Master Index of Archived Threads
Fickle and Roasted
| Edgy MD May 08 2014 12:03 PM |
|
You may reward them points for creative thinking come what may. Vic may reward them points. I have ALREADY awarded them points. But generally, they will get roasted.
|
| Vic Sage May 08 2014 12:37 PM Re: DFAQ |
|
they've been getting roasted for 2 years in a row now for continuing to run Tejada out there, just as they were with Ike Davis. If Flores doesn't work out but the team wins anyway, fans will be ok about it and hope he does better. If Flores doesn't work out and the team loses, he will be one of many reasons pointed to, just as losing with Tejada is being pointed to, as one of a number of reasons for failure. I just don't see the fear of Flores' failure as being a good reason to do or not to do anything they can to improve the team.
|
| Edgy MD May 08 2014 12:41 PM frag |
||
|
I'd really REALLY like people to stop mis-interpeting what I've written.
I know you need your enemies, but I can't say it any more stupidly plainly. I am NOT[/bigpurple] writing that fear of Flores' failure as being a good reason to do or not to do anything they can to improve the team. What in the world gives?
|
| Vic Sage May 08 2014 01:08 PM Re: DFAQ |
|||
|
Wow, first FK, now me. Take a pill, your martyrdom is showing. Yes, I understand you were not saying fear of failure was a reason not to make the move. You said that wasn't your point, and i believed you then, and i still believe you, despite your use of big purple letters. You simply raised the issue of a "roasting" fan reaction to his potential failure and I (1) disagreed that it would be particularly significant, or at least no more significant than the reaction to Tejada's continuing suckitude, and (2) made a general point that, regardless of what they do, i would hope our management not take fan reaction too much into consideration one way or the other. If you felt that was intended as a characterization of your view, then i apologize. My apparent need for enemies notwithstanding, i'd prefer not to have them, but I'm sorry if that conflicts with your notion of me.
|
| Edgy MD May 08 2014 01:11 PM Re: DFAQ |
|||
|
Oh, come on. Really?
Do we really have to rehash?
It's un-neccessary and silly and not a little patronizing for you to apologize for my feelings. It's about the oldest patronizing rhetorical trick in the book.
|
| Vic Sage May 08 2014 01:39 PM Re: DFAQ |
|
so is attacking people by claiming they are attacking you. you've been pulling this type of passive-aggressive victimization bullshit for as long as i've been here, and usually i don't say anything. But you wanted to make this personal, instead of a debate about an issue, so fine. Yes, i need enemies. you've got me. And you apparently need to be a victim. lets move on now.
|
| Edgy MD May 08 2014 02:54 PM Re: DFAQ |
|
|
Say all sorts of hateful crap about me and then propose we move on? That's another tired rhetorical trick. I haven't attacked you. Passively, aggressively, upways or sideways.
|
| Edgy MD May 08 2014 03:11 PM Re: DFAQ |
|
|
Fuck it. This qualifies as an attack. I withdraw this, apologize for it, and recede.
|