Writing a column, need my butt kissed

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

I'm writing a new column for a magazine you never heard of and never will, and I'd like you guys to write it for me. Colorful, lively stuff of just the right type--you know what I mean. I'll use it or not use it, as I see fit, but the reallly important thing is that you guys phrase it in the way I want you to, call me "sir," all that good stuff.

In return, I'll mention your name in this magazine that, as I said, no one has heard of and no one ever will, most likely.

That sound good to you? Thanks a million.

[Elster88]

I think this does cross the line into advesarial and unnecessary. JMO.

I was fairly rude in my first response to his post, so who am I to set limits? No one, that's who.
_____________________________
This post was made under the designation 166) Pete Schourek

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I like this post.


My take is that Healy was ticked off by this from Edgy:

]Quote: Have the Wilpons asked him not to throw inside? That's a really out-there stretch of speculation, don't you think?

And if he's that thin-skinned, then he deserves to be mocked by a post like the one Bret submitted.

[Zvon]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: I'm writing a new column for a magazine you never heard of and never will, and I'd like you guys to write it for me. Colorful, lively stuff of just the right type--you know what I mean. I'll use it or not use it, as I see fit, but the reallly important thing is that you guys phrase it in the way I want you to, call me "sir," all that good stuff. In return, I'll mention your name in this magazine that, as I said, no one has heard of and no one ever will, most likely. That sound good to you? Thanks a million.

LMAO.
I did get a kick out of this.
Nice shot man.

[Willets Point]

But are you filming a documentary about Mets fans at Shea on Saturday?

[seawolf17]

And exactly how many nationality's have you been with?

[MFS62]

Bret,
You've got to proofread better before you his that "submit" key.
You typed "kissed".
You must have meant "kicked".

Later

[G-Fafif]

]I'm writing a new column for a magazine you never heard of and never will

New magazines are often unknown when they start. And a lot of them do fail. That's the business. But this one happens to be an enterprise being put out by dedicated people with a pretty reasonable goal, namely covering the rich terrain that is New York baseball by looking at its past, its present and its future. I don't know why serious fans wouldn't want to read that.

I hope it succeeds. But I'm biased. I write for it.

[Guest Edgy DC]

]That's a really out-there stretch of speculation, don't you think?

Sorry if this is what set the house on fire. I can't really think of a lighter way to disagree with a person.

I didn't say "stupid" stretch. I guess I could have added one of those IMO's but I always think they're kind of superfluous. Of course it's in my opinion.

A student journalist wrote a smear job on a club I presided over in college. His column included the question: "Do they even allow Jews?"

That was it. He didn't call to ask anybody if we did discriminate or have any reason to think so except he was Jewish at a Catholic school and he disageed with us. Turned out, we were the only club on campus with an anti-discrimination clause in our constitution. I wrote it. Didn't matter, I was branded an anti-Semite in print.

So I seriously disagree with the idea of floating a question like that in journalism. It's baseless, but if somebody disputes it, well it wasn't a statement and you don't have to answer for it. You have wacky thesis like that, get some supporting evidence before throwing it out there.

And, no, coming here and bandying it about among other outsiders is not a search for supporting evidence, but a fishing trip for more out-there speculation.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

G-Fafif wrote: New magazines are often unknown when they start. And a lot of them do fail. That's the business. But this one happens to be an enterprise being put out by dedicated people with a pretty reasonable goal, namely covering the rich terrain that is New York baseball by looking at its past, its present and its future. I don't know why serious fans wouldn't want to read that. I hope it succeeds. But I'm biased. I write for it.

I wish you, and the startup mag, well.

The point of sharing this little exercise was that in my college journalism textbook, HOW TO GET PEOPLE TO HELP YOU OUT IN GETTING STARTED FOR FREE (Port Jefferson: Olive Oil Press, 1987), in chapter nine, "Why They Actually Enjoy Helping You Out," the authors state quite clearly (pp. 411-2) that "people will offer their help, sit through extensive interviews, even do so on your timetable, etc. as long as you're tolerant of the variety of views, which may butt up against your own. If someone offers an opinion and you disagree with it, by all means restrain your critical counterattacks, avoid telling them how little they know, and never storm out in a huff. That's just counter-productive. Instead, practice thanking them for expressing their position, or even ask them to expound on it. Who knows? You might learn something in the process."

I agree 100% with this technique, and would recommend the book highly to your friend.

[Guest Mark Healey]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: I'm writing a new column for a magazine you never heard of and never will, and I'd like you guys to write it for me. Colorful, lively stuff of just the right type--you know what I mean. I'll use it or not use it, as I see fit, but the reallly important thing is that you guys phrase it in the way I want you to, call me "sir," all that good stuff. In return, I'll mention your name in this magazine that, as I said, no one has heard of and no one ever will, most likely. That sound good to you? Thanks a million.

I have always felt that baseball fans and their ideas, concerns, etc. are always welcome in my columns. Yes, especially when they disagree with me. I sincerely apologize if anyone thought I was trying to do something different than that.

I didn't "storm out", I'm actually quite busy trying to get the second isue of the magazine.

As for Edgy's question, no that didn;t upset me in the slightest. The question wasnt meant to be anything other than what it sounded like, a stupid question.

I guess what I was looking for was answers like this:

"I could care less whether a guy is "colorful" or not, as long as he wins."

or ones that agreed with my premise:

"Having Durocher manage the Mets would have been cool."

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Mark Healey wrote: [I didn't "storm out",

Must have misinterpreted "I only came here because Greg spoke up for you guys, and I was willing to let bygones be bygones...hence the asking for help with the article.

I guess I shouldn't have bothered." as your announcing that you were done with us.