Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    You were lumped in with the ship jumpers.

    You shouldn't have been.  You're not like them.  I honestly had you confused with someone else, and for my part in it, I apologize.

    You're a quality member here in my eyes.

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatHockeyGuy. Show ThatHockeyGuy's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    Now I'm confused. What's with the sudden change in attitude?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    You were lumped in with the ship jumpers.

    You shouldn't have been.  You're not like them.  I honestly had you confused with someone else, and for my part in it, I apologize.

    You're a quality member here in my eyes.

     



    Yea, I was kind of wondering about that too! He's pissed me off with some of his stuff he says, but he's a solid poster & true fan! 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    Now I'm confused. What's with the sudden change in attitude?




    "I honestly had you confused with someone else"

    I figured that was clear enough. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    Now I'm confused. What's with the sudden change in attitude?




    I put you on the original list. Thats my mistake. I was wondering why you were going back and forth with NAS, and a simple look back at the list by myself would have changed that. I remember you defending Jagr against BassFishingII in the GDT. My apologies. I'm more loyal than intelligent.

    100% my mistake. 

    And all it is, is just poking a little fun at the dooms day people.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatHockeyGuy. Show ThatHockeyGuy's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    It still isn't right to openly denounce those people in a thread like that though. That list is very demeaning to a lot of the posters here.

    I value their input, even if it is often negative.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Klaas. Show Klaas's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    It still isn't right to openly denounce those people in a thread like that though. That list is very demeaning to a lot of the posters here.

    I value their input, even if it is often negative.


    Life just won't be the same without Stanley ...

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    It still isn't right to openly denounce those people in a thread like that though. That list is very demeaning to a lot of the posters here.

    I value their input, even if it is often negative.




    Oh, well, whatever then.

    F all of them.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    It still isn't right to openly denounce those people in a thread like that though. That list is very demeaning to a lot of the posters here.

    I value their input, even if it is often negative.




    Now your just coming across as the guy who begs for the free cup of coffee then complains it's too hot once he gets it.

    Like I said, just having some fun with the negative nellies of the forum. They made their bed, now their being told to sleep in it.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    Seriously, Kel.  It just keeps coming back to that.  Guys who come on here and "exercise their right to voice an opinion," who rip the team regardless of the results as though you can win the Stanley Cup in March or February, who refuse to actually enjoy the team and the ups and downs of a long season - those guys come on here all the time and act as though anyone who isn't "worried" or "concerned" or "convinced they can't win" is an idiot.  Why should I hold back from pointing out they were wrong, that their misery and complaining that the team isn't perfect, their insistence on having faults dominate the discussion - why should I not be allowed to exercise my right to call them out when events prove their misery to be wrong, inaccurate, and a product of their expecting the worst?  Or, perhaps it's not a question of "allowed" or "why should I..." so much as I don't understand the difference that some seem to when saying certain posters shouldn't be called on their behaviour?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    Sorry I started another thread with what I wanted to say.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mattbs. Show mattbs's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    kooombaya my lord koombaya.... everything is beautiful.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Seriously, Kel.  It just keeps coming back to that.  Guys who come on here and "exercise their right to voice an opinion," who rip the team regardless of the results as though you can win the Stanley Cup in March or February, who refuse to actually enjoy the team and the ups and downs of a long season - those guys come on here all the time and act as though anyone who isn't "worried" or "concerned" or "convinced they can't win" is an idiot.  Why should I hold back from pointing out they were wrong, that their misery and complaining that the team isn't perfect, their insistence on having faults dominate the discussion - why should I not be allowed to exercise my right to call them out when events prove their misery to be wrong, inaccurate, and a product of their expecting the worst?  Or, perhaps it's not a question of "allowed" or "why should I..." so much as I don't understand the difference that some seem to when saying certain posters shouldn't be called on their behaviour?



    We're getting off the rails with this ship jumper vs eternal optimist crap.  Neither are very good...both are framed by a stubborn, head in the sand mindset.

    When speaking publicly about something, the point of reference is... "the point". 

    Personally, I don't need the emotional security of only hanging out with those that see things exactly as I do.  I appreciate divergent viewpoints, and only get frustrated when someone is selfish or stupid enough to provide no compelling logic to their position, yet scream to high heaven when they get called on it.

    I'm just as interested in posts that speculate failure, however, reasonably intelligent people should understand that any prophesy that goes against the grain of public opinion, needs an extra level of back up.  It always does, in any conversation about anything.  Going "against" something always takes more than "agreeing".

    2 examples of mindless blithering.

    #1.  The Bruins will lose to the Rangers, cuz they're a bunch of gutless pukes.

    This has no basis for discussion, nor does it have any logical backing.  Not to be confused with an opinion, this is merely a stupid comment.

    #2.  The Bruins will lose to the Rangers because Jeff Ward has contracted syphilis. 

    The OP has provided logic to his opinion, however, it's incredibly stupid, therefore he is deserving every insult he gets.

    A good negative post.

    #3.  The Bruins will lose to the Rangers, because they've had trouble  with them all year.

