Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Hit piece

Hit piece

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
19 Posts 7 Posters 82 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

    I understand Portnoy's Complaint.

    George KG Offline
    George KG Offline
    George K
    wrote on last edited by
    #10

    @jon-nyc wins TNCR today.

    "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

    The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
    • George KG George K

      @jon-nyc wins TNCR today.

      HoraceH Offline
      HoraceH Offline
      Horace
      wrote on last edited by
      #11

      @George-K said in Hit piece:

      @jon-nyc wins TNCR today.

      My post where I understood the journalist's behavior won today's TNCR prior to jon's post.

      Education is extremely important.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • George KG George K

        I know nothing about Barstool sports or Portnoy, or at least I didn't until this morning.

        Perhaps some of what the NYT says is true, perhaps not. But the fact that they refused to meet, face-to-face, and only do a phone interview says a lot.

        "Mr. Portnoy did not respond," my ass.

        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #12

        @George-K said in Hit piece:

        I know nothing about Barstool sports or Portnoy, or at least I didn't until this morning.

        Perhaps some of what the NYT says is true, perhaps not. But the fact that they refused to meet, face-to-face, and only do a phone interview says a lot.

        "Mr. Portnoy did not respond," my ass.

        Well, in fairness, they said Barstool Execs didn't respond and that Portnoy didn't provide answers. They're not wrong. Also they did agree to face to face with audio only which Portnoy refused. He should have taken them up on it, it would have been interesting enough.

        "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
        -Cormac McCarthy

        HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

          @George-K said in Hit piece:

          I know nothing about Barstool sports or Portnoy, or at least I didn't until this morning.

          Perhaps some of what the NYT says is true, perhaps not. But the fact that they refused to meet, face-to-face, and only do a phone interview says a lot.

          "Mr. Portnoy did not respond," my ass.

          Well, in fairness, they said Barstool Execs didn't respond and that Portnoy didn't provide answers. They're not wrong. Also they did agree to face to face with audio only which Portnoy refused. He should have taken them up on it, it would have been interesting enough.

          HoraceH Offline
          HoraceH Offline
          Horace
          wrote on last edited by
          #13

          @jon-nyc said in Hit piece:

          @George-K said in Hit piece:

          I know nothing about Barstool sports or Portnoy, or at least I didn't until this morning.

          Perhaps some of what the NYT says is true, perhaps not. But the fact that they refused to meet, face-to-face, and only do a phone interview says a lot.

          "Mr. Portnoy did not respond," my ass.

          Well, in fairness, they said Barstool Execs didn't respond and that Portnoy didn't provide answers. They're not wrong. Also they did agree to face to face with audio only which Portnoy refused. He should have taken them up on it, it would have been interesting enough.

          You mean, you would have preferred Mr Portnoy to buy a plane ticket and take time off from his life to do an audio-only interview at the pleasure of the NYT. Mr Portnoy has other considerations which might price that 'should' out of his own budget. Similar to the 'should' of Jerry Jones and his contrition for something he did at 14. People don't feel like they "should" be at the service of religious witch hunters coming for them, and that's ok with me.

          Education is extremely important.

          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
          • Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor Phibes
            wrote on last edited by
            #14

            If a British tabloid behaved like this, nobody would be surprised in the least. In fact, they'd probably be praised for their self-restraint.

            I guess we should expect better from the NYT.

            I was only joking

            JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
            • HoraceH Horace

              @jon-nyc said in Hit piece:

              @George-K said in Hit piece:

              I know nothing about Barstool sports or Portnoy, or at least I didn't until this morning.

              Perhaps some of what the NYT says is true, perhaps not. But the fact that they refused to meet, face-to-face, and only do a phone interview says a lot.

              "Mr. Portnoy did not respond," my ass.

              Well, in fairness, they said Barstool Execs didn't respond and that Portnoy didn't provide answers. They're not wrong. Also they did agree to face to face with audio only which Portnoy refused. He should have taken them up on it, it would have been interesting enough.

              You mean, you would have preferred Mr Portnoy to buy a plane ticket and take time off from his life to do an audio-only interview at the pleasure of the NYT. Mr Portnoy has other considerations which might price that 'should' out of his own budget. Similar to the 'should' of Jerry Jones and his contrition for something he did at 14. People don't feel like they "should" be at the service of religious witch hunters coming for them, and that's ok with me.

              jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by
              #15

              @Horace I had no opinion on the meeting venue, it would just have been nice to hear him put her on the spot, as was his expressed desire.

              "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
              -Cormac McCarthy

              HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                @Horace I had no opinion on the meeting venue, it would just have been nice to hear him put her on the spot, as was his expressed desire.

                HoraceH Offline
                HoraceH Offline
                Horace
                wrote on last edited by
                #16

                @jon-nyc said in Hit piece:

                @Horace I had no opinion on the meeting venue, it would just have been nice to hear him put her on the spot, as was his expressed desire.

                Yes he was willing to do so on his terms. It would have been interesting to see confirmation that the journalist was unwilling to answer any of his questions, I suppose. But I am sure we can all relate to his feeling that it would be beneath him to submit to a bad faith religious inquisition, on the inquisitor’s terms. Not submitting, and releasing the texts, is arguably the best and most coherent point he could have made.

                Education is extremely important.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                  If a British tabloid behaved like this, nobody would be surprised in the least. In fact, they'd probably be praised for their self-restraint.

                  I guess we should expect better from the NYT.

                  JollyJ Offline
                  JollyJ Offline
                  Jolly
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #17

                  @Doctor-Phibes said in Hit piece:

                  If a British tabloid behaved like this, nobody would be surprised in the least. In fact, they'd probably be praised for their self-restraint.

                  I guess we should expect better from the NYT.

                  The paper of record....

                  “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                  Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • taiwan_girlT Offline
                    taiwan_girlT Offline
                    taiwan_girl
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #18

                    I have a question. I dont know if anyone here is a gambler, but I always that gambling will increase economic activity buy XX amount.

                    But my thinking is that if a gambling place opens and someone spends USD$100 on gambling, that USD$100 is taken from somewhere else.

                    For example, if the gambling place was not open, the person probably would have spent the money on dinner, pubs, clothing, etc. I doubt they just would have saved it and not spent anything.

                    Therefore, it seems like the economic benefits are exaggerated.

                    Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
                    • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                      I have a question. I dont know if anyone here is a gambler, but I always that gambling will increase economic activity buy XX amount.

                      But my thinking is that if a gambling place opens and someone spends USD$100 on gambling, that USD$100 is taken from somewhere else.

                      For example, if the gambling place was not open, the person probably would have spent the money on dinner, pubs, clothing, etc. I doubt they just would have saved it and not spent anything.

                      Therefore, it seems like the economic benefits are exaggerated.

                      Doctor PhibesD Offline
                      Doctor PhibesD Offline
                      Doctor Phibes
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #19

                      @taiwan_girl gambling helps redistribute wealth from poor people to rich people. And we all know much rich people love helping poor people, so really it’s a great way to help poor people.

                      I was only joking

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups