CaptainTrev wrote: wienerdog wrote:
Gino's Knuckle wrote:
Thanks RD. If those are the requisite sentiments I'd say I am about half in and half out. My animus for AV is pretty solid, Gillis - I like but am starting to question more and more, Raymond - feel for the guy but don't really see him progressing any further, Booth - jury still out, Grabner - liked since we drafted him, Malhotra - again, feel for the guy but don't see him coming back to form, Edler - like him but doubt he is going to actually be the #1 we have been hoping for, Ballard - like him and think he has been a team (read AV) scapegoat, Burke - meh, Kassian - jury still out, Hodgson - Love the guy, but can't say the same for his father, Higgins - reminds me of Sillinger i.e. good stopgap, Nonis - didn't like how many draft picks he got wasted.
Ooops. Well, there goes the latest Dudist acolyte...
Hooray! The clique wins again!
Haha, I guess you missed the irony of my post.
Here - I'll let you in on a secret:
There is no clique!
It's an invention of RD's to stir the pot - much like the Vancouver media makes much ado about nothing to sell papers. The only person around here trying to create cliques is RD himself.
If you read these boards with any regularity and attention, there is plenty of discourse, debate and dissention. It's usually
well thought out and coherently presented by a wide variety of posters discussing a wide range of topics.
Just because there are people that take to task the MO of bursting into every thread with a played out bull-in-a-china-shop schtick that tends to assert sensational but vapid points doesn't make them part of a "clique".
Calling out poorly contructed thoughts or goading is good for the board.
Admittedly, going against the grain is good for the board too. And while RD does that with regularity, he deserves zero credit for it because he's usually wrapped up in so much bullshit it obliterates his credibility. There are many here who are just tired of it.
I, like others, wish it would be the former colorful contrariness without the latter timewasting chest-thumping. Doesn't seem like it's going to change, though.
There's a difference between being colorful in communication while being eloquent (think George Carlin) and being colorful while shooting yourself in the face (Michael Richards).