARN SOMETHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>Green85 wrote:</strong> Because I don't like to encourage laziness.

YOU can take the same time I did last Summer to LEARN SOMETHING before you post about it.

Here is your help: FERPA

And here is some more help: Google

Do the work so you value the results. Otherwise remain ignorant and post like an idiot. I leave the choice to you.

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>So a hypocritical lecture on laziness when we can all see who won't simply post a simple link (Green85) followed by the usual cheap shot (post like an idiot)

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>

---------------------------------------------
Avatar

Posted: 02/05/2013 11:13 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (5 votes)


bennybeaver wrote:
Green85 is the one CONCEDING DEFEAT 

Jesus Christ.

Posted: 02/05/2013 11:39 AM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (1 vote)

Actually you are wrong.
FERPA is about control of student information by the student. ANY records held by the school that relate to matriculation and interaction with the student in the educational process fall under the guidelines that REQUIRE priot consent from the student for release.

In the case of Athletic Departments they specifically hold records about academic progress, academic eligiblity, and scholarship status - all are "directly related to the student" and therfore fall under FERPA. The University of Oreogn can (and DID) release information about the NCAA investigation. BUT the university is required by FERPA to get prior written consent from students before placing their name in documents that could reflect ANY information about their status as a student at the school - this would logically include their legitimate status to accept a scholarship or financial aid of any kind. Therefore, if the student is named in a document that questions any action by the school as it relates to eligibility to accept a scholarship, then the student's educational record is part of that discussion and therefore MUST be protected by FERPA. That is why the names were redacted. In addition, legal counsel has presented advice to a wide variety of administrators about releasing any information that could lead to a conclusion about the identity of a student ... in this case the circumstances and timing of their recruitment for a scholarship offer for football, which would then violate the student's privacy even without actually using the students name.

this is not "hiding behind FERPA" but rather taking necessary precautions to protiect the university from any lawsuit or other action that could be taken for releasing private student records or indicating anything that would lead to conclusions about a student's status in regards to schoalrships.

What purpose would be served to release the names of students in this case? Would attacking their character by having their name associated with a mistake made by administrators or others omsehow add value? I am sorry, even if I could grant your assertion is true regarding the motive of Oregon in this case (and I certainly do NOT grant any credence to such a conclusion based soltely on the law and the published advice of counsel on the topic), it still serves no purpose to anyone to release the names of students in this case.

And the proof of that is that even with the limited information we have available today, many folks feel free to draw conclusions about what is going on that are simply about producing the most negative perception possible. I prefer to protect individulas from such speculation.

---------------------------------------------
--- WinTheDayNStuff wrote:

I understand your point, but in this case, the University is clearly interpreting FERPA rules too conservatively. I also see the point in saying that that is 'hiding' behind FERPA.

FERPA is written to protect the unwanted release of educational records, not the interactions between the University and the NCAA investigators that happen to mention a student's name and definitely not the draft of the NCAA's proposed findings.

Neither of those things are educational records maintained by the University.

--

MYTH: Any document kept by a school or college that contains a student’s name is a confidential education record.

REALITY: FERPA classifies records as confidential only if they “directly relate” to an identifiable student. Courts have ordered the release of records including parking tickets and complaints against school employees – even though the records mention students – because they are not the“education records” of particular students.

Again, educational records maintained by the university.

Neither of the things in question is an educational record maintained by the university.

www.splc.org/pdf/ferpa_wp.pdf

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Let's review ...
you posted about FERPA and how Oregon was "hiding behind" a law that did not apply.

I told you that there have been MANY documents published about the extension of FERPA and the legal counsel that has advised institutions to interpret FERPA in the widest possible teerms to limit liablity.

I then provided a simple link so you could start learning about FERPA. I quoted information that explained the concept of FERPA and the definition of records covered by the law.

Here are a few questions to test your understanding of FERPA:

1. True or False FERPA covers privacy for student records.
2. True or False FERPA covers privacy for records maintained by the school.
3. True or False FERPA covers any information directly related to the student's education, including grades and academic status.
4. True or False Athletic Depratments offer scholarshipS to athletes and maintain records.

The answers to those questions will help you understand the application of FERPA and the NECESSARY redaction of student names and information from the public documents released by the University of Oregon.

I have not responded to your other stuff ... and never intended to do so in this thread. I only responded to your allegation about Oregon and FERPA.

I encourage you to take some time to read about FERPA and the legal counsel offered to administrators that are tasked with the liability of institutions that fall under this law.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/05/2013 12:18 PM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (2 votes)

The sponsor of the law agrees that Oregon is misinterpreting the intent of the law.

Former U.S. Sen. James L. Buckley said his intent 37 years ago was to allow parents access to their children's academic records - we're talking report cards, transcripts and behavioral evaluations - and to shield those records from others. He never imagined how the interpretation would evolve.

"One thing I have noticed," Buckley said during a telephone interview Thursday, "is a pattern where the universities and colleges have used it as an excuse for not giving out any information they didn't want to give."

And Buckley added: "Based on what I believe to be extreme misinterpretations of (the law) by colleges and universities, if I was still in the Senate, I would long ago have introduced amendments to the bill to get rid of the kind of (issue)."

thefire.org/article/12954.html

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Actually you are wrong.
FERPA is about control of student information by the student. ANY records held by the school that relate to matriculation and interaction with the student in the educational process fall under the guidelines that REQUIRE priot consent from the student for release.

