1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Engrossing dispatch or word dump?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Alma, Mar 30, 2011.

  1. derwood

    derwood Active Member

    Great read. Best US article on cricket since SI's profile of Ian Botham.


    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1065395/index.htm
     
  2. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    Man, an on-topic jack. Good work, derwood.
     
  3. Care Bear

    Care Bear Guest

    That is hilarious. Out of nowhere. I may actually read the article and hopefully end up declaring it an engrossing dump.
     
  4. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    At first I thought this whole thread is a trainwreck with virtually no one who's posted in it has come off looking sympathetic, except maybe Dooley.

    But my first reaction wasn't the right reaction. You've got people, folks I admire and like on both "sides" of this "fight", being honest (I hope) and there's no harm in that.

    SJ is about 100 different things to about 100 different people, myself included, with cross-breeding and board feuds crossing everyone's personal tastes of why they like SJ to begin with.

    It's never been totally about the writer's workshop, the J board, the jobs board, anything goes or anything else. It's always been a tug-of-war between its so-called "professional" aspects and its juvenile ones. Again, with many members crossing those lines and enjoying both aspects of SJ.

    I think those who get turned off try too hard to invest their own personal stamp on what they wanted SJ to be, only to be disappointed that the whims and tastes of hundreds of different members were never going to allow for any one person or group (despite what some believe) to "take over". That's fine, to each everyone's own as far as I'm concerned.

    SJ has never been about one thing to any one member. To instill anything in it beyond that is to set yourself up for disappointment.
     
  5. secretariat

    secretariat Active Member

    This is pitch-perfect, for me.
     
  6. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    Jones, Boom is indeed part of this place's history, for better or for worse. So is Alma. So are you, by the way.

    I mean, Jones, you're talking about two of the all-time characters in sj lore. (And DD, why shouldn't Alma be allowed to post erratically? I don't buy that one. We can't all maintain the same regular posting schedule.)

    The fact is, people like Boom, whether or not you consider them villains, have added to the color of the place. Surely the journalist in you appreciates that on some level.

    I can't speak to the controversy at hand because I haven't been paying attention, but I'll give you that Boom has a dark side. Is it too dark? When I think about some of the stuff you've written, i think you know about the darkness within a story. And that's what this site is-- the story of human beings.
     
  7. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    I look at a message board like a park. We have many different people coming here and doing different things. Some are meeting as a small group, some are just passing through riding bikes and there are larger games and events happening with more people watching and paying attention.

    The people who oversee the park are supposed to make sure that everyone in the park is having a good time and following the rules of the park.

    Sometimes a certain group will invade the space of another group, but usually adults can work things out like civil people.

    But when you have people in the park not following the rules, fucking up the games going on, telling mothers their kids are fat and ugly and just being pricks, you would hope the management of the park would discipline them or kick them out.

    It is a nice park, and most of the time you have a good time there, but you tire of the odd times you are fucked with by dickheads when you are just trying to have a good time. This is especially frustrating when all the people attending the park, in theory, should be nice professional adults.

    That is what screws up 1.0 for me, when people just shit on the rules of the place. Sorry if this is a shitty analogy, but it works for me.
     
  8. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member


    "Well, here’s the stone-cold truth, kids: Jason Whitlock has no soul. He’s neither a good reporter nor a good writer. " / Chris Jones
     
  9. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Defending your friends just because they are your friends may be good for the soul, but it's bad for the intellect. It's barely a full step above going on the comments sections and professing someone's innocence under the police blotter.
     
  10. secretariat

    secretariat Active Member

     
  11. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    And your point is ?
     
  12. typefitter

    typefitter Well-Known Member

    They also happen to be two of the best writers working today, so, you know, there's that, too.

    Your friends are lucky to have you, Spock.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page