Master Index of Archived Threads


Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Ashie62 Jan 02 2017 09:33 PM

Anyway we can knock this out to have an enjoyable baseball page season. I think you know who the primary bad actor is. Thanks for considering.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 16 2017 03:46 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 20 2017 09:32 AM

Ashie62 wrote: Anyway we can knock this out to have an enjoyable baseball page season. I think you know who the primary bad actor is. Thanks for considering. Again with that Trump joke, which I'm so fucking sick of already. How many threads are you gonna start over that? And humor me --- who would that primary bad actor be, as if I didn't know? I mean, we're talking about one single lonesome Trump joke here, right? Which you wouldn't have ever complained about if it was an Obama joke, you hypocrite. You act as if I made 100 Trump jokes. NTTAWWT

d'Kong76 Jan 16 2017 02:00 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Going forward, we should probably refrain from getting so personal here that we're digging up stuff to nail home a point and then including people's real names in negative/derogatory posts?

batmagadanleadoff Jan 17 2017 12:21 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: Going forward, we should probably refrain from getting so personal here that we're digging up stuff to nail home a point and then including people's real names in negative/derogatory posts? I know that you mean well and that your post is well-intentioned. And I agree with your post. I can guarantee you that no one on this forum is more self-aware and respectful of someone else's right to privacy than I am. But I haven't done any of the things you seem to suggest that I did. The Flint water scandal is a public and national story. And MGIM is a public figure personally involved in that story -- first as a journalist reporting the scandal, and then as his Governor's press secretary. His name has appeared in many stories covering the scandal where he is characterized not just as a government employee, but as an active participant in that scandal, accused by many of personally concealing crucial evidence to protect his governor. That article I posted above is kid stuff compared to some of the other stuff out there about him. Also, every regular on this forum should know his real name. He's volunteered his real name numerous times here, encouraging us to google those journalistic pieces he's written that he's proud of. And he's referred us to his personal blog/web site where his real name is easily found. My post is fair game. I don't think I've done anything to invade someone's personal space. And I can promise you that I never will. But this isn't the case here.

cooby Jan 17 2017 12:58 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Oh my god I didn't dream it

d'Kong76 Jan 17 2017 01:36 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

batmagadanleadoff wrote: But I haven't done any of the things you seem to suggest that I did. d'Kong76 wrote: including people's real names in negative/derogatory posts? I don't know or really care why this battle is so important to you but please, PLEASE, try not to make things so personal. The bots get hold of this and it's on the internet forever unless we're put in the position to delete it. And then it's feather in the cap of the this-place-is-over-admin'd club. I googled his name and the forum name and yes he posted his name in the music trivia derby. Big woop. His name is gonna propogate on the search engines and have links here. He doesn't need that, and neither do we? Right?

batmagadanleadoff Jan 17 2017 02:00 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: But I haven't done any of the things you seem to suggest that I did. d'Kong76 wrote: including people's real names in negative/derogatory posts? I don't know or really care why this battle is so important to you but please, PLEASE, try not to make things so personal. The bots get hold of this and it's on the internet forever unless we're put in the position to delete it. And then it's feather in the cap of the this-place-is-over-admin'd club. I googled his name and the forum name and yes he posted his name in the music trivia derby. Big woop. His name is gonna propogate on the search engines and have links here. He doesn't need that, and neither do we? Right? So what is it that you prefer I don't do? Post some member's real life name here? Because I never did that. Do you want me to not post about the Flint water scandal? Because that's a national interest news story. Do you want me to not post critical pieces about Betsy Devos on grounds that MGIM might throw another ninny-fit? Not post a national interest news article that mentions some CPF member's real name? What if I posted a review of the the Mets By the Numbers book? Or a review of VIcSage's new sci-fi book, Spira Mirabilis? Are those posts off limits because they would include the real life names of their respective authors/CPF members? If you ever addressed your post to VicSage, he'd stick his .38 up your nose and force you to sing Barnacle Bill the Sailor. Come up with something fair and sensible and you have my word that I'll comply.

d'Kong76 Jan 17 2017 02:08 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

batmagadanleadoff wrote: If you ever addressed your post to VicSage, he'd stick his .38 up your nose and force you to sing Barnacle Bill the Sailor. Lol... and I'd stick it up his ass because all threads lead to his ass!