In the case of Athletic Departments they specifically hold records about academic progress, academic eligiblity, and scholarship status - all are "directly related to the student" and therfore fall under FERPA. The University of Oreogn can (and DID) release information about the NCAA investigation. BUT the university is required by FERPA to get prior written consent from students before placing their name in documents that could reflect ANY information about their status as a student at the school - this would logically include their legitimate status to accept a scholarship or financial aid of any kind. Therefore, if the student is named in a document that questions any action by the school as it relates to eligibility to accept a scholarship, then the student's educational record is part of that discussion and therefore MUST be protected by FERPA. That is why the names were redacted. In addition, legal counsel has presented advice to a wide variety of administrators about releasing any information that could lead to a conclusion about the identity of a student ... in this case the circumstances and timing of their recruitment for a scholarship offer for football, which would then violate the student's privacy even without actually using the students name.

this is not "hiding behind FERPA" but rather taking necessary precautions to protiect the university from any lawsuit or other action that could be taken for releasing private student records or indicating anything that would lead to conclusions about a student's status in regards to schoalrships.

What purpose would be served to release the names of students in this case? Would attacking their character by having their name associated with a mistake made by administrators or others omsehow add value? I am sorry, even if I could grant your assertion is true regarding the motive of Oregon in this case (and I certainly do NOT grant any credence to such a conclusion based soltely on the law and the published advice of counsel on the topic), it still serves no purpose to anyone to release the names of students in this case.

And the proof of that is that even with the limited information we have available today, many folks feel free to draw conclusions about what is going on that are simply about producing the most negative perception possible. I prefer to protect individulas from such speculation.

---------------------------------------------

Last edited 02/05/2013 12:21 PM by WinTheDayNStuff

Posted: 02/05/2013 12:26 PM

Re: Uhh no Post Rating (1 vote)

Actually he does not disagree with what I have explained. He said it was designed to give parents access to records AND control by parents and students to publication of those records with consent.

The Athletic Department holds ACADEMIC RECORDS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE STUDENT and therefore must protect access to that information under FERPA in order for the institution to continue to receive any Federal funding. It is EXACLTY this type of information that FERPA was designed to protect.

It is NOT designed to protect a school or athletic department from publishing information about an NCAA investigation or violations of rules. BUT the language is specific as are the recent published advisories from legal counsels on the matter that the school is REQUIRED to redact or otherwise protect the identity of a student when records are directly related to the student.

Read the entire piece from the article from which that Buckley quote was extracted. You will find specific reference to the requirement for redaction under the law.

---------------------------------------------
--- WinTheDayNStuff wrote:

The sponsor of the law agrees that Oregon is misinterpreting the intent of the law.

Former U.S. Sen. James L. Buckley said his intent 37 years ago was to allow parents access to their children's academic records - we're talking report cards, transcripts and behavioral evaluations - and to shield those records from others. He never imagined how the interpretation would evolve.

"One thing I have noticed," Buckley said during a telephone interview Thursday, "is a pattern where the universities and colleges have used it as an excuse for not giving out any information they didn't want to give."

And Buckley added: "Based on what I believe to be extreme misinterpretations of (the law) by colleges and universities, if I was still in the Senate, I would long ago have introduced amendments to the bill to get rid of the kind of (issue)."

thefire.org/article/12954.html

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Actually you are wrong.
FERPA is about control of student information by the student. ANY records held by the school that relate to matriculation and interaction with the student in the educational process fall under the guidelines that REQUIRE priot consent from the student for release.

In the case of Athletic Departments they specifically hold records about academic progress, academic eligiblity, and scholarship status - all are "directly related to the student" and therfore fall under FERPA. The University of Oreogn can (and DID) release information about the NCAA investigation. BUT the university is required by FERPA to get prior written consent from students before placing their name in documents that could reflect ANY information about their status as a student at the school - this would logically include their legitimate status to accept a scholarship or financial aid of any kind. Therefore, if the student is named in a document that questions any action by the school as it relates to eligibility to accept a scholarship, then the student's educational record is part of that discussion and therefore MUST be protected by FERPA. That is why the names were redacted. In addition, legal counsel has presented advice to a wide variety of administrators about releasing any information that could lead to a conclusion about the identity of a student ... in this case the circumstances and timing of their recruitment for a scholarship offer for football, which would then violate the student's privacy even without actually using the students name.

this is not "hiding behind FERPA" but rather taking necessary precautions to protiect the university from any lawsuit or other action that could be taken for releasing private student records or indicating anything that would lead to conclusions about a student's status in regards to schoalrships.

What purpose would be served to release the names of students in this case? Would attacking their character by having their name associated with a mistake made by administrators or others omsehow add value? I am sorry, even if I could grant your assertion is true regarding the motive of Oregon in this case (and I certainly do NOT grant any credence to such a conclusion based soltely on the law and the published advice of counsel on the topic), it still serves no purpose to anyone to release the names of students in this case.

And the proof of that is that even with the limited information we have available today, many folks feel free to draw conclusions about what is going on that are simply about producing the most negative perception possible. I prefer to protect individulas from such speculation.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Posted: 02/05/2013 12:50 PM

RE: Uh Oh.The hammer is coming per Beavis insider Post Rating (5 votes)

BENNY, Why have you yet to answer the question asked many times? What benefit did any athlete receive?
85, I appreciate all the work you have put in over the last few pages but your wasting your time, I live in beaver country and most of them are lazy, ignorant, and can't think for themselves.
The difference between ducks and beavers; ducks want to be the best by beating the best, beavers want to be considered good by default.
Post New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 5  Next >
< Prev. Topic | Next Topic >