I'm a former IC ZZL/P Mod = AMA

  • Thread starter Thread starter SnoopRob
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 769
  • Views: 18K
  • Off-Topic 
Who actually owns IC? What is the hierarchy within the PTB?
My understanding is that Ben and Buck are co-owners. They pay a portion of the dues to 247 for the network (or more accurately, 247 takes a cut of the dues that are collected).
 
My understanding is that Ben and Buck are co-owners. They pay a portion of the dues to 247 for the network (or more accurately, 247 takes a cut of the dues that are collected).
This is the same understanding I have.

If you want more info about the staff, here's the "About IC" page... About Inside Carolina
 
We'll I didn't...

Until you mentioned it again. I probably should have known better.

It wasn't nearly as disturbing as some words I've mistakenly Google over the years.

Not in the same ballpark as rosebudding.
Damn you, now I want to google rosebudding...
 
As an aside, I saw where some porn stars are doing some PSA's against project 2025.
 
Yes, it is possible to for both heterosexual and homosexual to be normal. Ability to have children isn't the only qualifier here.

That is also why I asked, without answer, about how one with such a binary belief system would classify other human traits that are along a spectrum.

Like skin color, eye color, and hair color, which is "normal". It would be highly offensive for one to claim that white skin is normal and those whose skin is not white to be abnormal.

My beliefe is this was simply a way to try and mask unacceptable personal biases.

Example: I'm not homophobic but, you know that gay people are not normal, since they can't have kids.
But the dude assured us that everyone disagreeing with him is liberal (I'm sure that will be news to you) and making emotional arguments. Of course he didn't answer the question.
 
How many children of the ZZL googled bukakke after Sooner told them to?
At my law firm we used to have what we called the “bukakke test.” It all started circa 2007 when we were handling a case involving a madam of a very high end escort service. One of my partners had access to her email account. The client would get emails from people who were applying for jobs with her escort service. They were quite entertaining. They would actually submit resumes.

We were reading the resume of one of the applicants and she had appeared in a number of adult films, which she listed in her resume. Several of the films had the word “bukkake” in the title. One of my law partners and I were not familiar with the term so we did our research. We found some videos. Once we saw what it was, we called in one of our other partners to check it out (we were a very small firm at the time with about 4 or 5 lawyers back then). We all stood there laughing as we watched the videos. This applicant was also in movies with the term “reverse bukkake” so we checked that out too.

After that, we all laughed about how watching videos like that is the type of stuff we do at our firm. We talked about how someone who wanted to come work at our firm would have to be someone who wouldn’t be offended by the fact that people are watching bukkake videos in their office and could actually find humor in it.

At that point we came up with a hypothetical “bukkake test.” If anyone were to join our firm, they would need to be the type who would not be offended by people watching bukkake videos in their office and would have to find humor in the whole thing.

Now we never actually subjected anyone to the “bukkake test.” But when we talked about hiring other lawyers, we would ask each other if we thought they’d be able to pass the “bukakke test.” Though that hasn’t come in years now.
 
I never said the dictionary definitions were wrong. Typical isn't always. Abnormal can be used in a positive way. A basketball player can be abnormally tall. A gifted student can be abnormally intelligent, etc.
it doesn't always have to be used in that context to make it incorrect and insulting in some situations.

this is one of those situations.
 
Last edited:
I moderated the ZZL and ZZLP for almost 8 years. It was a shitshow.

What questions do you have about IC? Or being an IC mod? Or about the ZZL or ZZLP? Or about whatever else?

Ask me anything
Approximately how many zzl posters (daily/weekly) were there before the split? Once it split what did the numbers become zzlp vs zzl ?
 
Approximately how many zzl posters (daily/weekly) were there before the split? Once it split what did the numbers become zzlp vs zzl ?
No idea.

Based on my experience, the numbers had already been trending down for years before the split. The issue that niche message boards like IC face is getting new folks to join when facebook, twitter, reddit, etc are already out there and offer a place to discuss UNC sports while also offering much more.
 