Vic Sage Jan 17 2017 07:02 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

a quote from one of my stories! whoopie!! i'm a happy golem!

Edgy MD Jan 19 2017 12:58 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

It's a good idea if we go on the honor system here and don't use the posters' real names, even as we often know them. Please stick to that policy.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 01:57 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 19 2017 07:09 AM

Edgy MD wrote: It's a good idea if we go on the honor system here and don't use the posters' real names, even as we often know them. Please stick to that policy. Good by me. But define "use". Because I get it if you think we shouldn't use the real names in the posts we write. That's a sensible idea. But what about copying and pasting or linking to web articles that might include someone's real name? Does this mean that I can't link to a Faith and Fear piece or a book review of the Mets By the Numbers book? Or a review of the Donn Clendenon piece in The Miracle Has Landed? Or that I can't copy and paste those reviews here? What if it turns out that Senator Elizabeth Warren was cheating on her husband and having a steamy affair with the poster that goes by the name here of VicSage and that they had sex behind Lincoln's ass at the Lincoln Monument? And the papers got a hold of that one and named names. Would coverage of that affair be off limits on this forum? If I copied and pasted excerpts (of course, excerpts) of those articles, would I have to redact any real names of any posters here? What if Betsy Devos asked Donald Trump to shove a 10 inch dildo molded in the shape of Jesus up her ass and the New York Times ran that story along with photos of the sex act? Is that story off limits? What if it was MGIM instead of Donald Trump shoving the dildo up Betsy Devos's ass? Would that make any difference as far as your policy is concerned? Or is the MGIM version of the story OK so long as I redact any names of posters here? Thanks in advance because I don't wanna break any rules here and I wanna get off on the right foot right from the get go.

Edgy MD Jan 19 2017 04:02 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Well, you're not. Please don't condescend to me. I'm not having it.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 04:16 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 19 2017 04:18 AM

Edgy MD wrote: Well, you're not. Please don't condescend to me. I'm not having it. Of course you're not having it. When did you ever take my side on any of this shit? Ever? People could whale on me from here to eternity but the second I respond, you're all over me. People here don't disagree with me by telling me, for example, that they might disagree with my opinion of Lucas Duda or Jeff Sessions. No, they tell me to go fuck myself and write insulting and fake news posts that I'm supposed to be broke or that I flip hamburgers for a living or that I'm not worthy of engaging with. They write those posts over and over and you don't do a flying fuck about it, not that I'd ever come crying to you to settle my battles, but the second I respond, then it's a goddamn crisis. That's a perfectly valid post I wrote. Anybody else here writes it and you'd probably join in, adding humor to an already funny post. Your "use" policy, even if it's well-intentioned is so ambiguous as to be pointless. I thought I'd bring it out, is all. Only me. I'm the only one here that would generate a shitstorm of ugly jackass responses all because I made a joke about Donald Trump. This is what it's come to. You can't make Donald Trump jokes anymore. No let me rephrase that. I can't make Donald Trump jokes anymore.

Edgy MD Jan 19 2017 04:18 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

And here comes the martyr act. Right on time.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 04:23 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Edgy MD wrote: And here comes the martyr act. Right on time. It's not a martyr act. It's the goddamn truth. I don't even know what this martyr act thing means. It's as vague and meaningless as your "policy" post. So I'm a martyr because I note abusive off-topic personal attacks aimed at me? You use that word martyr to make it appear as if I'm making this all up and that those personal ad hominem attacks against me don't exist and never happened. And beside, is that an excuse for you never ever taking my side when posters write unprovoked personal attacks against me? One guy here abused me for about eight fucking years running with me ignoring about 95% of it until I decided not to anymore (and I'm not gonna mention his name because maybe that's in the past -- we seem to be getting along lately and that's a good thing) and you acted as if you weren't even aware of it ever happening even though you write more posts and spend more time here than anybody and nothing that goes on here, not even the most trivial things escape your awareness. You called me a martyr as a defense because you wrote a flawed post and got called out for it. Not that you'd ever admit a mistake, at least to me. I can't tell you how many times I've seen you weasel and bullshit and doubletalk your way out of things you wrote that weren't on the up and up.

