Examples of Shots at Writers and Management

 

From the Rules:

 

No. 17: No Needling of Writers, Readers or Management of the Site, and this one is a judgment call on the part of Mr. FishDuck. Like the “Snarky” violation above, it is hard to describe but easy to detect due to the history of the offender.  It is often quite obvious that a post is written simply to offend, annoy or needle someone due to a difference of opinion and we delete these as they do not fit our “polite and respectful” profile of posts required.

 

No. 18: Posting denigrating statements about the sites of FishDuck, Our Beloved Ducks Forum, or of Mr. FishDuck? If you have a complaint, then email charles@fishduck.com and Mr. FishDuck will engage with you.  If you post your feelings in the forum–you will be deleted in a heartbeat, because after all the thousands of hours and dollars put into creating the site over the last ten years … who needs it?

 

Examples:

 

““It utilizes irrelevant facts to prove a hypothesis and ignores huge facts. There are quite a few facts that are being overlooked to support the hypothesis that you'll catch with film analysis.  Couple of notables and these are flat-out truisms that apply to virtually any QB or Team.”

If you don’t agree with the premise--fine.  If you have a beef with an article?  Send me an email, but we do not do this in public.  I do not ream people in public for breaking our rules, and I expect the same consideration in return.  Plus, if you think the article is unworthy--come do better.  Learn the technology, and put in the time every week, and put your effort where your mouth is.

 

“I think your analysis is a bit of an abuse of statistics.”    

See response above.

 

“The two quarterback "solution" is laughable.”  It was changed to…”I disagree with the two quarterback solution.”

See first response again.

 

“Maybe you should partner with John Canzano?”

Being snarky at the writer is not cool.  See first response above again.

 

“Has the writer actually watched Oregon okay this year?  Bridges has been a very weak link at CB2–that is why every team has thrown at him regularly.  Every other article I have seen on where Oregon needs to improve notes this fact.  Ducks can win at Pullman; but they will have to find someone else at this position..”

See first response again.

 

“I can't say that I am a fan of this article. It seems like a hit piece with all negativity and overall salty attitude towards UCLA, USC, and the Big 10. This was just over the top negative for me and couldn't muster the spirit to complete the article after the third paragraph. I feel the writers points could have been made without all of the derogatory terms every sentence or paragraph.”

See first response again.

 

“I honestly don’t care for this perspective. Maybe this article wasn’t meant to be sarcastic; Just humorous?  I honestly can’t tell.”

See first response again.

 

“I do find it ironic that a kinder, gentler FishDuck is to discuss a pugilistic, violent sport.”

 

“How do you know the views of the fans?” (A shot at the writer)

 

“I actually learn about football and the Duck at this site. Without the sensationalist opinion click-bate crap I find almost everywhere else.–until this article.  I can find aggrieved, troll the audience crap writing anywhere.”  

 

“Such an uninformed and inaccurate assessment.  This is a poor approach to so-called journalism.”

 

“I think the writer’s stance (name was actually used) in this article is overly harsh, completely hyperbolic, and shows an underlying dislike of Cristobal.  It’s a hyperbolic statement a child would make.”

 

“This is pure bullshit.  It is an embarrassment to our new staff that Mr FishDuck would think he represents hundreds of thousands of fans. He is a pompous tool who has no place in our program. REALLY?????   We have lost Brand???  Don’t think so.  Scoring is down throughout college football.  The spread offense has been figured out.  FishDick needs to retire already.”

 

“This article turned my stomach.”