what a perfect parallel
obviously, your comment directly addressed to me, is exactly the same, on all levels

are you a site admin or just someone who likes making blanket statements? nevertheless, i will heed you call/threat/advice to “move along”

the observation that you ever found anything simultaneously “cute” and worthwhile makes me completely re-evaluate you, Chuck. /Shaking my head…

Chuck is an Indians fan and a longtime regular of this community.

As a fan of another team, the onus is on you to be careful not to act like a troll.

This will be your only warning.

Well at least I made you laugh – that’s more than I can say for RR.

“laughable and pathetic”

Sorry, Will, but that’s both argumentative and abusive. You evidently believe that the fact he was sticking up for you changes the very meaning of those two words. You’d do better to tell your friend that he’s embarrassing both of you, and that you can stick up for yourself perfectly well.

Some will not agree with Chuck’s critique, but others would say it was pretty funny and/or totally valid. Ironically, the same could be said for quite a lot of what you write.

I agree with this point, but consider how it started: With a self-promoting bit how Page Two was ripping off Mr. Review. Chuck gives him a hard time, other people disagree and maintain that RR is in fact funny. Then NY Royal posts a few sarcastic defenses. Jay calls him on it. RR then concludes: “Jay’s a rock-solid chuck’s way or the highway guy i guess, so this is my final involvement here.” He takes his ball and goes home? I don’t want to see the man run out of Dodge.

Some good points here, but let me try to give you some food for thought on it.

First, Chuck doesn’t speak for the site or the collective throng here, and he doesn’t claim to. “Move along” isn’t an order, and it refers more to “moving along” in terms of getting some new material rather than leaving entirely. I think you will find that his remark is actually quite in keeping with some of the self-management that the community does, i.e., occasionally someone will apparently be cracking himself up pretty good with some comment, over and over again, until one or more fellow LGTers (and it’s often not Ryan or me) points out that it isn’t that funny or is inappropriate or irksome in some other way.

Second, while Ryan and I have been rather indulgent of our friend and colleague’s antics here, it’s fair to say that they’re problematic, and my guess is that some of our peers would not be (and perhaps have not been) been as welcoming. The fact that I’ve felt it necessary many time to follow his posts with — “this guy isn’t a troll, he’s doing this semi-obscure satirical thing” — suggests in itself that either the satire isn’t entirely compelling or the venue isn’t quite right for it, or both. We have essentially declared that he’s not trolling, but one could reasonably call it trolling.

I’ll give you a parallel example. Early last season, I’m over on Lookout Landing, months before the “raid,” and the experience is going more or less as usual for that sort of expedition. I’m having some deep exchange with a couple of people, some slightly funky trash-talk with one or two others, and then of course there’s another 1-3 commenters who just despise my very existence, and that have a tough time calming down about “the enemy” even when a couple of their fellow LL’ers tell them that they should—all par for the course.

At some point, I make some reference to Bavasi being possibly the dumbest GM in the game right now, not even in a trashy way if I recall, almost more matter-of-fact, like, everyone already knows this. At that point, more or less everyone reacted badly, and I found myself backtracking, like, “Hey, hey, I didn’t mean to be rude or anything, I’m sorry, what’d I say? I thought everyone knew and accepted this.” And the answer I got was basically, “Yeah, but that’s our team’s GM, so it comes off one way for us to say it, and quite another way for you to say it.” They weren’t defending Bavasi, just pointing out that when a guy who roots for some other team says it, the effect is totally different. We might feel the same way about a guy like Paul Byrd, for example.

What if I went back to LL last season and made a big diary post about how Richie Sexson is just another example of how Cleveland trades away all its best players. Sexson was abysmal last season, and people always have selective memory about their team trading away great players, so obviously I’m making a big piece of satire, right? So fine, maybe some of them get the joke, some of them don’t. Now let’s say, every time Sexson puts up a big 0-fer - often, by the way - I go back and make essentially the exact same post. Some people might eventually find it hilarious, the sheer stupidity and repetition. Quite a few would wonder why I would take the time.

But quite a few would get pissed off, too, and I couldn’t say they were wrong, because Sexson is Their Guy now. Betancourt was once a very small national story, but he’s Our Guy before and after that. And bottom line, this is an Indians fan site. To expect a better reaction, after you make one of Our Guys the butt of the same joke, 50 times in a row, is frankly just not realistic. We all ultimately write for ourselves, but there is always some expectation of understanding how your comments will be read.

I don’t know if Will has been entirely realistic or reasonable in his own expectations for this material, and that’s just one more reason why Chuck’s critique was fair game.

Look Nick I didn’t tell him to get the hell outta Dodge – I asked him to freshen up his material. I can handle lame jokes – I make quite a few myself – but month after month of the same lame crap? Common, ya gotta admit it wasn’t that funny from the get-go and didn’t get any funnier in the retelling – over and over again.

No, a thought that “move along” was pretty non-threatening. In fact I defy you to find any of my posts where I’ve ever threatened anybody.

As to NYRoyal – I’m sure he won his HS senior essay contest – in fact I’m sure RR was at least a runner-up, but the canned cliched criticism just rolls offa me. You know are you one obnoxious thing or something stupid thing type of criticism. It’s one of the lamer rhetorical devises used by the unimaginative.

Finally, all I’m saying is if you’re gonna be a clown at least be a funny clown, or else change your profession.