Ceetar Jan 19 2017 01:56 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Good by me. But define "use". Because I get it if you think we shouldn't use the real names in the posts we write. That's a sensible idea. But what about copying and pasting or linking to web articles that might include someone's real name?. How about a screenshot? That's free from the Google spiders.

d'Kong76 Jan 19 2017 03:00 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Requests for a ruling from the Stockholm offices have fallen on deaf ears. I really wonder what they do up there all day! Four moderators (admins) here agree that no one should use another posters real-life name in any negative/derogatory posts. Posts containing names and such will be ed- ited or deleted at the discretion of the moderators. When in Rome, you do as the Romans do.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 19 2017 03:49 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

That's all well and good and I would agree but at the risk of supporting martyrdom this post begins with a shot singling out an alleged "bad actor" on trumped-up claims, so to speak, and when he comes to defend himself it morphs into a thread about the appropriateness of said bad actor naming names. I think Batmags for his own good should take up Michigan's offer to take the debate up offline, but would urge the rest of yous to be aware this is not purely a fantasy that there is critical singling out going on here.

d'Kong76 Jan 19 2017 04:01 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Speaking only for myself the whole 'bad actor' thing went over my head. I guess I'm not following the political thing going on here very closely.

Ceetar Jan 19 2017 04:08 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: I'm not following the political thing going on here very closely. ..is something Donald Trump would say.

d'Kong76 Jan 19 2017 04:11 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

I'll also add that batmag's style of twisting things around like he's done in this thread is old and aggravating. The whole a) please don't use name in a negative/derogatory manner b) turned into what if I use Vic's/Lunche's/G's name c) and then please tell me what you'd like and I'll be more than happy to comply is just childish and maddening (to me). Don't post peoples names in a MEAN MANNER... it's very simple.

d'Kong76 Jan 19 2017 04:12 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Ceetar wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: I'm not following the political thing going on here very closely. ..is something Donald Trump would say. Perhaps... you think I'm Trumpesque?

Ceetar Jan 19 2017 04:14 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: I'll also add that batmag's style of twisting things around like he's done in this thread is old and aggravating. The whole a) please don't use name in a negative/derogatory manner b) turned into what if I use Vic's/Lunche's/G's name c) and then please tell me what you'd like and I'll be more than happy to comply is just childish and maddening (to me). Don't post peoples names in a MEAN MANNER... it's very simple. This has gotten very meta all of a sudden.

Vic Sage Jan 19 2017 04:15 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

What if it turns out that Senator Elizabeth Warren was cheating on her husband and having a steamy affair with the poster that goes by the name here of VicSage and that they had sex behind Lincoln's ass at the Lincoln Monument? And the papers got a hold of that one and named names. Would coverage of that affair be off limits on this forum? If I copied and pasted excerpts (of course, excerpts) of those articles, would I have to redact any real names of any posters here? Shhhhhhhh....

seawolf17 Jan 19 2017 04:18 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: I'm not following the political thing going on here very closely. ..is something Donald Trump would say. Perhaps... you think I'm Trumpesque? It's the hair.

Ceetar Jan 19 2017 04:21 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: I'm not following the political thing going on here very closely. ..is something Donald Trump would say. Perhaps... you think I'm Trumpesque? No. I think I've seen you write on a piece of paper, so therefore you've already demonstrated abilities above and beyond.

