Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BAgate last won the day on March 30

BAgate had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

BAgate's Achievements


Explorer (4/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges



  1. Then who are they recruiting at tackle? Wagner isn't likely and brunner is probably RT only.
  2. Huh? I thought Craig was a tackle and Hinzman was a center. Why would they be fighting for a spot?
  3. I would argue your definitions are wrong. When a prospect 'blows up' does not determine whether he is plan A or B. What matters is what tier of acceptance a prospect falls into, i.e. all prospects in plan A would be taken ahead of those in plan B. So the fact that Walker blew up just recently is irrelevant. What matters is if he would be taken before others.
  4. Shouldn't the visits still be ongoing till the afternoon?
  5. Thx for the tip. No improvement for the tweets, in fact there is now a ton of empty space around them.
  6. Is there any way that when you go to a page with new posts you are sent to the new posts automatically rather than having to scroll down to them? Or am I missing something?
  7. No improvement. And thank you for taking our concerns seriously.
  8. I like the dark theme, but embedded tweets are unreadable in it. Black text on black background. Any way to change that?
  9. I'm referring to desktop. I don't really know how to elaborate. On the old board there were 2-3 times as many rows as there are now. Each thread is about 3 times as tall with lots of empty space between. And I'm seeing the bold now. It just is not as stark a contrast as before.
  10. 2 issues with the update- 1) Each line takes up 3 times as much screen real estate (at least). Leads to dramatically more scrolling. And it is all wasted whitespace. Any way to condense it? 2) There is no visual clue that there is a new post. It may be a color scheme issue, but the old software would bold a thread if there was a new post. Any way to do that?
  11. 1) There is a difference in giving each state equal representation in the senate (what they were promised) and giving each state equal representation overall (what they were NOT promised). Even under the EC each state gets different representation. 2) I'm of the belief that states matter less now. When I think of myself I think of a US citizen, not a citizen of my state. And there is more movement today (for ex. I currently don't live in the state I was born in). So while each state is different I don't see them as having an identity that needs special protection. Representation in congress, and especially the senate, takes care of protecting state's rights, so I don't see the need to give low population states a leg up when it comes to electing a president who represents the entire country. Its the old saying, before the civil war the United states are, after the civil war the United States is. 3) Calling people who live in cities crazy and saying we shouldn't be run like them isn't a strong argument. Currently cities are experiencing far greater economic growth than rural states, they generally are better at guaranteeing equal rights to minorities, and they tend to come up with more novel solutions to problems. You might call that crazy, but others would say the rural states could use a little of that.
  12. NDHoosier 1) You said "California always benefited greatly from the EC". I took exception to the word 'always' and conflated it with a prior post about states getting what they bargained for. My bad. 2) No, having elected officials is supposed to mean each person is equally represented. How many states have legislatures that apportion representatives by geographical region as opposed to population? And how is it regionally based when the size of states varies widely (new england vs the west)? 3) I think this is where the fundamental disagreement lies. I think of the US as a country with the states being constituent parts, you see the US as being a union made up of the states. I don't know how we bridge this divide. 4) Polls generally show independents are the most numerous but that democrats outnumber republicans. Combined with the fact that democrats generally have won nationwide popular votes (3 million in 2016 presidential, 8 million in aggregate 2018 congressional) and I think saying republicans are in the minority is an accurate statement. 5) Just because it has worked doesn't mean it is the best or that it can't be improved. Everything that was changed via amendment was part of the great success before it was changed. So that is a weak argument. 6) Blammm - you are referring to how congress was composed, not the electoral college. Do some research. While big/small state dynamics were at play, the greater impetus behind the electoral college was that northern states were more populous than southern ones if you just counted whites (about 60-40). Creating the EC and having blacks count 3/5 helped even that out. Now, I do have to thank everyone for this discussion. I couldn't imagine how anyone could still support the EC, and while I strongly disagree with pretty much everything you guys have been saying, at least now I know where such opinions are coming from.
  • Create New...