Well, I was named by John to respond to questions about behavior. This is like asking Lucifer to comment on the propriety of religion. Not being a choir boy at MTU home (or away) hockey games, I am not certain that I can defend the NCAA announcement before the games. To the immense embarassment of my wife, I have been known to say, (she claims that I use my "command voice",) things about refs such as Buzzy, Brutal Bob, and Chick, that have not been published on this list or elsewhere. In fact, she threaten to watch the games from behind the goal rather than from over the red line where our season tickets are located. The people in front of me last year wore ear protection. This year, I am strategically placed such that there are no people in front of me. They have placed me between our local judge and a very senior, calming professor in my department. I have decided to approach the game this year in a more gentler, kinder, nature. Last week, the professor loaned his seats to a hockey ref. Imagine me sitting next to a NCAA hockey ref! (I learned a few things from him. Apparently, he thought the penalties called were also marginal. He was a very enjoyable and knowledgable fellow.) The truth of the matter is that banging on the glass is dangerous not only for the players but also for the fans. I have seen the glass shatter or fall out of the fixtures on three different occasions. The same goes for standing on the folding seats that are used in our arena. This frankly ain't too smart. As for verbal abuse of ref's, opposing players and occassionally home players, I am less definitive on. I don't, and would submit that most fans do not, want to hear a stream of curses. This is clearly beyond the scope of civility. But what about comments that do not contain curse words? I personally don't like to hear a lot of whining about this call should have been called to that call should have been made. When a ref calls something that is questionable, I have been known to verbalize. Under the current rules, both of us should be ejected from the game for abuse. Fortunately, the people enforcing the rules are somewhat more liberal about their interpretation of abuse. It is my way of thinking that there are far too many rules both for the hockey players and the fans. I come from a background that says that hockey is a contact sport. Furthermore, hockey fans are expected to move and occasionally indicate that they are alive. (This is necessary when watching games at forty below as we use to do. We needed to identify cadavors. The new arena's make us a little pusillanimous.) While at West Point, watching games at old Smith Rink (teams coached by Jack Riley), the fans were essential to getting Army's wins. That could be their problem now: a fine arena but reduced home croud advantage. Now a little older and maybe wiser, I would suggest that comments made in the spirit of team support, should be permitted. When the fan support becomes violent as indicated by physical damage or potential physical damage to the fans, the players or the refs, immediate action needs to be taken. Making a warning announcement before the game is NOT the way to encourage positive fan attitiudes. Walt Olson MTU