SteveJRogers Jan 19 2017 04:55 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: I'll also add that batmag's style of twisting things around like he's done in this thread is old and aggravating. The whole a) please don't use name in a negative/derogatory manner b) turned into what if I use Vic's/Lunche's/G's name c) and then please tell me what you'd like and I'll be more than happy to comply is just childish and maddening (to me). Don't post peoples names in a MEAN MANNER... it's very simple. For the record, I believe you admonished me, not in a bad way, for saying Lunchie's IRL name with a posting a "feel good piece" about him in a journal that had to do with his IRL profession. In other words, if in a social networking platform where users operate a certain way when it comes to interactions (real names, discussion of IRL issues, etc) it is best to adhere to how they conduct themselves, even if its to shed light on an issue, good or bad.

d'Kong76 Jan 19 2017 05:11 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Kinda rings a bell, but I don't recall the details. (that's my Reagan, not my Trump, Señor Ceetar) Use Lunchie's name here in negative/derogatory light here going forward and the post will be edited or deleted at our discretion though! Can anyone imagine if someone typed cooby's real name here and called her a frog face? My PM inbox would explode.

cooby Jan 19 2017 05:31 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

I doubt it. For one thing I look more like a rabbit. Just ask my sister

Benjamin Grimm Jan 19 2017 05:34 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Whether the post is nice or nasty, nobody should ever post anybody's real name here, ever. (The only exception would be if people want to post their own names.)

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 08:05 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

d'Kong76 wrote: I'll also add that batmag's style of twisting things around like he's done in this thread is old and aggravating. The whole a) please don't use name in a negative/derogatory manner b) turned into what if I use Vic's/Lunche's/G's name c) and then please tell me what you'd like and I'll be more than happy to comply is just childish and maddening (to me). Don't post peoples names in a MEAN MANNER... it's very simple. The problem with your post is that I don't twist things around. You just don't always understand a joke when you see it. The other problem with your post, and all the others trying to make policy is that they still don't answer a fundamental question that goes directly to the post I wrote here that kickstarted this whole discussion. The post was about the Flint water scandal and my question -- that still hasn't been addressed no matter how many different ways and styles I used to ask the question --- is what about linking to a newsworthy item that has broad interest and includes a poster's real name? Broad interest like a Mets book review because this is a Mets forum. Or broad interest like the Flint water scandal because that's a major national story. There's still no answer to that.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 19 2017 08:08 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

I would say go ahead and link it, but don't mention, explicitly or implicitly, that it references anyone who posts here.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 08:31 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I would say go ahead and link it, but don't mention, explicitly or implicitly, that it references anyone who posts here. Great post. From the neutral mod with the logical voice of reason. Not like some of the others. OE: What about copying and pasting? Excerpts, of course.

SteveJRogers Jan 19 2017 09:16 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The other problem with your post, and all the others trying to make policy is that they still don't answer a fundamental question that goes directly to the post I wrote here that kickstarted this whole discussion. The post was about the Flint water scandal and my question -- that still hasn't been addressed no matter how many different ways and styles I used to ask the question --- is what about linking to a newsworthy item that has broad interest and includes a poster's real name? Broad interest like a Mets book review because this is a Mets forum. Or broad interest like the Flint water scandal because that's a major national story. There's still no answer to that. The problem, as pointed out in my example, is SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE POSTER THEMSELVES DOING IT! JCL posts a link to something that mentions his name and day job, fine. I do it without permission, hell even if it was a sweet story of JCL's Big Cauldron talking up his relationship with Bucket and The Mets, and presenting it with Bucket's real name, its still a bit of a line crossing moment when its clear JCL doesn't really want his life streams to cross that freely. Does that make sense to you? Its not so much that you do it, its that you are doing it in a place that they wouldn't want you to do that. There are reasons why noted persons have pages on Facebook for fan interaction beyond their Facebook profiles. There are reasons why some podcast hosts I know use stage names on their FB profiles, despite using a real name on their show. Its all about keeping aspects of their lives seperate on different social network platforms. So yes doing it without MGIM's permission is very much a big deal. What if someone figured out who you are, poked around and did the same as what you are doing? "Public Figure" or not?

