I guess some people can't take constructive criticism. By associating yourself with Eklund and hockeybuzz you’re going to be fighting an uphill battle with most of the hockey world. (e5)
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
I guess some people can't take constructive criticism. By associating yourself with Eklund and hockeybuzz you’re going to be fighting an uphill battle with most of the hockey world. (e5)
Originally Posted by Cup B4 I Die
You're right, we do have a choice. And believe me there's alot here who don't read them anymore. That being said, Carla herself said that she wanted dialogue and that's what she's getting. If all she wants is to get responses that agree with her, she's in the wrong place. She needs to put her big girl panties on and deal with it. If you put your opinion out there, you're gonna get responses from both sides. No journalist is exempt from this.
Secondly, she has been writing for some time about how she has insight into this club, i.e. that the player's and management read her blog and respond to them. I don't think for a minute anyone here believes that. She calls a player out for a bad game and all of a sudden said player has a good game and she takes credit. Please! It's puff written by a female that can't take criticism. She makes it look bad for all females. She'll get respect when she earns it. The rest of us can discuss things and get our point across without crying "no respect".
Third, she is now spouting opinions expressed by some of us early in the season which she promptly denounced by saying that the above mentioned player/management responses backed her up. Well now all of a sudden, it's about time Crawford finally left a few lines together? Again, please!
Finally, there are enough stupid, inane arguments and name-calling sessions on here that it gets old reading them. The moderators on here selectively pick and choose who to call out and maybe it's time they moderate the whole board and not single out a select few to chastise.
Why does it have anything to do with gender? I know several men on here that disagree with her as well.
I also know several men, if not the majority of them on here, that are name-callers and just as 'feisty'.
She's crying her eyes out over this because a bunch of people don't agree with what she wrote and started a 'discussion' on it. She thinks we don't respect her because we don't agree with what she wrote. Thats what promtped the Big Girl Panty comment.
People tear apart Eklund, Hammond and every other blogger out there and their articles, so why is she immune? I've got serious karma points from a lot of people who agree with me and think that her writing lacks something. However, I'm being told that I need to 'back off of her'.
She doesn't bring anything new to the table here. Her article on Cammy? Pretty well written - EXCEPT its been hashed over way too many times. And then, no one is supposed to respond to it? No one can add their thoughts or comments? Apparantly her feelings are hurt when someone does.
If you're going to lay yourself out there like she is, laying your opinions out in written form, you have to be prepared to take the responses. The good responses with the bad.
Its not a catfight, its 2 people having a conversation. What would you call the thousands of threads I see here every day where one man is calling another a name, disagreeing with them etc? Is that also a catfight? Or a moron-fest?
Thats the difference. I don't sit there are type out a diatribe after every game proposing to know whats right and wrong with this team.
She does. And when someone has a different opinon than her, her only answer is a smiley face and:
'I'm just trying to tell you whats right and wrong with this team.'
I'll be happy to go back through her posts and find that one.
I can also find one where she told someone who responded to her that Crawford changing the lines had nothing to do with the team sucking THEN makes a comment in a more recent post that he left the lines together FINALLY. To me, she's backtracking on a previous statement she made.
Calling out a player in one blog post, only to have that player come back the next game looking much improved - and she claims her calling them out is the reason for the improved play.
While I'm happy that someone wants to cover the team, I just wish they would check facts and back up their posts a little better. Not cry out 'no respect' when some disagrees or has a different 'opinion'.
I agree with you completely on this point.
I think it is only fair and right that I respond because I appreciate the fact that you took the time to question things I have written in the past. I get that some, all or a majority of people don't believe what and whom are reading my blogs. In turn, since I have direct feedback to back up my beliefs, I maintain the right to believe what I know. Perhaps this rubs some the wrong way since I feel no need to prove what I know and how I know it. We all are 100% entitled to believe whatever we want to on this point.
As an aside, this isn't the first time this has been said to me. I will leave it at this. I haven't figured out whether those who don't believe me are more upset that I think this or more upset that it might be TRUE.
Do I think when players do better I caused it? I am not on the ice so obviously the player(s) who stepped up deserves the credit. Do I think some of the things I have written have been read by the team, players or management and might have motivated/inspired or been a factor with the results of the player(s) or the team? Yeah; I do because I have contacts that confirm this possibility.
I also take no issue with anyone or everyone who feels I haven't earned their respect. In turn, I feel no need to prove anything to anyone here. I write what I write. Read it, don't read it. This is a voluntary activity. What I take issue with is people here who think I owe them ANYTHING. The bottom line is I have an opportunity to write for a site that is read A LOT. That audience speaks for itself. I am happy to let my blogs speak for themselves.
In closing, these blogs are my passion away from my job. It is not something I am paid to do. It is a choice I make and whatever responses my blogs create is fine. I take ownership of that. People here who think I owe them anything have the right to expect it. I also have the right not to jump through hoops.
It is my hope that since I took the time to respond that some who feel I can't handle the heat of being called out will perhaps consider the possibility that I can take it and am happy to try. As a practical matter, I have a very demanding full time job. The amount of time I have to research, write and edit my blogs and fulfill the responsibilities of my work sometimes leave me insufficient time to respond to everyone who comments. Also, I fully admit that people whom I find disrespectful, I intentionally ignore. That is my right.
Also, since some people expressed that I have an attitude that it is my way or the highway, this couldn't be more wrong. So long as dialogue is created that is based on the content of my blogs and not me personally, I have no problem with that. I plain do not have the time to prove who I am, what I know and how I know it. If I provide something interesting, great. If I am not people's cup of tea, I am okay with that too.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
