Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

post away

Expand Messages
  • Frank TEX Liebmann
    I ve reopen the list. There are two threads I d like to see killed: NHL = horrible drivel NHLPA/Union Hahahohoheehee I think these two got beaten like a dead
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 30, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I've reopen the list.

      There are two threads I'd like to see killed:

      NHL = horrible drivel
      NHLPA/Union Hahahohoheehee

      I think these two got beaten like a dead horse.

      Also, somebody suggested to me that we have a daily posting limit. I have
      thought about this in the past and think it would be a good idea. The
      problem is that such a limit would have to be monitored manually, since
      yahoogroups provides no such means to enforce such a limit. I have created a
      poll to determine what everybody thinks the limit should be. Vote and let
      your voice be heard.

      For those who have tried to subscribe in the past week or two, sorry for the
      delay. Both list mas were away from their computers for the holidays.

      Frank
    • Jonathan Kinney - Puckjunkie
      I must say that this list does tend to bog down my email a bit. And I find that I usually read the first few posts of a thread and then delete everything else.
      Message 2 of 3 , Dec 30, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I must say that this list does tend to bog down my email a bit. And I
        find that I usually read the first few posts of a thread and then delete
        everything else. A lot of topics seem to always revert to the same
        arguments - arguments that always seem to arise every three or four
        months.

        Am I in favour of limiting daily posts? Yes, to a degree. I think that
        would make people think twice before simply posting a "ya, I agree with
        you" message with nothing else except an excerpted section of a previous
        post.

        As well, it may cut down on some of the repetition as people will be
        forced to consider their posts more carefully.

        I voted for 3 to 7 posts per day. I think that there are very few people
        who exceed that limit currently and those that do could maybe combine
        their arguments into one post. There were 1220 messages in November. I
        think that with some limits in place (using an honour system for the
        most part) we could keep many of the more casual members interested
        rather than risk scaring them away with too many messages in their
        inbox.

        Please don't get me wrong, there are a lot of very interesting topics on
        this board. And while only some interest me personally, I think that,
        for the most part, there is a lot of value here. If we can just cut down
        a bit on some of the extraneous post we could encourage even more
        members to join in.

        Happy New Year all!!
        ---

        Jonathan Kinney
      • benjamin@prcn.org
        I was surprised that there was a perceived need to intervene on any of the threads. I can only assume there were some significant difficulties before I joined
        Message 3 of 3 , Dec 31, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          I was surprised that there was a perceived need to intervene on any of the
          threads. I can only assume there were some significant difficulties before I
          joined the list. There were a few things said that could have been said
          better, but I didn't see anything I would consider really offensive.
          Conflict is okay in my books.

          > There are two threads I'd like to see killed:
          >
          > NHL = horrible drivel

          I would like to see this thread permanently killed. A variation on this
          theme crops up in way too many topics and it dominates the listserv. I wish
          we could all agree to disagree and never touch the subject again, but
          whether one is a modernist or a traditionalist (or something in between)
          seems to colour all opinions.

          Almost all discussions eventually funnel into the same argument.

          It is not the conflict that is troublesome - it is that the subject is
          boring and frustrating. It is boring and frustrating even when I am one of
          the participants. Everyone has heard everyone else's arguments. We are all
          either preaching to the choir on this issue or trying to convert heathens
          who are quite happy to wallow in heretical thoughts. It is a religious
          argument, built around opposing articles of faith. It can never be settled.

          I don't have any good suggestions. A Great Schism? Two lists?

          > NHLPA/Union Hahahohoheehee

          Fair enough, but this is a subject I'd really like to learn a lot more
          about and illustrates the problem created by the Schism.

          The NHL is a labour market and the labour market is one of my career
          areas. I'd like to know more about the history of the NHLPA and how Eagleson
          convinced the owners in 15 minutes to recognize the organization. How
          Eagleson, Brewer and Pulford started out together and how Bobby ended up
          being part of the hockey establishment, how Brewer became a pariah, and how
          the Eagle ended up in jail.

          I think there are great gaps in the history. What really happened is very
          hazy. Who would not love to go through Carl Brewer's files? What happened to
          the 55 page report about Eagleson's NHLPA, the one written by Ed Garvey?

          How did the current collective agreement come into being? What kind of
          reasoning went into the agreement? Where are the courts going with the
          issue? There are a raft of subjects open to academic study, to labour market
          analysis.

          The impact of the collective agreement on NHL hockey is a very
          interesting topic. The impact on salaries of restricting free agency. The
          impact of the rookie salary cap. A study of arbitration decisions. Has the
          CBA impacted career length? Salaries have jumped. How much of that is
          expansion, how much of that is increased revenue, and how much of that is
          because of the CBA?

          I think there are ways to figure real answers to these questions, answers
          that go beyond mere opinion. How do we discuss this material while avoiding
          the usual spiral into Bettman bashing and responses to the Bettman bashing?

          I don't think it is possible.

          Tom
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.