batmagadanleadoff Jan 19 2017 11:41 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

SteveJRogers wrote: The other problem with your post, and all the others trying to make policy is that they still don't answer a fundamental question that goes directly to the post I wrote here that kickstarted this whole discussion. The post was about the Flint water scandal and my question -- that still hasn't been addressed no matter how many different ways and styles I used to ask the question --- is what about linking to a newsworthy item that has broad interest and includes a poster's real name? Broad interest like a Mets book review because this is a Mets forum. Or broad interest like the Flint water scandal because that's a major national story. There's still no answer to that. The problem, as pointed out in my example, is SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE POSTER THEMSELVES DOING IT! JCL posts a link to something that mentions his name and day job, fine. I do it without permission, hell even if it was a sweet story of JCL's Big Cauldron talking up his relationship with Bucket and The Mets, and presenting it with Bucket's real name, its still a bit of a line crossing moment when its clear JCL doesn't really want his life streams to cross that freely. Does that make sense to you? Its not so much that you do it, its that you are doing it in a place that they wouldn't want you to do that. There are reasons why noted persons have pages on Facebook for fan interaction beyond their Facebook profiles. There are reasons why some podcast hosts I know use stage names on their FB profiles, despite using a real name on their show. Its all about keeping aspects of their lives seperate on different social network platforms. So yes doing it without MGIM's permission is very much a big deal. What if someone figured out who you are, poked around and did the same as what you are doing? "Public Figure" or not? _____________ SteveJRogers wrote: Does that make sense to you? Hardly any of it. First of all, I never typed a poster's real name and I never would. And that's been my attitude for as long as I've been here. So there's that before this next clusterfuck spins more out of control than it already has and the underlying facts get crazier and crazier with each new post. Second of all, I think you're mostly wrong about your JCL analogy. If he's on a podcast discussing the Mets, that's fair game. It's of central interest here because this is a Mets forum, we care about all things Mets and JCL has a following through his own web site and as the author of a couple of published Mets books. Also, I find it absurd that JCL would participate in a podcast accessible all over most of the planet Earth to discuss things he doesn't want anyone to listen to. But that's your hypothetical set of facts, not mine. Any piece discussing one of his Mets books is also totally fair game here. Me, I would never post a link here to a negative review of one of his books for personal reasons, but also, because I wouldn't do that to any poster here, not just JCL. I'm not aware of a negative JCL review either, but that's besides the point. But it's fair game. I wouldn't think it's wrong if another poster posted a bad review of the Met book. It's a Mets book and this is a Mets forum and the book(s) are for public consumption, available on book sites like Amazon and in brick and mortar book stores. The Mets books are public matters so don't go equating posting a Mets book review with someone stalking JCL on his private time to post personal info about where JCL dines or where JCL shops for his underwear, which is not the same thing and which I would be the first to tell you is totally out of bounds. I don't need you to explain to me how wrong that would be. Next, anyone who has an expectation that their Facebook posts or pics are never gonna end up on some other web site is either a child or an imbecile. Anyone who doesn't want their facebook posts to end up here shouldn't post them in the first place. But that's just principle. For the record, I agree with you at least in the sense that I wouldn't post some other members' facebook posts here. But that's based on my personal makeup. Posting facebook posts might be appropriate depending on the context. It's a case by case thing really. I'm not sure there should be a firm one size fits all rule on this one. Anyway, me, I wouldn't post facebook posts here. But I don't know what kind of rule there should be on facebook posts, if any. This scandal isn't about facebook anyways. SteveJRogers wrote: So yes doing it without MGIM's permission is very much a big deal. What if someone figured out who you are, poked around and did the same as what you are doing? "Public Figure" or not? Whaddya mean public figure or not? That is the point. That's the whole point. A public figure has no right of privacy when acting in his capacity as a public figure and shouldn't be heard to complain when those actions go whizzing around the net. You guys should talk. You have wifey threads where you scope out which girl some fringy Mets scrub was dating five girlfriends ago. Then you find that girl and you post every little sliver of humiliating info you can dig up on her no matter how embarrassing. A facebook photo of her shitting on her toilet? You'd post that photo here in giant size. If she had a 10 year old warrant for drunk driving, you'd post that, too. Talk about a fucking hypocrisy. What if Jerry Seinfeld joined this forum? He's a big Mets fan so it's possible. It's likelier that Jerry'd join up here than Kanye West. Would that mean that we can no longer link to anything about Seinfeld that appears on other web sites. See how ridiculous you sound? Are these ideas really well thought out and fair and neutral? Or are they mainly reverse engineered with the main purpose being to stick it to me?

