American College Athletics

In [US] NCAA sports, athletes have four years of eligibility, which must be used within 5 years of entering college. Many entering student-athletes aren't ready to compete, and so their coaches have them spend their freshman years practicng with the team but not actually suiting up for games. This is called RedShirting. It can also happen because the student isn't academically eligible.

I'd rather not debate the ethics of the NCAA and of American college sports. Let's just say that it gives me the creeps. --EricJablow

I know what you mean. Jay Ward saw this coming back in the early 1960's. His Wotsamatta U story sequence is a very pointed take on the situation. --BullwinkleFan?

To say nothing of the MarxBrothers in "Horse Feathers"!

Related Articles: SportInjuryCourtCases? PromptAndCapableMedicalAssistance?

See: RedShirt [This is for whomever is having a problem with this page, and no, I am not the author of either page]

EditHint: OffTopic -- move to TheAdjunct.

What does it have to do with PeopleProjectsAndPatterns in/or SoftwareDevelopment?

You seem to miss the point, in that Wiki is both full of such OffTopic pages, and Wiki "needs" OffTopic pages. Besides, it is simply a spin-off from RedShirt. What are you going to do, start deleting all pages like films, books, etc. that are all clearly OffTopic? Quit being a one-man ruler. Other people have their interests and opinions. Have you not paid any attention to the pages and discussions related to this matter of late?

OffTopic pages have a home on TheAdjunct. This Wiki is, and has always been, about PeopleProjectsAndPatterns in SoftwareDevelopment. It is not, nor has it ever been, a general repository for arbitrary interests and opinions. The majority of active participants here are interested in SoftwareDevelopment and related matters. There are plenty of other forums for OffTopic material, like TheAdjunct and WikiPedia. Since TheAdjunct is a SisterSite, content moved to it can trivially be linked from here.

Do you ever actually read NewRecentChanges, and pay attention to the pages that are being edited and currently active?

Of course. The majority are directly or indirectly related to SoftwareDevelopment. Some other topics are tolerated, mainly due to their traditional associations with computer "geek" culture, like HarryPotterVsLordOfTheRings. Otherwise, your argument is bogus. If RecentChanges was filled with spam (as has happened at times), should we keep it, too? Unfortunately, those who insist on maintaining OffTopic content appear to like the idea of a general-purpose repository-for-everything, but are bored by SoftwareDevelopment, which creates conflict. WardsWiki, however, is not a repository-for-everything. See WelcomeVisitors.

You are not the one in charge of deciding which pages are the ones that people are interested in "tolerating", and that is my point of being in defense of this page. It is no different then any other of the so-called OffTopic pages here.

True, but you are not in charge of deciding which pages should be kept, either.

That said, whilst there are numerous pages here with novel and relevant content that arguably can't be found elsewhere, this page doesn't add anything new and no one benefits from its presence or would lose from its absence.

As compared to HighHeeledShoes?

Thanks for reminding me... I've tagged it for moving to TheAdjunct.

The fact that you fail to see the point, makes you one of the things that is currently wrong with this Wiki.

The only thing "wrong" with this Wiki is your perception of it. Those of us who are discuss and develop content on SoftwareDevelopment-related matters, and use it as an interestingly "in the trenches" reference for the same, find it works very well.

So, you are one of those few people that have decided that they are going to capture Wiki, and make it conform to their ideals even if it kills Wiki? You appear to not be a true friend of this Wiki, nor do you appear to have this Wiki's best interest at heart.

Take a look at WelcomeVisitors. Note that this Wiki is "primarily about PeopleProjectsAndPatterns in SoftwareDevelopment." I have every interest in maintaining that clear and unambiguous focus. I have no interest in gobbling Ward's hard-drive space to turn it into a redundant repository of miscellanea that are better suited to TheAdjunct or WikiPedia. That, after all, is why they exist. Why duplicate them here? You appear not to be a true friend of Ward's hard drive space or bandwidth limits, or of the developer community, or of TheAdjunct or WikiPedia.

The fact that you fail to see the point, makes you one of the things that is currently wrong with this Wiki.

The reason nobody can see each other's point is because there is no point to be seen. From WelcomeVisitors:

"""This site's primary focus is PeopleProjectsAndPatterns in SoftwareDevelopment. However, it is more than just an InformalHistoryOfProgrammingIdeas. It started there, but the theme has created a culture and DramaticIdentity all its own. All Wiki content is WorkInProgress. Most of all, this is a forum where people share ideas! It changes as people come and go. Much of the information here is subjective. If you are looking for a dedicated reference site, try WikiPedia; WikiIsNotWikipedia! """

In other words, you're both right, and you're both wrong. So, what defines off-topic content? WelcomeVisitors says that the site's primary purpose is for PeopleProjectsAndPatterns, but certainly makes no claims to wall off content to just that.

It appears to me a better metric is,

Has the content existed essentially unchanged for more than a year or two?
Is the content a WalledGarden for the most part? That there exists one or two pages which points into the garden does not mean it's not a WalledGarden.

If you answered yes to both of those questions, then I claim it's eligible for clean-up, refactoring, or outright deletion. Example: When I (Samuel A. Falvo II) first came across this page, it was because of an allegedly spammy kind of page, and I deleted the content. However, shortly, the page was restored (the spammy page was not, however, thankfully), which meant that I was in error about how old the content has existed for. Apparently, someone thought it relevant. I'm happy with that, even though I certainly don't like the content on this page.

That seems eminently reasonable. However, given that TheAdjunct is a SisterSite which means OffTopic content (whatever that might be) can be effectively maintained and linked without any significant inconvenience to the WikiReader, I can see no reason not to move OffTopic material there. Indeed, given that TheAdjunct is free of any OffTopic restrictions, more content there may help it achieve the critical mass necessary for significant popularity, whereas here there will always be resistance to OffTopic content.

TheAdjunct is clearly a failed experiment, and was a bad idea from the start. It was forced upon us.

It's only potentially "failed" if OffTopic content isn't moved to it, thus forcing it to reach the CriticalMass necessary to becoming a self-sustaining community entirely on its own.

This discussion is now a matter of historical record as TheAdjunct no longer exists.

FebruaryZeroNine