Tito's big dreams

**Phrost** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:06pm

Have to enforce the rules consistently or they mean nothing.

**Vulgar42Ox** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:09pm

is there any MMA promotion that pays their fighters fairly according to their fighters? I think they should all get the same base pay, with the champions getting marginally more then the rest. Theres no reason for someone to get 250g's and their opponent to get 40g's. The winner should get more not the loser, and the winner shouldnt quadruple the losers pay either. We need more communism in mma.

**Snake Plissken** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:15pm

Originally Posted by Phrost

Have to enforce the rules consistently or they mean nothing.

slap JaydonBlade (aka GaydonFayge) across the lips with the Ban Dong

**Jadonblade** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:15pm

I imagine the fighters have agents which promote them and work out the pay. If I was Brocks agent I know I would feel very confident in getting tons more cash than their opponent.

aardvarks-

That life is behind me now!, untill we organise the ATA raid that is....

**UpaLumpa** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:22pm

Originally Posted by Vulgar42Ox

is there any MMA promotion that pays their fighters fairly according to their fighters? I think they should all get the same base pay, with the champions getting marginally more then the rest. Theres no reason for someone to get 250g's and their opponent to get 40g's. The winner should get more not the loser, and the winner shouldnt quadruple the losers pay either. We need more communism in mma.

No reason?
How about knowing who the **** someone is?

And the IFL tried what you're talking about; salaries with win bonuses and some differences. The guys I know are happy that's going away (of course, they've got winning IFL records).

**Roidie McDouchebag** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:27pm

Originally Posted by Phrost

Have to enforce the rules consistently or they mean nothing.

I don't understand why it's a rule in the first place. If it's spamming something stupid, then it shouldn't be here, but if it's on topic, I don't see why it's a problem.

**Phrost** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:35pm

Because if it's not addressed consistently and a line is drawn, less casual readers/posters get the idea that it's acceptable and we would have to do a lot more work to keep the forum spam-free.

It's just about setting and maintaining standards so that the forum is easier to read and doesn't turn into a spambox.

Nobody got banned, or even yelled at. Nothing to see here, move along.

**Roidie McDouchebag** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:47pm

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that being a good rule or making any sense, then.

**Phrost** · Posted On: 2/06/2008 3:57pm

That's perfectly fine.

However, we have seen a dramatic increase in the quality of threads after we started cracking down on making sure the first post has decent content in it... at least in certain forums.