SteveJRogers Jan 20 2017 04:11 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

batmagadanleadoff wrote: First of all, I never typed a poster's real name and I never would. And that's been my attitude for as long as I've been here. So there's that before this next clusterfuck spins more out of control than it already has and the underlying facts get crazier and crazier with each new post. Pretty sure I did not utter JCL's real name either Second of all, I think you're mostly wrong about your JCL analogy. If he's on a podcast discussing the Mets, that's fair game. It's of central interest here because this is a Mets forum, we care about all things Mets and JCL has a following through his own web site and as the author of a couple of published Mets books. Also, I find it absurd that JCL would participate in a podcast accessible all over most of the planet Earth to discuss things he doesn't want anyone to listen to. But that's your hypothetical set of facts, not mine. Of course, but if JCL wants to keep whatever illusion he has of anonymity on this forum, and yeah that is pretty much out the window once someone clicks on that MBTN link and puts two-and-two together. Not to mention, yeah he does quite often promote his books, appearances and whatnot, that is his prerogative, and his alone. Hence it wasn't a good idea for me to stumble upon that piece about his IRL when I really know him here, FB/Instagram and a few hours of non-cyber interaction and plaster it here without his permission. Any piece discussing one of his Mets books is also totally fair game here. Me, I would never post a link here to a negative review of one of his books for personal reasons, but also, because I wouldn't do that to any poster here, not just JCL. I'm not aware of a negative JCL review either, but that's besides the point. But it's fair game. I wouldn't think it's wrong if another poster posted a bad review of the Met book. It's a Mets book and this is a Mets forum and the book(s) are for public consumption, available on book sites like Amazon and in brick and mortar book stores. The Mets books are public matters so don't go equating posting a Mets book review with someone stalking JCL on his private time to post personal info about where JCL dines or where JCL shops for his underwear, which is not the same thing and which I would be the first to tell you is totally out of bounds. I don't need you to explain to me how wrong that would be. Ummm...at what point did I say we couldn't post reviews, bad or otherwise? Maybe I'd post a ridiculous review for JCL and others to have at it in a "does this troll have better things to do" or "did this person read, or not get the purpose and premise of the book?" If I felt it was legit criticism, and it didn't seem that JCL, or Greg even, weren't aware of it, I'd let them know privately and have them deal with it as they may. Not sure how we went from "personal data found in an email embedded in an MILive article" to "bad reviews" and all the way back to "stalking a member of a message board" but the former and the latter are much more related to each other in terms of what you were trying to do with MGIM. Next, anyone who has an expectation that their Facebook posts or pics are never gonna end up on some other web site is either a child or an imbecile. Anyone who doesn't want their facebook posts to end up here shouldn't post them in the first place. But that's just principle. For the record, I agree with you at least in the sense that I wouldn't post some other members' facebook posts here. But that's based on my personal makeup. Posting facebook posts might be appropriate depending on the context. It's a case by case thing really. I'm not sure there should be a firm one size fits all rule on this one. Anyway, me, I wouldn't post facebook posts here. But I don't know what kind of rule there should be on facebook posts, if any. This scandal isn't about facebook anyways. WHAT!? No I mean, I know what you are saying, but how did that get mixed up in this? Okay, I'm guessing the Facebook thread, where posters will be all =Someone I knew in High School but haven't seen or heard from since about a year ago when I connected on FB]Today I made waffles for the first time since High School cooking classes 32 years ago!

