Sportsjournalists.com: Where cowards go to post

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,73092.0.html

The circus performers are starting to show their true colors again. The cowards are using anonymity to throw stones in threads like this one.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,74610.0.html

Hey, Double Down and Dumb is NOT Les Carpenter! I know we can all sleep easier with that kernel of knowledge revealed.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,70609.msg2669264.html#msg2669264

This post shows why newspapers have been failing.

"I didn't look too closely at content because I'm editing for our paper on deadline today, but the overall look was good. ... The print job was very, very clean - cleaner than the Detroit papers. The layouts were good, too.

Overall, a very solid start."

In other words, this moron has not read the content, but he thinks that based simply on the layout and the print job, the newspaper has started well.

These are the people who have not one clue as to what readers want in a newspaper.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,74632.0.html

When I started to read this one, I expected two pages of name-dropping, butt-kissing, and the repeated sj.com mantra of "He's a good guy!"

But then:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,74632.msg2671186.html#msg2671186

And all of that was derailed. You rock, Fredrick!

Building on his point, though: I don't recall any of the higher-ups ever coming in on a holiday to congratulate us for showing up. If it did happen, then I have forgotten.

That being said, though: The managing editor at one paper invited the working staff to his home for Thanksgiving dinner. Another place made sure to give us cash so we could buy dinner. A third place at least made the attempt to divide up the holidays, rather than sticking a few people with all of them or worse, passing out a "sign-up" sheet that allowed the same people to get the same holidays every year.

Of course, all of those papers found other ways to undercut their workers, but at least on the holidays, they tried to play fair once in a while.

[rknil]

Had to save this one:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,75004.0.html

For those who don't know, every so often someone who thinks he's really smart and cool starts a thread like this one. Inevitably it leads to the following statement:

"If you refuse to see this movie, you don't actually like movies. Just stick to books. We'll all be better off."

Great response, though:

"Tell you what, Hoo - you spend your own money watching what you want to watch and save your money not watching what you don't want to watch. I'll do the same with my own money. Capiche??"

For the life of me, I don't understand why people think they need to intimidate people into watching the movies and shows they like. It is far too expensive and time-consuming to go to every single movie in the theater simply to discover if I will like it or not.

TV shows fall into the time-consuming portion of this category, although I will sometimes record something I'm lukewarm about, then skip through it rapidly with the DVR. (For those who don't know, I was way late to the DVR craze, mainly because of what I'm describing here -- I made time for a couple of shows and generally ignored the rest. But then I needed to modernize in order to get the MLB Network and ESPNU, so here we are.)

But I have no intention of watching every "hip" show just because people want to scream about it. If anything, the screaming convinces me I'm making the right choice. If the screamers want to hurl insults in response, then they can hurl away. Most of the time, I assume the screamers are the usual mob of uneducated/undereducated millennials who can't handle any opposing viewpoints that might threaten their own. TV, movies, and music are entertainment; the people who can't accept that need to adjust their priorities.

Time and time again, though, we see that the maladjusted circus performers at sj.com cannot distinguish between art/entertainment/fantasy and real life. 

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,75197.msg2701654.html#msg2701654

Had to get this one, too, starting with the train wreck.

93Devil could well be the dumbest poster at that board, and that is saying a lot. He has serious competition from many, but he often manages to outdumb them and his past peak of dumb.

My personal favorite -- again, always subject to change when he outdumbs himself -- came this fall when he was making some sort of argument about high school graduates playing basketball in Europe instead of in college. I'd love to tell you what his argument was, but I'm not sure that I, he, the readers or even the Holy Trinity Itself could interpret it.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,74287.75.html

Here's the other recent example of 93Devil twisting logic into a pretzel.

But his sj.com detractors need to realize they are frequently guilty of the same tactics. When they start getting destroyed in an argument -- and that would happen far more often with more sensible people on the board -- they immediately shift the argument to something new.

Classic quote:

"Arguing college vs. early NBA entry with 93Devil is a waste of time you will never get back.  Trust me on this.  You are in store for some of the most illogical, dumbfounding, message board posts your eyes have ever seen."

Again, he is FAR from alone on that board. With little research, an informed person could find thousands of examples. My personal favorite -- and I am choosing from a wide field -- came in early 2007 when the alleged experts were convinced the Colts would fall to the Chiefs in the first round of the NFL playoffs. When this prediction proved sorely wrong, the alleged experts simply carried their prediction to the following week, and then the week after. After that game, the Colts were in the Super Bowl, and either the experts finally had wised up, or they were so determined to pile on Rex Grossman that they simply shifted their negative arguments to a new target.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,75963.0.html

These guys stretch awfully hard for thread topics and titles. I guess it's not enough to torture articles to death on a daily basis.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76172.0.html

If the guy paid for two seats, then he should have been OK.

That being said, it's entertaining to see how the sportswriters are the ones agonizing about the airline's policy. Funny how that works.

[rknil]

http://www.illinihq.com/news/mens_basketball/2010/02/22/tate_loss_could_burst_uis_bubble

How far has the Big Ten Network advanced in 2 1/2 years? They're now in 19 of the country's top 20 markets (all but Los Angeles), and claim nearly 75 million homes with advertising increasing dramatically. That's why some financially strapped Big 12 schools and Pittsburgh look on with such longing as the conference considers expansion. The combination of TV and bowl links have made Commissioner Jim Delany the most dominant personality in amateur sport, not counting the Olympics.

