Reflecting: Tank Wars

[shrader]

What was the other thread where we were talking about this yesterday?  I liked my take on the whole thing.

[MattPie]

The circumstantial evidence is fairly damning against a vehement anti tanker who is also staunchly far right on the political spectrum.

 

 

So, that's like you're thing, huh?

 

k

 

 

Yes. Repeating the same lie over and over again in the hopes that people will accept it as true. It's what the far right does.

 

Matrix loves catch phrases, he's like a sitcom character that way. There was one that he would post and link in the Politics thread and repeat the same line every time. Can't be bothered to look it up.

 

Just for the record, the article is fine (if too long, maybe find an editor to cut out some of the redundacy) even if don't agree with most of the premise. However, as someone upthread mentioned, when your Twitter feed (or any other public forum content) is a dumpster fire of idiocy people aren't going listen to whatever valid points you may have.

[Johnny DangerFace]

Thanks for proving my points!

 

See ya next episode!!!

[shrader]

Matrix loves catch phrases, he's like a sitcom character that way. There was one that he would post and link in the Politics thread and repeat the same line every time. Can't be bothered to look it up.

 

Just for the record, the article is fine (if too long, maybe find an editor to cut out some of the redundacy) even if don't agree with most of the premise. However, as someone upthread mentioned, when your Twitter feed (or any other public forum content) is a dumpster fire of idiocy people aren't going listen to whatever valid points you may have.

 

 

He likes catch phrases?  I hadn't noticed.  I'm too lazy to look back through it, but I remember direct references to both Rush and Pink Floyd.  I'm sure there were others.

[WildCard]

Wildfire can't melt Valyrian steel.

R+J=GWB

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Well, that was enjoyable.

 

What's next?

[bunomatic]

Superman wears Chuck Norris pajamas

[Stoner]

The Puck Daddy Affair is getting more interesting to me as I think about it more. I didn't follow Matrix's posts here that closely. A lot of them must have come in the Politics thread. I saw a few Tweets that could be considered objectionable. I didn't comb over how many thousands of Tweets?

 

Is it fair to say this whole thing was about Mike Schopp being offended not by Tweets, but about a fan — real or not, troll or not, good or bad, he didn't know at first — getting his voice heard on such a major platform, seen by more people in an hour than listen to Mike in a week? Mike is not old, but he's old enough to be a bridge between Old Media and The Internet. In the bad old days if you wanted your opinion heard by a lot of people, you wrote a letter to Larry Felser and hoped it was one of three or four printed in the paper. Or called in and hoped the station put you on the air and didn't cut you off.

 

Mike started out there but ended up in a world where fans have their own sites, blogs and boards, podcasts, and audiences, influence, even. Bloggers are in the press box. As a guy who still sits there with his finger on the button, routinely dumping callers he disagrees with, or who don't rise to his elitist standards (mostly those he disagrees with), seeing that Puck Daddy fan piece had to tear him up.

 

And that's why his nose first got out of joint. At first it had nothing to do with objectionable Tweets. All that fell into Mike's lap. Why did Mike feel the need to Tweet Greg Wyshinski, the editor of Puck Daddy, to make a snarky comment about how many "bad points" were in the piece? Since when does Mike pay any attention to or care a lick about a fan's commentary on the Internet? What an honor — having Mike Schopp comment on your thoughts.

 

I don't criticize Yahoo's decision at all. It's not about free speech. They had to protect their brand and business, and the Tweets that were objectionable to some were enough to justify pulling the article. That's just the nature of big business and political correctness. But it doesn't happen, IMHO, without Schopp's pitchforking.

 

So insecure. One more last gasp, spasm of rigor mortis, from Old Media and prematurely fossilizing dinosaurs.

Edited April 18, 2015 by @fakegorbyportwinestain

[Weave]

That was very well thought out.

 

Personally, I'm a little happy inside each time the blood vessel in Mike Schopp forehead begins to throb.  He's such an elitist ass.  Its too bad Shopp comes out on top here.  That is the last thing his ego needs.

[wjag]

The Puck Daddy Affair is getting more interesting to me as I think about it more. I didn't follow Matrix's posts here that closely. A lot of them must have come in the Politics thread. I saw a few Tweets that could be considered objectionable. I didn't comb over how many thousands of Tweets?

 

Is it fair to say this whole thing was about Mike Schopp being offended not by Tweets, but about a fan — real or not, troll or not, good or bad, he didn't know at first — getting his voice heard on such a major platform, seen by more people in an hour than listen to Mike in a week? Mike is not old, but he's old enough to be a bridge between Old Media and The Internet. In the bad old days if you wanted your opinion heard by a lot of people, you wrote a letter to Larry Felser and hoped it was one of three or four printed in the paper. Or called in and hoped the station put you on the air and didn't cut you off.

 

Mike started out there but ended up in a world where fans have their own sites, blogs and boards, podcasts, and audiences, influence, even. Bloggers are in the press box. As a guy who still sits there with his finger on the button, routinely dumping callers he disagrees with, or who don't rise to his elitist standards (mostly those he disagrees with), seeing that Puck Daddy fan piece had to tear him up.

 

And that's why his nose first got out of joint. At first it had nothing to do with objectionable Tweets. All that fell into Mike's lap. Why did Mike feel the need to Tweet Greg Wyshinski, the editor of Puck Daddy, to make a snarky comment about how many "bad points" were in the piece? Since when does Mike pay any attention to or care a lick about a fan's commentary on the Internet? What an honor — having Mike Schopp comment on your thoughts.

 

I don't criticize Yahoo's decision at all. It's not about free speech. They had to protect their brand and business, and the Tweets that were objectionable to some were enough to justify pulling the article. That's just the nature of big business and political correctness. But it doesn't happen, IMHO, without Schopp's pitchforking.

 

So insecure. One more last gasp, spasm of rigor mortis, from Old Media and prematurely fossilizing dinosaurs.

 

Of all the folks he called out in his manifesto, there was a direct Bulls-eye on Schoop,,  Everyone else can ask, was that me or not me; but there were no shades of gray for Schoop dog.  

[dudacek]

Nice post PA.

Requiem for ivory Tower media