Okay, I see what you are saying, and I see what the posters are doing, assuming that the FB friends never know that they are being plastered, but at the same time, it is a theft of privacy, and I'm glad you'd think I'd agree on that point.


="SteveJRogers"]So yes doing it without MGIM's permission is very much a big deal. What if someone figured out who you are, poked around and did the same as what you are doing? "Public Figure" or not?

Whaddya mean public figure or not? That is the point. That's the whole point. A public figure has no right of privacy when acting in his capacity as a public figure and shouldn't be heard to complain when those actions go whizzing around the net.

For the record, are we about to have a debate over the degrees of public figure MGIM is/was? And whether his actions should be brought up in relations to topics around here in general that have little to do with it?

Ditto for that matter JCL or Greg, if you want to do apples and oranges. Granted MGIM has/had a bigger profile, but at the same time, slings and arrows hurled at his public job performance would be greater and make a greater impact on a personal level than trashy reviews of MBTN or Greg's books. Either way, it was pretty clear that he rarely brought any of that up HERE (where conversations are kind of focused on a New York based baseball team and people mostly in the New York area) during that time period, hence it probably would be in people's best interest not to touch that whole situation. No matter how tempting it could be in the GDF sandbox when political discussions and social failures are brought up.

You guys should talk. You have wifey threads where you scope out which girl some fringy Mets scrub was dating five girlfriends ago. Then you find that girl and you post every little sliver of humiliating info you can dig up on her no matter how embarrassing. A facebook photo of her shitting on her toilet? You'd post that photo here in giant size. If she had a 10 year old warrant for drunk driving, you'd post that, too.

LOL! That is not me you are talking to. And yeah, I do find that thread a bit disturbing, a long with other fringy Met scrub tidbits that get used for thread filler around here as well. Though the latter I'm a bit more lenient in the "who cares, but it fits what this forum is about" way. Hell, I was getting burnt out early on on you and Zvon obsessing over 27 years of photogenic spots all over the Met spring training facility! I mean it fits, but going as far as to name locations based on early Man from Topps solo photos? But you guys do you, whom am I to argue over whether the Sadecki Spot or Butterball Mound should keep its CPF inside joke moniker or not =;)

Though to be fair, no, I don't seem to recall any sort of "over the edge" stuff beyond photos with the hubby/main squeeze, or at least nothing in the vein that you are describing.

Talk about a fucking hypocrisy. What if Jerry Seinfeld joined this forum? He's a big Mets fan so it's possible. It's likelier that Jerry'd join up here than Kanye West. Would that mean that we can no longer link to anything about Seinfeld that appears on other web sites. See how ridiculous you sound?

To be fair, if Jerry were here, and an active member, would it be appropriate to bring up a couple of months/years old article that presented him in a bad light or did a hatchet job on him in the context of whatever GDF political arena you thought it would be appropriate to go after him with?

And if he posted as a variation of JerrySeinfeld, then yeah, I'd imagine anyone posting positive news about him, Comedians In Cars, etc would be fair game over in the Member Promotion form without his consent. If not, then its probably would be clear that despite we knowing who it is, he probably wants that illusion of anonymity that I was talking before with Lunchbucket.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 20 2017 07:32 AM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

