Do you disagree with this? If so, why?

The introduction of points on MGoBoard was, in my humble opinion, a catastrophe for all but a chosen few. The point system rewarded early joiners who posted frequently. These posters were all able to circle jerk each other to point totals of epic proportions, which enabled them essentially to control the destiny of new or infrequent posters. Negative points were not awarded for the reasons listed in the MGoBoard FAQ (i.e., being redundant, using stupid nicknames, spelling things incorrectly, or posting useless replies), but for merely posting material with which the established posters disagreed. Posters lacking in MGoBoard points were thus discouraged from voicing their true opinions, and, instead, encouraged to preach to the choir. What began as an effort to deter trolls and establish rules for new posters devolved into a Lord of the Flies-esque state of affairs. Those who held the "conch" (i.e., had lots of MGoPoints) were able to dictate the character and tone of conversation; those without the "conch" were subjected to the tyranny of the MGoBoard elder statesmen. Face it, MGoBoarders: you won't agree with everyone on here. That doesn't mean those you disagree with deserve to be negbanged. I've been a Michigan fan for all twenty-five years of my life. I spent seven years as a student in Ann Arbor (undergrad and law), and I've disagreed with Brian--and posters here--on numerous occasions. But does my disagreement mean I should be negbanged or barred from posting an original threads on this site? I would hope not. The point to to "senior" posters here is clear: get over yourselves. Your ridiculous point totals don't establish you as more worthy or more knowledgeable than any other poster on this board.