The Ultimate Meta Day Spa For Guys Who Need Constant Massaging
Saturday, May 26, 2012
MKMOT (May 26-28, 2012)
From: MS
To: Baloggy Bunch
Subject: Yesterday's Performance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So I won't be around much this weekend, but I have a discussion point from yesterday that I'm hoping you all can follow up on.
I mentioned that BofC's history should have been considered in the decision to move (or not move) his thread. Those who spoke on it seemed to disagree completely. I'm not sure why.
Keep in mind, that moving/ninjing are rare actions. We're not talking about +1s here. I would definitely not argue that history should be taken into account for those. Funny is funny, a joke should stand on it's own merit.
Public reprimand is another story. My main argument is that someone with a body of work as solid as BofC's should be given the benefit of the doubt over an argumentative pinko or a Pete Gaines wannabe because he clearly has established that he is not a troll in any way, and obviously picks his spots to engage a writer/editor in debate. Whether or not anyone agreed with his method/tone/point is not what I'm seeking feedback on here, so please don't make that the point of discussion (if there is any). I'm merely saying that BofC, and commenters with his track record, should be given a smidge of leeway from moving/ninjing, within reason, of course, and that simply responding would have been a more appropriate move. I know Craggs did respond, but after the move.
The "average Deadspin reader" theory was put forth by Shitehawk, and I don't think it holds here. For a few key reasons. One, like it or not, the star is Deadspin's way of giving BofC an extra layer of credibility, and a "louder" voice to the readers. Two, he was, and always is, articulate. I was once an "average reader", and NOTHING turns me off more than poorly-formatted, incoherent, typo-laden comments that look like they were texted in by a 13-year old. Being articulate is key, especially when engaging in intelligent debate. Three, it was interesting. Isn't that the ultimate goal? I can't imagine a reader being drastically turned off by an articulate commenter going at it with a writer/editor over a weighty topic, especially since serious discussions are now an accepted part of what we do.
Well, I'm tired, and not too interesting or articulate, but feedback is welcome. I have a dog in both sides of the "fight", I know that both guys respect each other, and it got a bit more heated than I would have liked. I respect Craggs for chiming in, I just don't think he should have moved the thread. And unless something was incredibly distasteful or egregious, I would unapologetically take the commenter's history into account when making such a decision. No one should be immune, by any stretch, but I see nothing wrong with an earned longer leash.
I still love you, Shitey, and I'd appreciate it if everyone refrains from burning me too badly when I won't be around to respond. So please just place your +1s below to let me know I'm right, mmmkay? Thanks.
As always, just one man's opinion, tl;dr, and all that.
Dude, I'm no big Disco Choo fan, but that's a pretty dead-on parody of Mike and Marcus from the Bad Boys films, who do talk like ugly stereotypes of black people.
Here's a spicy Bloody recipe for people who don't feel like using 29 ingredients or spending $200.
Choose your booze Buy decent premix Empty into container Add the following, to taste: Sriracha Cayenne Lemon juice Lime juice Shake vigorously Rim glass with celery salt Pickle, olive, hot pepper on a pick for garnish
And a :) and a tip of the cap to you, Mr. Skeevy, for keeping the balog going.
ReplyDeleteSo I won't be around much this weekend, but I have a discussion point from yesterday that I'm hoping you all can follow up on.
ReplyDeleteI mentioned that BofC's history should have been considered in the decision to move (or not move) his thread. Those who spoke on it seemed to disagree completely. I'm not sure why.
Keep in mind, that moving/ninjing are rare actions. We're not talking about +1s here. I would definitely not argue that history should be taken into account for those. Funny is funny, a joke should stand on it's own merit.
Public reprimand is another story. My main argument is that someone with a body of work as solid as BofC's should be given the benefit of the doubt over an argumentative pinko or a Pete Gaines wannabe because he clearly has established that he is not a troll in any way, and obviously picks his spots to engage a writer/editor in debate. Whether or not anyone agreed with his method/tone/point is not what I'm seeking feedback on here, so please don't make that the point of discussion (if there is any). I'm merely saying that BofC, and commenters with his track record, should be given a smidge of leeway from moving/ninjing, within reason, of course, and that simply responding would have been a more appropriate move. I know Craggs did respond, but after the move.
The "average Deadspin reader" theory was put forth by Shitehawk, and I don't think it holds here. For a few key reasons. One, like it or not, the star is Deadspin's way of giving BofC an extra layer of credibility, and a "louder" voice to the readers. Two, he was, and always is, articulate. I was once an "average reader", and NOTHING turns me off more than poorly-formatted, incoherent, typo-laden comments that look like they were texted in by a 13-year old. Being articulate is key, especially when engaging in intelligent debate. Three, it was interesting. Isn't that the ultimate goal? I can't imagine a reader being drastically turned off by an articulate commenter going at it with a writer/editor over a weighty topic, especially since serious discussions are now an accepted part of what we do.
Well, I'm tired, and not too interesting or articulate, but feedback is welcome. I have a dog in both sides of the "fight", I know that both guys respect each other, and it got a bit more heated than I would have liked. I respect Craggs for chiming in, I just don't think he should have moved the thread. And unless something was incredibly distasteful or egregious, I would unapologetically take the commenter's history into account when making such a decision. No one should be immune, by any stretch, but I see nothing wrong with an earned longer leash.
I still love you, Shitey, and I'd appreciate it if everyone refrains from burning me too badly when I won't be around to respond. So please just place your +1s below to let me know I'm right, mmmkay? Thanks.
As always, just one man's opinion, tl;dr, and all that.
Are you making fun of me? :-(
ReplyDeleteDude, I'm no big Disco Choo fan, but that's a pretty dead-on parody of Mike and Marcus from the Bad Boys films, who do talk like ugly stereotypes of black people.
ReplyDeleteAnd who also are Miami cops in their fictional universe.
ReplyDeleteSo what you want to do now is post a reply where you acknowledge that that's actually a very good comment. Because it is.
IMG moved this thread to #yousawanawfulmovieonce
ReplyDeleteHere's a spicy Bloody recipe for people who don't feel like using 29 ingredients or spending $200.
ReplyDeleteChoose your booze
Buy decent premix
Empty into container
Add the following, to taste:
Sriracha
Cayenne
Lemon juice
Lime juice
Shake vigorously
Rim glass with celery salt
Pickle, olive, hot pepper on a pick for garnish
Heh. It's a parody, not an unembellished quote. I think it's terrific.
ReplyDeleteGo fingerbang a blender!
ReplyDelete