Steve, let me see if I can wrap this topic up. It's getting a little tiring and everybody, it seems, including me, is talking in circles. Also, my head's spinning in circles a little bit as I try to figure out your post and wonder if now all of a sudden there's gonna be another rule where this time, I'm gonna also be prevented from writing posts about Huggins-Stengel Field. I don't think I did anything inappropriate even though I deleted the controversial portion of that post. The guy was Press Secretary to his Governor, and politics should be the most public topic that there is. And I posted a piece that was totally about his actions while on the clock and in his capacity as the press secretary to the most powerful person in Michigan state politics. No. Actually that's not entirely true. Betsy Devos is the most powerful person in Michigan state politics and she's not even a politician. If Betsy wanted to, she could snap her fingers and Gov. Snyder would eat a five pound box of prunes and then stick that ten inch dildo molded in the shape of Jesus up his own ass with his own two hands until the diarrhea shit from all those prunes Betsy forced him to eat flowed all over the ten inch dildo molded in the shape of Jesus if that's what Betsy Devos wanted. And after the Snyder prune induced shitstorm, he'd put that shit drenched ten inch dildo molded in the shape of Jesus inside of his mouth if that's also what Betsy wanted. Actually, that may not be entirely true either because Snyder's political career is likely kaput at the end of his term if not sooner. So maybe Devos no longer has the leverage over Snyder that she typically has over every other Republican politician in Michigan. Whatever. Soon she's gonna be the U.S. Secretary of Education even though, as Charles Pierce suggests, in a fair and just world, Betsy wouldn't even qualify to work the cafeteria lunch line of any school. But I digress. I hope that NYmr83 doesn't blow a gasket and call for my banning because I made an off topic comment about Betsy Devos in a thread that isn't about Betsy Devos. Heavens to Betsy. Your friend, The Primary Bad Actor

cooby Jan 20 2017 03:43 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

You know, until this thread came along, back along I should say, I didn't even know MGIM worked for the Michigan government. I just thought he was a nice guy from Michigan who likes the Mets. I still think that. Let's just agree to use our nicknames here. Yes, a bunch of you have websites, etc, but honestly, we use nicknames here for a reason. Some small degree of privacy from the outside world who just happen to stop off once and maybe that's it. If we know each others' names, fine, but those other people don't need to read them here. Not to mention, yeah he does quite often promote his books, appearances and whatnot, BTW I first read this as '=#FF0000]looks', Go JCL!

batmagadanleadoff Jan 20 2017 07:40 PM Re: Political rhetoric in baseball forum

cooby wrote: You know, until this thread came along, back along I should say, I didn't even know MGIM worked for the Michigan government. I just thought he was a nice guy from Michigan who likes the Mets. Same here. Except that when I demonstrated that I didn't know that he worked for his Governor, I got blasted for it by one particular poster for not knowing and then got personally attacked for my troubles, where he insulted me by insinuating that I flipped hamburgers for a living. Not that there's anything wrong with flipping hamburgers but this poster clearly meant it in a mean-spirited way in order to diminish me. When I defended myself, Edgy immediately jumped in to call me a martyr because that's what he always does when I respond to these posts that abuse me. I guess calling me "martyr" is supposed to deny all of the unchecked abuse I have to endure here. And the way the hamburger poster carried on against me, you would've thought I didn't have a clue as to who Abraham Lincoln was instead of not knowing what MGIM does, or did, for a living. But MGM's job, apparently, isn't a top secret here because most of the forum members here know what he does professionally. Nobody ever defends me against these posts. Now I'm supposed to know that MGIM worked for his Governor, but when I show that now I damn well know who he works for, it's another crisis with just about everybody who then weighed in on this latest clusterfuck taking his side even though he's a public figure who, in his capacity as Press Secretary, appears not only in his home state papers, but in national interest papers like the New York Times -- not that I'd copy and paste or link to it. Your post is reasonable and I've got nothing against it. I'm just using it as a springboard to write this post. The other thing that galls me about this incident, which I know to be 100% true even though I can't prove it, is that if the roles were reversed and I was the one who worked for that Governor and somebody else here wrote that post that's generating this discussion, nobody would've stuck up for me and the consensus then would be that anything on the web is fair game, especially if it's about a public figure acting in his capacity as a public figure. And the jackass who wrote that I-flip-hamburgers-post would've jumped in to tell me that if I didn't like the post, I shouldn't have taken the public figure job in the first place.