Gee, that's funny. I remember the SEC fanboys at sj.com claiming this fall that the network was about to fade into oblivion, and that the Midwest's entire population base was about to move south.

Of course, we always have to take Loren Tate with a grain of salt, especially when he doesn't cite a source. He's been known to use anonymous sources, only to have that information explode in the light of verification.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76378.0.html

Wow, these people are amazingly stupid. But we knew that already.

First, some background: I bought into the Jenny McCarthy hype back in the mid- to late 1990s. Once she started having intercourse with producers and writing about every trivial aspect of her life, including her bowel movements, then I backed away.

To be honest, I thought she seemed a lot more normal and down-to-earth with the anti-vaccination cause, even if it might have been misguided. At the risk of writing an sj.com-type, one-sentence analysis, I think some people were legitimately concerned about the perceived risks, and some people were opposing the vaccinations simply because they are required.

The sj.com posters have none of this analytical ability. Example:

The truth is McCarthy gave birth to a perfectly normal son.

Read much? He had symptoms similar to autism. Fail. Ultrafail for Stoney -- he gets the dunce cap and goes to the corner. He'll have company, though.

And now not only is the science debunked, her son doesn't even have the disorder the whole thing was predicated upon.

Again, read much? Again, and we might have to go slowly for the moron crowd: He had symptoms similar to autism.

We have to spell things out often for ArnoldBabar. He is likely the dumbest person on the Internet today. He pollutes both sports journalist forums with his idiocy. From what I can tell, he tries to compensate for his past/present/future bitterness about his employment situation by making stupid claims that he then attempts to defend solely with zeal. For him, fail is imminent.

There will certainly be more examples to follow in this thread. When it comes to medical issues, journalists jump joyfully onto the magic bus, where all illnesses can be treated with a single pill; everyone's care is paid for without hitch or hesitation (NOT a slam on the Obama health plan, BTW; just pointing out the willful ignorance of some); there is NEVER a misdiagnosis of any illness; and the blame-the-patient philosophy guides the pack.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76526.0.html

Their thread on this topic is better than the one at the other place. 

Several points can be made here, but there's probably only time to mention a couple in this post.

* These awards are taking on a note of silliness. As mentioned, the largest circulation category names almost every eligible newspaper. That's nonsense.

* I learned early on these types of awards are based on subjective bullshit. Rarely are the comments useful, constructive, sensible, or helpful.

* Even with useful comments, it's tough to get the newsroom/desk to change. As with anything in the newsroom, you have people who rebel immediately against anything new or different.

On to the specific posts:

As to "I hope you got out a long time ago!!!!!!!!!!!" two things. A. Anyone who thinks that's an insult or an indictment in the Year 2010 hasn't been paying attention. B. I hope you - I hope EVERYONE - get(s) out as soon as you can. 

Sorry, but as recently as a few months ago, people were still trying to insult the people who did get out. It will take a long, long time before the people who claim stupid stuff like "We have ink in our veins!" wrap their tiny minds around the changes that have taken place.

There's more to say, but it will have to wait.

[rknil]

Miscellaneous:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,73193.125.html

Wow -- they're still obsessing about this show. I did check in for the Carrie Underwood episode, and I discovered it's as dumb as ever. But the morons like Double Drool think it's great. Also, when are Double Drool, JayFarrar, and ArnoldBabar going to create their remedial version of the Three Stooges?

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76533.0.html

Time to retire the "funny" thread titles, guys. Just go with the basics for a while until the originality can return. Oh, wait -- the site is declining rapidly, so that won't happen. My bad.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76539.0.html

The personal stuff here is amusing. Also, I don't think I've ever seen a real-life example of the "orange soda" stereotype, even in an Orange Crush town.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76624.0.html

Every so often, someone goes on the site and pretends to be a juvenile. (This is different from the people who use a juvenile posting style, mainly because they think it's cool. It's not.)

Anyway, the people at sj.com are too stupid to see through the facade, so they buy into it.

This thread is even more entertaining because they reveal their own writing flaws as they "correct" the fake juvenile:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76624.msg2768282.html#msg2768282

As you'll see, most of the writers here take grammar and spelling very seriously, since it makes us look bad when we make those mistakes.

Because. Not since. The "it makes us" construction should be scrapped and rewritten. And of course, the entire premise is B.S. because the people there fuck up grammar and spelling all the time, and then they try to brush it off by saying: "This is not for publication. I am just relaxing here as I post anonymously and gutlessly." (I added that last part.)

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76624.msg2768310.html#msg2768310

One of the rarest and most important skills of a sports writer is to be able to go to a game and turn in a story in 15 minutes, an hour, two hours, whatever.

I have never known any sports writer who turned in a story in 15 minutes.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76624.msg2768330.html#msg2768330

Always proofread and fact-check, since it appears you have no editor.

Because, damn it. Not since. Proofread!

I glanced at the Pinstripe Bowl thing and there are more errors that I care to count.

There should be a comma before "and." There should always be a comma before a coordinating conjunction separating two independent clauses. Than. Not that. There are more errors in that sentence THAN anyone should have to count.

93Devil has a post, too, but he is a blooming idiot, so there is no need to copy his ramblings over here.

[rknil]

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76683.msg2770188.html#msg2770188

Name 8 countries where American football is played, Dumbo.

Lord, what an idiot. He is almost immediately smacked down:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php/topic,76683.msg2770196.html#msg2770196

Of course, the retaliatory insults follow. These guys just can't handle the truth: The "facts" they come up with off the top of their head are often wrong. Yet they still refuse to do any research on anything.