d4rksabre, on 07 November 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:
To your point about local media types, we know a few have posted here before (or tried) and were quickly shown the door because they didn't understand how forums work. I wonder how well any of them even grasp some of the discussions we have here? You'd think someone would take a chance with the wild conspiracy theory anti-Pegula stuff, right? It's not like they aren't already muckraking.
Over the years I have seen what I believe is the media/radio running with stuff on here. They are all respectful for the most part in how they do it. There may be issues where the subject is a little off the norm, and they gain confidence if they see it talked about here. Hamilton has said stuff with confidence that I firmly believes he believed himself, but opinion here gave him cover. Schopp will use things for discussion, but will almost do a 180 on how he attacks the subject to make it his own and not blatantly lift an idea. Bulldog will talk and either support or counter something directly worded from here. Gleason will use this as a temperature taker, and use his own writing style to build around the mood or a few points. It's all good in my opinion. I don't see or hear everyone, so not sure who else may use this place as a tool.
We can say stuff here that those guys probably don't want to chance saying. Not to sound like a total narcissist D-bag, but I always try to be truthful and entertaining as I present some things that many wouldn't usually think about. I would hope the media guys would enjoy my posts...sometimes they may agree or be intrigued and look into something....sometimes they may think I'm a nutbag...but I try to say the things they probably wish they could say without risking their jobs. Now as a member of a posting community.....that makes me over the top at times...but for them I hope it's a little bit of a guilty pleasure.
I know you have said in the past that we have no control over things here so we can't bring about change. I totally disagree. We know this team and the personalities involved. When I speculate that Bob McKenzie has preferred status with the Sabres because of his fluff piece on Pegula during the Penn St. scandal where he totally ignored Benson....people will scoff. But then I hear Teddy on GR joking about twitter, and he gave up the golden goose. I find Ted, and the first 3 follows are LeBrun, McKenzie, THEN the Buffalo Sabres. Sure it's a little bit of psychology and reading things, but the breadcrumbs are there. If you can identify things.....then just like the reasoning behind this thread....it makes sense for the Sabres to control the dialogue about the team....and what better way to do so than through the media? Wawrow used to do it for Quinn in my opinion. When you start to put things together, and can then say "I see you!!!"....and enough of the public catches on over time to where what seems like outlandish opinion about someone or something at first is eventually revealed as fact...well, then something may have to be done.
Many posters here have wondered how I myself can be so seemingly negative about the team for so long and still show up. It is because the truth eventually always comes out if enough people are willing to see it. A lot of stuff is opinion, but there are plenty of facts that form it. I don't think Darcy Regier is a bad person. He is a survivor first and foremost when it comes to his job though. Does he want to win a Stanley Cup? Sure...that would be nice.....but goal #1 has always been to never take a big enough chance to make a fire-worthy mistake. It's only through exposing facts over time that maybe...just maybe...if there is any logic up top....we see a change.
We WILL....outlast the oppression, and eventually see a Free State of Sabredom once again!!!
Oh sh!t....I'm out of coffee......