I never said the dictionary definitions were wrong. Typical isn't always. Abnormal can be used in a positive way. A basketball player can be abnormally tall. A gifted student can be abnormally intelligent, etc.
You see those as positive?

No one would call a gifted person abnormally intelligent.

I doubt anyone would take "abnormal intelligence" as a compliment.
 
You see those as positive?

No one would call a gifted person abnormally intelligent.

I doubt anyone would take "abnormal intelligence" as a compliment.
Positive or negative really doesn't matter if it fits the definition.

Edit: I don't know what I have said previously, but what I meant is that homosexuality is abnormal, not that homosexuals should be labeled as abnormal people.
 
Last edited:
You see those as positive?

No one would call a gifted person abnormally intelligent.

I doubt anyone would take "abnormal intelligence" as a compliment.
Disturbingly, I'm not sure I could honestly reject the term if applied to me.:confused:
 
On reflection, What would the construct of a "normal" mind look like? I'm not even sure that's a valid concept. The closest society comes is that if you can care for yourself, you're normally functional. and the acuity and problem solving abilities aren't terribly relevant. Those aren't exactly well defined standards with clear criteria unswayed by the expectations of society.
 
Can you rank from below what you feel IC's decision-makers are most concerned with?

a. Enhancing and preserving the reputation of UNC athletics
b. Selling Premium memberships
c. Increasing advertising revenue
d. Tracking the browsing habits of its users, paid and free.
 
Positive or negative really doesn't matter if it fits the definition.

Edit: I don't know what I have said previously, but what I meant is that homosexuality is abnormal, not that homosexuals should be labeled as abnormal people.
See i don't agree that homosexuality is abnormal, because that is a binary response to something that is not binary. There is a spectrum. Even from a biological stand point, there are people who have both male and female sex organs. From the stand point of chromosomes there are more than two options. Then factor in the mental aspect and any concept of binary is blown away.

I am happy that you state that homosexuals should not be labeled as abnormal.

Just as being left handed is not abnormal homosexuality is not abnormal.
 
Disturbingly, I'm not sure I could honestly reject the term if applied to me.:confused:
If one were to say I'm of abnormal intelligence I would take it as an insult.

It's also ambiguous in that there are two sides of a bell curve, which is the abnormal side? I'm confident that Zen would answer both.
 
Can you rank from below what you feel IC's decision-makers are most concerned with?

a. Enhancing and preserving the reputation of UNC athletics
b. Selling Premium memberships
c. Increasing advertising revenue
d. Tracking the browsing habits of its users, paid and free.
To be clear, I wasn't at the level where I got looped in on such topics, but this is my best guess is concerning those 4 things.

They care most about (b) and then (c) as those are the things that affect their business/bottom line. My hunch is that premium memberships are the most important revenue driver by far and that ads are very secondary, especially if you're talking about the ads that appear on the site. (They also have partnerships with local businesses and such that I would guess are more important to them than online ad revenue.)

As far as (a), I believe that IC views itself as an independent journalistic endeavor away from the university or the Carolina Athletic Dept, so I don't think they see their role as much as "enhancing and preserving the reputation" of the AD as much as reporting on the AD and its sports teams. However, they are certainly "friendly media" in that their subscriber/reader base are pro-Carolina and so I'd say they aren't likely to be terribly harsh on the AD or any team, nor are they willing to let unsourced and unproven rumors be spread using their message boards. They attempt to do their best to strike a balance between critiquing a team, players, coaches, the entire AD and not going overboard with consistent negative content; and they certainly want to be able to source what is reported by the site and allowed to be posted on the message boards.

I've never seen anything that suggests to me that IC/247 is trying to (d) track its users beyond the normal stuff done by pretty much every website. I'm sure they obtain the typical stuff any normal website would obtain when you visit the site, but I've never seen anything to suggest they do anything beyond that level of tracking.
 
Back
Top