VB Letter to Boston Globe

[Zappa 0]

Well done VB along with anyone else for taking the lead and soliciting an apology.

.

Exactly. Well done to all.

[calscot 0]

The VB letter to me was ok, but nothing special: it was too long, didn't stick to the point or deliver it well and was too partisan in places - pretty much like most of their communications. But in the end it was admirable they did something. However, when it's used as internal one-upmanship and they take all the credit for any result when clearly there are other people writing letters, then that admiration fades to almost nothing.

 

I'm sure many of us have written emails to the press or put comments on websites but none of us go about saying that we're the only one's doing anything. I find that pretty distasteful and off-putting - it doesn't warm me to VB one bit.

[maineflyer 0]

S'funny, hard as I look, I can't see one example of anyone taking all the credit, least of all VB. Nor can I see even a single example of anyone saying that only VB writes letters or offers protest. So why all this feigned 'distaste'? It's always puzzling to see posters go on the defensive when no one's attacking them. Nowt as queer as fowk I suppose.

[bmck 117]

I suppose if attacks were aimed at individuals rather than the mysterious "some people", people would know when to be defensive.

[maineflyer 0]

I suppose if attacks were aimed at individuals rather than the mysterious "some people", people would know when to be defensive.

 

That's the thing though, there were no attacks. Not beyond imagined ones anyway. I guess you tend to find what you go looking for.

[bmck 117]

That's the thing though, there were no attacks. Not beyond imagined ones anyway. I guess you tend to find what you go looking for.

I think this is the phrase that BD thought was referring to him, given he was the only person to make comment on the style and that you failed to actually say who you were talking about.

It's interesting to see there are still some people who hanker after style over substance, parading words on a website rather that on a letter of complaint.

You said people felt like they were being attacked. I dont think anyone felt like they were being attacked, just sensibly asking if it was them your comment was aimed at. Who are these people hankering after style over substance anyway? Even then, why should substance and style be in competition? Doesnt seem like too much to ask as people who set themselves up as spokepersons be they the rst or whomever. Edited May 4, 2010 by bmck

[maineflyer 0]

I think this is the phrase that BD thought was referring to him, given he was the only person to make comment on the style and that you failed to actually say who you were talking about.

You said people felt like they were being attacked. I dont think anyone felt like they were being attacked, just sensibly asking if it was them your comment was aimed at. Who are these people hankering after style over substance anyway? Even then, why should substance and style be in competition? Doesnt seem like too much to ask as people who set themselves up as spokepersons be they the rst or whomever.

 

I think Bluedell usually manages well enough to speak for himself. He asked, I gave a clear answer, there was no problem that I could see. You, on the other hand, seem to need to jump in and stir it up, I wonder why? Anyway, I've got better things to do, squabble with yourself from now on.

[bmck 117]

I think Bluedell usually manages well enough to speak for himself. He asked, I gave a clear answer, there was no problem that I could see. You, on the other hand, seem to need to jump in and stir it up, I wonder why? Anyway, I've got better things to do, squabble with yourself from now on.

 

That you are unwilling to admit who you were talking about speaks for itself. Chances are it was BD, you realised he wasnt hankering over style over substance, and didnt want to admit it. But suit yourself.

[andy steel 0]

Hoi! It was me who jumped in and stirred it up, if you don't mind. Credit where it's due.

[calscot 0]

S'funny, hard as I look, I can't see one example of anyone taking all the credit, least of all VB. Nor can I see even a single example of anyone saying that only VB writes letters or offers protest. So why all this feigned 'distaste'? It's always puzzling to see posters go on the defensive when no one's attacking them. Nowt as queer as fowk I suppose.

 

Smoke and mirrors?

 

It's interesting to see there are still some people who hanker after style over substance, parading words on a website rather that on a letter of complaint. Vanguardbears has done more over the last couple of years to address our detractors than all other Rangers groups put together ... and then some. To the extent that some much larger websites have been shamed into outright animosity and refused to take part in pro-Rangers activities while continuing to line their pockets with hit-money.

 

I guess it just depends what you think is really important, doing it or talking about doing it? I ask myself, what other Rangers group would have written that or any other letter to the Boston Globe? Or on a daily basis take head-on the mass of lies and anti-Rangers propaganda, wherever it comes from? So while VB might not be the place everyone would feel comfortable in terms of style or trivia, it's at least worth acknowledging that they have contributed something important that no one else seems able or willing to give.

 

You seem here to be having a go at everyone outside VB while saying they are the only ones who do anything.

 

If I've got that wrong then maybe it's the way you write that makes it come across that way. I wasn't being defensive, I just find that kind of overblown posturing detracts from any worthiness of praise.

 

I'm also skeptical of radicalized action. A good message can often get lost when surrounded by partisan bluster; it's only good for preaching to the converted.