Could someone tell me why he has not been banned yet?
He’s an inflammatory, annoying, closeminded, poorly spoken non-contributing member. As one senior member of my fraternity house at Mizzou once said about KU he is “completely and utterly worthless, and brings nothing to the table.”
RnR, if you read this, please take
a logic course
seek counseling for your desire to be right
a month hiatus from reading and get to working improving yourself. Dont read anything on here, design your own program, report your results in 4-6 weeks time. if you improve, we’ll respectfully ask you how. If not, I hope youll be humble to ask for help, which the board will gladly offer of our experience.
Rupert, just check out this message from Jim Wendler at Elite Fitness Systems:
"Ok, I took a look at the Charlie Francis web board and the discussion on WSB training. In that discussion, someone under the pseudoname of Rock and Roll had assumed that Kevin Deweese has practiced his backflip for quite some time using a trampoline. Just so R-n-R realizes this; Kevin did this at my wedding after several beers. And no he did not practice it. So Mr Rock and Roll, who has with no references, no background, nothing but assumptions decides that he KNOWS exactly what happened. You wonder why forums are a bunch of bullshit. Lies and misinformation.
Congratulations to Kevin on making the CF Forum.
Thought for the day; Try training; I heard a rumor that it makes you better. "
There are other Forums besides this one? Hmm, I have never had the need to go elsewhere. You can find crap at any City Park if you look for it. There is so much gold here though that I haven’t had time to look for crap.
It’s not a forum Herb, it’s a QnA section at Elite Fitness Systems. In fact, it was an announcement… and not by a “crap” talker but one of the strongest powerlifters in the business.
Not to mention that Elite Fitness Systems is a popular business ran by SMART individuals. Tons of people have read this QnA. The Charlie Francis board can get a bad rep if top guys in the strength training business (like Jim Windler) speak out against the posters of this board…
I misunderstood your post. R&R however does not represent CF.com or the majority of the 3000 members here. Saying that forums are a bunch of lies and misinformation is a hasty generalisation though. There is plenty of good information here. What exactly is Jim speaking out against? Backflips, beer and trampolines?
Furthermore, I am not quite sure what he means by congrats on “making” the CF forum. My 8 year old nephew could “make” the forum if he wanted. Everyone has the freedom to speak that they believe is truth here, if they are wrong, then at least others have the freedom to correct them, unlike on EFS.com, where the site administrators can write hasty generalisations with there being no means to rebutt by those implicated in the matter.
Look over R&Rs posts in the Westside thread in the Strength and Conditioning thread. Windler was speaking out against the assumptions R&R made about Kevin Deweese. Specifically, it was along the lines that Deweese’s strength training lent no assistance to his ability to perform backflips or any other athletic movement. R&R refers to Deweese spending tons of time on a trampoline to achieve that back flip -despite not even knowing who Deweese is or reading about him. Windler mentions that is not the case and that Deweese did it out of the blue after a couple of beers.
Yes, R&R does not represent the board, but when one individual stands out as a pain and then insults a friend of Windler’s (Dewesee), he could end up mistakenly representing the entire board. I am sure Windler was mostly frustrated/annoyed which led to typing before thinking (happens to us all). One bad egg can ruin the whole, despite the quality and substance of that whole.
Also, many of us would agree R&R talks before reading, and makes rather error-filled comments. I doubt R&R has even read much of Charlie’s works with his references to supplementary strength training “slowing people down.”
I know this is a quality board, and this is why I read the topics here. Yet when one poster is getting publicly noticed for representing this board AND has nothing overly educated to contribute to discussion except harsh assumptions, then maybe that poster should not be allowed to post…
I am not justifying Windler’s rather sudden remarks, but perhaps avoiding hasty generalizations from others by removing posters that only assume rather than use fact (R&R in this case) might be a good move to keep face.
Side note: Just mentioning what happened. I have no desire to take sides on what should happen. I just wanted to bring up Windler’s post to show that even one immature assumption from a poster has its consequences. Plus I found it interesting, personally. Therefore, I will just go back to reading information on this site instead of debating on how the site should be ran
This is a large site, with a lot of posts going through! Sometimes things get too personal and sometimes there is misinformation. Of course, if everyone already HAD accurate information, there would be no arguements. We try to keep the discussions civil, but, sometimes, countering faulty logic serves to re-inforce important points. Rupert has already posted that he’ll check through the posts in question.
Look at the bottom of the forum page. you’ll see that there are over 50,000 posts here on version three of our site, with another 30,000 or so in the archives. If someone want’s to crap on my site because they have a problem with one poster, that’s up to them. If they read through enough of the posts, they’ll discover that there are some SMART people over here too.
