In response to stevegm's comment:
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.
Voice of Reason.... Kudos!!!!....