Reddy

in my book, if a RAYS player won and a player from the brewers beat a NY guy... things rigged. and i think thats why they didn't give out actual vote totals.

it's now crazy slow... but got in about 1000.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 10, 2008 -> 10:19 AM) <!--quoteo(post=1685000:date=Jul 10, 2008 -> 10:19 AM:name=joemg311)-->QUOTE (joemg311 @ Jul 10, 2008 -> 10:19 AM) <!--quotec-->With the text message method of setting the number as every recipient I have been able to send quite the number of votes. I can set 10 recipients at onces, so I can send 10 votes at a time, and just keep resending it. I can do about 100 votes per minute until the barrage of confirmation responses come rolling on in. Some times it takes a bit for the confirmations so I can get 500-1000 votes before my phone is a slave to the 500-1000 texts back from MLB saying I have voted for DYE. At that point I just have to let my phone sit for 15 minutes but its a nice break. Make sure you have unlimited texting like I do before you go this route unless you want the largest phone bill of all time. damn my phone doesn't let me do it. i'm pissed.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 09:35 PM) Yea! That's good to hear. 'tis indeed.

yeah after everything this year i tend to believe that OC isn't exactly the greatest in the clubhouse...

282 so far.... we all need to log at least 500. ugh...

anybody find it odd that i put the rally crede back up as my avy and he hit a hr yesterday? eh? eh?

QUOTE (Felix @ Jul 9, 2008 -> 12:05 AM) You should be happy about it Jose. Ozuna sucked. i hate when people say this because it's not at all freaking true. ozuna was great for us. unless a .290 average is now somehow considered sucking.

QUOTE (Noberto Martin @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 04:39 PM) Eh, Longoria deserves it more.... ? .355 ba?

i can't deal with more voting!

i'd actually agree... been thinking that lately.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 03:04 PM) Here is a "cool standings" tidbit to think about... this team was at one time 20-22, if I recall. They are now 51-37 - or 31-15 since that time (a huge .674 clip). 46 games is more than a hot streak. Once this team's offense started to improve a bit, they took off. Unless the pitching implodes, I think this team is projectable to a pretty huge season. right now we're on pace for 94 wins. if you look at your numbers, take out that first 42 and suggest we continue that .674 clip we win 100 games. now we probably won't do THAT, but between 90-100 wins is now looking like a distinct possibility.

QUOTE (kane0730 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 02:22 PM) He can't be any worse then Pablo was. Goodbye Pablo. Your hustle will be missed! worse meaning a career .290 avg w/ the sox?

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 12:43 PM) Because we had to move somebody off the 25-man roster to reinstate Paulie. ah right, thanks.

if our 40 man is at 39 after the DFA, why did we have to do it?

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) So we are winning 100 games and will only lose twice in the playoffs. Cool. twice?

QUOTE (tonyho7476 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 11:37 AM) This seems to make the most sense...he has a bad glove...and is hardly playing. As least Uribe can fill in at 3rd. but it's PABLO!

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Jul 6, 2008 -> 07:49 PM) I strongly disagree with all of you. Dye has been very good for us this year, but he does not deserve to get voted in over Longoria. The all star game is made so worthless by all the fan voting. Because the players who are more well liked (usually due to what team they're on) are the ones who become all stars, not the ones who deserve it per their performance on the year. Vote Longoria. If you vote a player in just because he plays for your team than you are just as bad as all those people who voted for the Boston/Yankee players like crazy. The all star game should be a matter of performance, not popularity. Now some could make an argument that Dye is more deserving than Longoria, if you really feel that way than vote for him. But considering that Evan started the year after Dye, and has played GG caliber defense, you gotta put him in there over JD. i want you dead. /green. sort of.

QUOTE (chisoxdavid @ Jul 7, 2008 -> 07:35 PM) Hopefully the Red Sox fans come in and help, I doubt that they want Longoria in there. have we talked to them?

just dropped 100. we really gotta make this thing happen.

love the uribe one. effing hilarious

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 08:46 AM) A town decides to not spend the town's money on a play that the town's citizens may find offensive. People outside the town, demand that the play be staged "for the good of those citizens". That is civility and manners. Too bad manners and civility are no longer in fashion. This play would be great staged somewhere other than in a public park. So now public parks must be R-rated? When people cannot differentiate between a good time and a place for something and a poor time and place for something, the rest of the world should just go along with it? I'm done. It's obvious why this place becomes such a hell hole at times. you sound like a completely different tex than i'm used to. No, we're not saying things in public parks MUST be R-rated. are you nuts? we're saying that after the go-ahead was given to do the show, it should have been done. to cancel it a week before it opens because of ONE GODDAMNED sentence is just absurd. what are the odds that someone is walking by to get "offended" during that one split second of the show? AND if its in a park, and the patrons who are there to see the show are paying, then i'll bet you certain measures are taken ANYWAY to keep pedestrians away so they can't see the show 'for free' ya know? regardless, like someone else said, to pull the plug on a show after a month+ of rehearsal and all that energy spent putting it together is just unacceptable. i don't know what you do for a living tex, but imagine working for a month or two, every single day of the week, and then at the end, not getting paid for it. wouldn't that piss you off a tad? because actor's contracts at this level are usually a per performance pay. no performances = no pay. yeah. it's a b****. and ya know what, when the hell will we stop coddling kids. "oh no, they'll hear the n-word!" big freaking deal, they'll hear it, like i said, walking down the streets of chicago. and a) they don't know what it means and B ) what better time to talk to them about it. oh yeah, i forgot, parenting really isn't as big these days. it's the musical's fault. instead of parenting lets just keep our kid's in a little plastic bubble. yeah, that'll help.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 04:37 PM) I do not believe that every park district that puts on a play needs to follow that same mission statement of enlightening, offending, creating change, etc. I believe there is room for non controversial, family entertainment, and that is what a park district should be involved in. GP rated events that the entire family can enjoy. Believe it or not, there are volumes of plays by Simon, Williams, Shepard, O'Neil, Miller, etc that could be staged. But I've come to accept that around here the consensus is that insulting, offending, is always preferred to something less controversial. that are family friendly?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 11:58 AM) Well, I think there is a key difference between federal funding and local funding. I don't want to see any federal dollars spent on art programs either - its not their place. But if some local park district serves a community that wants it, they should be able to go ahead. why the f*** not!? where the hell else are the arts supposed to get their money from? private donors? yeah that works only so well. we get it from grants and such which are mostly funded by the government.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 11:24 AM) Shall we also condemn every theater group in the country that has not produced this musical? I believe publicly funded projects like this should stick to entertainment not social education. I think it is reasonable for a family to be able to walk through the park without a government funded musical singing racial insults. whoa i think you're way off base this time. as an actor, the POINT of theatre is not just to entertain but to provoke discussion, create change, enlighten, etc. The point of theatre, just like any art, is to SAY something. Fluff musicals do serve a purpose, and that's what Broadway's mostly become these days, but why should governmentally funded projects be limited to this fluff? I'd argue it should be the other way around. The gov't should fund theatre that is educational and teaches us something or at least opens our minds up to looking at something in a different way.