    A fact based opinion that leaves tons of room for an adult discussion/debate.   This is deserving of some respect.  Not agreement, just respect, as the OP should realize they're basing their assumption on only one bit of logical information, when there is much more that can also be considered.  The combined responses(both pro and con) from an assortment of enlightened hocey fans should result in the development of an even more "informed opinion" by everyone. 

     

    Lets not attempt to censor the critics.  They provide a balance here. Heck, there's one regular poster whose been ripped more than any...for constantly being ridiculously positive(until recently anyway).

    What's confusing to many here....is the whole idea of respect.  That opinions should be respected, and everyone has a right to their own.

    That's a myth.  Not true.  Everyones entitled to "form" an opinion, but they're weighed down with the responsibility to "wait" until they have enough information to come to an "informed' one.  Many seem to forget about the second part.

    This is multiplied tenfold when expressing opinions publicly. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportsnutty. Show Sportsnutty's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We're getting off the rails with this ship jumper vs eternal optimist crap.  Neither are very good...both are framed by a stubborn, head in the sand mindset.

    I'd have highlighted your entire post Steve GM it was ALL well said. Who isn't annoyed with constant team-bashing regardless of recent/overall performance? Who doesn't roll eyes at incessant "points" made by posters without any reasonable logic to sustain their argument?
    I'd really enjoy getting past this "fan-boy" vs. "hater" thing. Someone make a construction paper crown for the "best fan" and get over it and back to intelligent hockey conversation.

    New series... new chance to get back to what this forum once was.

    Now onto more important things.. beating the tar out of the butt-Rangers.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    Lets not attempt to censor the critics.  They provide a balance here. Heck, there's one regular poster whose been ripped more than any...for constantly being ridiculously positive(until recently anyway).

    What's confusing to many here....is the whole idea of respect.  That opinions should be respected, and everyone has a right to their own.

    That's a myth.  Not true.  Everyones entitled to "form" an opinion, but they're weighed down with the responsibility to "wait" until they have enough information to come to an "informed' one.  Many seem to forget about the second part.

    This is multiplied tenfold when expressing opinions publicly. 



    It's not about censoring the critics.  It's more about those who simply come here to post about how bad the team is.  Opinions are fine.  When the bulk of one's posts are just negative garbage (gutless puukes, scared little kittens, I hope they lose...), enough is enough.  Now those suckers have to face the music.  And they are.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    Lets not attempt to censor the critics.  They provide a balance here. Heck, there's one regular poster whose been ripped more than any...for constantly being ridiculously positive(until recently anyway).

    What's confusing to many here....is the whole idea of respect.  That opinions should be respected, and everyone has a right to their own.

    That's a myth.  Not true.  Everyones entitled to "form" an opinion, but they're weighed down with the responsibility to "wait" until they have enough information to come to an "informed' one.  Many seem to forget about the second part.

    This is multiplied tenfold when expressing opinions publicly. 

     



    It's not about censoring the critics.  It's more about those who simply come here to post about how bad the team is.  Opinions are fine.  When the bulk of one's posts are just negative garbage (gutless puukes, scared little kittens, I hope they lose...), enough is enough.  Now those suckers have to face the music.  And they are.

     

     




    Yeah, what I wrote above doesn't disagree with anything you're saying.  I pointed out the responsibility of back-up.  Gutless pukes, scared kittens....none of that tripe has any backup, and attempting to provide any, just makes the poster look even more silly.  I'm all in when it's time to call out those pests.  It's important though, to not lump that group into the same category as others who share opinions that are not always glaringly positive.  There have been a few lists compiled, that I feel, unfairly pigeon hole some reasonable posters, as trollish, chronic, defeatist whining complainers.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mattbs. Show mattbs's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    NAS if you do your home work while obsessing over my negative posts you would see that I point out all the good with the bad.  During a game I complain and I cheer as loud as anyone because games are meant to be roller coaster rides.  It doesn't offend the athletes so why should it offend you?  I don't need you to moderate me so if you don't like what I do please put me on ignore.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    Wow...even fighting about apologies now?

    Really?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to mattbs' comment:

      I don't need you to moderate me so if you don't like what I do please put me on ignore.



    ........or another option is to rip you a new butthole..........which he is doing. 

    P.S. He doesn't need you telling him what to post so why not put him on ignore if you don't like it.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to mattbs' comment:

    NAS if you do your home work while obsessing over my negative posts you would see that I point out all the good with the bad.  During a game I complain and I cheer as loud as anyone because games are meant to be roller coaster rides.  It doesn't offend the athletes so why should it offend you?  I don't need you to moderate me so if you don't like what I do please put me on ignore.




    You are posting like a scared little kitten.  Panties turning brown.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mattbs. Show mattbs's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    Yawnnnn.  I personally never payed attention to the child til he started stalking me.

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    In response to mattbs' comment:

    P.S. He doesn't need you telling him what to post so why not put him on ignore if you don't like it.

     




     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:

    It still isn't right to openly denounce those people in a thread like that though. That list is very demeaning to a lot of the posters here.

    I value their input, even if it is often negative.



    When a posters opinion is 100% negative, i don't value their input.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    THG is ok in my eyes.  I was scared of no redemption.  Scared i tells ya!  

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Open Letter to ThatHockeyGuy

    PS.  I miss RWTK.  

     

Share