Jasson Mass to Calgary for Hank Burris

Jason can be closer to his family in Edmonton. It is a good deal for both teams. Welcome to the hammer Hank. Hammering Hank!!!

I heard it was Maas for Hank and Rambo.....

...bordering on trolling...

Only bordering?

Definately trolling!

Awwwww.... come on guys. A troll is an attempt to be a subtle nasty that gets the naive excited. This guy is proposing a trade, that's all.

It's not a very likely one...
or sensible one...
and it IS on the Stamps forum...
but it is one. Let's not see a troll under EVERY bridge.

Here's the original fairy tale-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont_Troll

... and here's a little on the artwork-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont_Troll

Nope Troll nice try to cover up that fact.

Wow.... This is the first time that I'VE ever been called a troll. I am genuinely sorry if I've offended you - that was not my intent - but I do disagree with your analysis of the situation. My own tendency in life is to attempt to make careful distinctions between categories as well as to grant people the benefit of the doubt.

First, I don't like trolling. I find it infantile. People who think that they are superior try to egg on the naive to argue with them. (This very approach suggests that they feel inadequate and that they possess emotional difficulties.)

However, I've noticed on almost all of the boards on cfl.ca a recent tendency to call people - whose opinions are in themselves unusual or disagreeable -'trolls'.

Admittedly there is often a fine line. It's hard to discern the difference when one doesn't really know the person who is on the other end.

My judgement on the 'Burris for Maas' idea is that it IS fair game because: 1) There's no attempt to call out Calgary fans or put down the team, 2) Such a trade might be in the realm of conceivable possibilities, 3) It is no more unusual a speculation than many others that are acceptable on this site.

I'd be honestly interested in hearing your definition of 'trolling' in order to understand what I perceive to be a change in definition on the boards.

Thanks!

....you're right, if there is not a lot going on in the intial post then there is a fine line to discern the reason for the post...if hanker had offered the idea of the trade with perhaps more explanation for his idea than just so that JM would be closer to his family then it gains legitimacy....as I noted, it was 'bordering' on trolling, not a definate.....you think he was offering a real discussion, maybe that is correct, but he's never come back to defend his idea has he?...right now it's like he rang the doorbell and then ran away....

I'll grant that... tho' his post count is so low that he may be someone who can post a single thought but who is unable to carry on a sustained discussion.

Anyway, thanks for the response.
All the best.

...that statement represents about 93% of the forum users....

...in case it is legit, this is a trade that wouldn't fly, JM is damaged goods whereas Hank is in his prime, pound for pound HB is the better QB, when he isn't throwing picks all over tarnation....thankfully the last two games he has wisened up, so right now, today, Hank is the better QB between the two...plus, a #1 QB for #1 QB trade mid-season is absolutely unprecedented, in any league....both team's offense would take weeks to re-establish themselves and effectively lose the campaign....if it looks like hamilton misses the playoffs then perhaps a team looking to go deep into the playoffs might consider bringing JM aboard in a #2 position....if it were us it wouldn't be for Burris, probably draft picks...

I find it to be ridiculous to even suggest a trade like that.. that would be like the Washington Capitals and Pittsburgh Pengiuns doing a Crosby-Ovechkin trade..

...perhaps hanker is a CFL young'un, just learning the game, if so then cuttin him some slack is warranted...

I'm SOrry guys but until Ti-Cat coaching staff goes completely off there rocker were gunna keep maas but well send ya Chang for burris