[GK3]

Since my code of ethics prohibits me from ever going on any web page connected to Facebook, can someone kindly summarize what is in that link above?

I believe the term for this is ethics laundering. If you think it is ethically wrong to use Facebook, then you shouldn’t advocate others do it on your behalf. If, on the other hand, you value some information originating on Facebook, then just click the damned link.

BC

I’m an atheist, but don’t tell others they have no right to their religious beliefs because I find any and all of them illegitimate. I’m also not telling anyone what they should or shouldn’t do vis-a-vis Facebook. 

Just like believing or not believing in religion is everyone’s right, so to is using or not using websites or online apps. Yet here you are BC, totally disrespecting my choice, and suggesting that me consuming any information from a source I find objectionable that others might not, proves my position has no merit.

More to the point, I’m only interested in the information I asked about, not where it might be found, and it’s not like it originated on a website anyway. It was put their by someone. As far as we know, it might be available somewhere else too.

The irony here is the only reason I mentioned my disdain for Facebook was because I knew I couldn’t ask someone what was said when a link was posted that everyone could tell me to click to see for myself. I had to express my belief system to explain my ask and did so because I felt it would be respected here.

It's kind of like asking me to pray for you to receive grace.

I think it is VERY unlikely that anyone within the University would try and dictate to Shaw that he should make a staff change unless that person was involved in something the University found reprehensible and Shaw took no action.  Until this happens, or we suffer through multiple years like the last, I do not think anyone would try and tell Shaw how to run his program.  It generally seems to take about 4 years of true incompetence to get someone fired unless you are named Teevens or Harris.  Since 1940 half of our coaches have won more games than they have lost, only two have a winning percentage North of 70%.  Stanford has not proven to have its identity tied up with a program that wins constantly.  I do think that there might be some chance Shaw would listen to someone with Stanford ties and proven success as an athlete, someone like himself, but I don't think the time has come for someone like that to step up and say something privately to Shaw.  Shaw wants to win and beginning to have multiple losing years would probably prompt him to take action on his own, it just won't be as fast as some here want to see the action taken.

I also think that the system of power football introduced by Harbaugh and continued by Shaw has run its course as a dominant, winning system.  Like the single wing and many other systems that came and won for a period of time, defensive coaches figure out how to stop them.  I would not be surprised if we don't revert to becoming once more a passing school.  Assembling and coaching up a dominant offensive line on a consistent basis has proven to be very difficult.  You do not need that kind of line to throw the ball effectively.  But no matter the offensive system, if you can't play defense the the offensive system doesn't matter a great deal.

[GK3]

Since my code of ethics prohibits me from ever going on any web page connected to Facebook, can someone kindly summarize what is in that link above?

I believe the term for this is ethics laundering. If you think it is ethically wrong to use Facebook, then you shouldn’t advocate others do it on your behalf. If, on the other hand, you value some information originating on Facebook, then just click the damned link.

BC

I’m an atheist, but don’t tell others they have no right to their religious beliefs because I find any and all of them illegitimate. I’m also not telling anyone what they should or shouldn’t do vis-a-vis Facebook. 

Just like believing or not believing in religion is everyone’s right, so to is using or not using websites or online apps. Yet here you are BC, totally disrespecting my choice, and suggesting that me consuming any information from a source I find objectionable that others might not, proves my position has no merit.

More to the point, I’m only interested in the information I asked about, not where it might be found, and it’s not like it originated on a website anyway. It was put their by someone. As far as we know, it might be available somewhere else too.

The irony here is the only reason I mentioned my disdain for Facebook was because I knew I couldn’t ask someone what was said when a link was posted that everyone could tell me to click to see for myself. I had to express my belief system to explain my ask and did so because I felt it would be respected here.

It's kind of like asking me to pray for you to receive grace.

I think it is VERY unlikely that anyone within the University would try and dictate to Shaw that he should make a staff change unless that person was involved in something the University found reprehensible and Shaw took no action.  Until this happens, or we suffer through multiple years like the last, I do not think anyone would try and tell Shaw how to run his program.  It generally seems to take about 4 years of true incompetence to get someone fired unless you are named Teevens or Harris.  Since 1940 half of our coaches have won more games than they have lost, only two have a winning percentage North of 70%.  Stanford has not proven to have its identity tied up with a program that wins constantly.  I do think that there might be some chance Shaw would listen to someone with Stanford ties and proven success as an athlete, someone like himself, but I don't think the time has come for someone like that to step up and say something privately to Shaw.  Shaw wants to win and beginning to have multiple losing years would probably prompt him to take action on his own, it just won't be as fast as some here want to see the action taken.

I also think that the system of power football introduced by Harbaugh and continued by Shaw has run its course as a dominant, winning system.  Like the single wing and many other systems that came and won for a period of time, defensive coaches figure out how to stop them.  I would not be surprised if we don't revert to becoming once more a passing school.  Assembling and coaching up a dominant offensive line on a consistent basis has proven to be very difficult.  You do not need that kind of line to throw the ball effectively.  But no matter the offensive system, if you can't play defense the the offensive system doesn't matter a great deal.