FlaSoxxJim

Eye and Nuke: I'm not going to flame you over your positions on this, I understand some of where they come from, and I respect you and your right to honestly arrive at your opinions. Eye, I recall the Reagan bit, and I recall you and others being incensed when, basically the minute the body was in the ground, he started in on what he really thouht of the man. In my view he played along with the BS Week of American Mourninng like we all did, and then got brutally honest on his opinions. Just as you both are now. Perhaps not tactful, certainly combative and abraisive... But that's not something unoque to cw around here. As far as being condescending (Nuke's words) or the 'passive-aggressive uncle' (Eye's sentiments), I disagree with those assessments but respect them for the personal opinions they are. cw had a release valve, and when a conversation got too heated or became an impasse, he woud try to end it amicably - the "you're a great poster and I consider you a friend.." sentiments Eye noted. Maye that's the right approach, and maybe not. But the fact is that we're all helping to evolve this nascent online dialog thing, and sometimes we get it wrong. You should know that cw was regularly the one who fought NOT to ban abraisive, disagreable posters that others disliked and wanted gone. Being a jerk was nott a ban-able offense in hiis estimation as long as the suspect poster was not resorting to venomous personal attacks. Not being one of the cool, in-crowd posters, and disagreeing with members of the same was not a man-able offense in cw's estimation, which is why you need Admins like that. I respect Jason's wishes not to air particulars in public, and I appreciate that some of his stance is in deference to cw. But, the 'abuse of Admin powers' rationale for dismissal seems more a last straw than the entire picture. Doing the right thing is not always the easy thing. cw as an Admin pushed the rest of the Admins to do the right things rather than the easy things, and he pissed people off as a result. We are now left to decide whether his termination is conjfluence or coincidence.

I'm going to unpin this, but still keep it unlocked. Jason took some time to explain his position, and his decision that I understand he did not enter into lightly. I don't agree with the final decision, but that is irrelevant.

I unlocked it. Should cw want to show up and respond, I don't think he would have been able to... I just reinstalled AIM on a machine here and will talk to Jason that way, as he suggested.

Fair enough. And I do have a personal concern. cwsox is the first to welcome new members, the first to start birthday threads, and the first to jump into the fray when someone is being personally attacked on here. This place is more diverse, more cerebral, a little more combatitive at times but what the hey, and generally better off with him rather than without.

I'm sure I will. For the moment, I assumed if I had questions about the politics of the site then others did as well. Rather than all of us bombarding him, you, and other Admins with PMs (once they start working again) and emails asking the same questions, I figured the matter can be addressed once, publicly, and we'll all know what the deal is.

If it has been cleared up, then please fill me in. So far, all I get is that the move had been pondered for some time, other Admins said go for it, there is a second-hand suggestion that cw abused his position somehow, and now a "good admin for the site" is out because...?

Jas, it's obvious you don't want to hash it all out, and I won't take you to task on it. But between your statement that despite being a good admin, "it was time for a change," and danman's suggestion that you had implied an abuse of power was what prompted tthe change, your explanation is somewhat lacking. Tex is right, it's your dime and your call. But when several Admins have a pow wow and it results in pushing out someone who is a good friend to the site and, by your own admonition, was "a good admin for the site," -- well, THAT is where I start to wonder about an abuse of power.

I agree, and cw did as well, which is why it became - as best it could - water under the bridge. Again, until I'm told otherwise, I assume event A (scapegoating cw for defamation due to others) and event B (his MIA status as an Admin) are unrelated to one another.

Yes. To have been banned as the result of outrageous and unsubstantiated claims made by known immature assholes, then to be unbanned with a 'gee, sorry,' that takes away none of the pain of having to defend yourself against false accusations... The SoxTalk community was fortunate that cw came back to contribute to the site as a poster and an Admin. Moreover, he was a big enough person to tell everybody to let it go and move on, which most everybody did.

Kap, I didn't suggest cw was banned or told not to post any more. I'm sorry if I implied that. I only asked why he's no longer an Admin. If it was not his choice (in which case 'ouster' certainly is an appropriate term), I was just looking for an explanation. I do know that I would not ever feeel 'at home' coming back to post if I had been stripped of Admin duties and I didn't agree with the reasons given. IMO, the site was lucky cw came back a year ago when a handrul of jerks acused and slandered him and had a good portion the board egging them on in the process. My working assumption is that the current situation DOESN'T have anything to do with 'Black Friday' (or whatever it was labeled). I'll wait and see if that is the case.

I'm not sure I do know fully what you are talking about. But, yeah, I think Vince had a sense of impending ouster for reasons to become clear I hope when Jas chimes in. You are certainly not the only one that would be very disappointed when we find he is gone. I only hope I am not very disappointed by the explanation given for his departure.

Maybe it was lost in the accidental purge... If so, please repost. Thanks.

Looking at the SoxTalk Moderating Team roster, I see that cwsox is no longer on the list. What is that about??

The more things change the more they stay the same. “Why, just fifty years ago, they thought a disease like your daughter's was caused by demonic possession or witchcraft… ...But nowadays we know that Isabelle is suffering from an imbalance of bodily humors, perhaps caused by a toad or a small dwarf living in her stomach.” -- Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber

In the meantime, here in Jeb's Florida we are being given a 0.08-cent a gallon state tax break on gasoline for the entire month of August. I paid less than $1.80 a gallon today... It will cost the state - a chronically cash-strapped state - $60 MILLION in lost revenue for the month. But if it saves the average idiot Florida voter 5-10 dollars over the course of the month it will be well worth the sacrifice as long as they remember to thank Jeb by voting for his Big Bro in November.

Yes, I think it had been earlier established that he had been confused with "Monster Zero" (aka Ghidra) from Toho Studios Godzilla fame... It's an honest mistake...

"Don't have the time for it..." Well, then, maybe you'll soon find you have time enough... BURNING IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!! There, condemning another was my moving religious experience of the week. Puttin' the "fun" back into Fundamentalist Christian hate-mongering.

Happy Happy Minny Minny

Blade 2 is the only thing I know I've seen that Guillermo Del Toro directed. I survived that, so I know I could survive Hellboy and I'm sure I will rent it one of these weekends. I was actually fairly excited when I saw they were making the film. I think Mike Mignola (Hellboy creator) writes pretty deep for the medium, and I know he at least consulted on the screenplay.

Without a doubt, the Pixar blunder - along with the rogue movement headed by Roy Disney - cost him the Chairmanship, and may get him completely booted. But Eisner's failings in the last decade are many, and the F 9/11 move is just the latest one. Florida Theme Park Ops is just a small part of Disney/ABC/ESPN/GO Network, and I do think that the negative here is equally real in magnitude - in terms of alienating the Weinsteins and possibly prompting them to leave Miramax, in terms of letting the Bushes politicize the company's decision to kill the film, and in terms of Eisner generally demonstrating that he has become myopic and reactionary rather than groundbreaking or visionary. I also think the danger that Jeb would have actually pulled some of the Disney incentives had they released the film is very overstated. Disney is obviously a huge employer in the state and any hits Disney took would result in more layoffs and pay cuts which would not help the state. Anything that caused the parks or resorts to raise prices would also hit the tourism economy. Eisner was the key reason Jeff Katzenberg bailed on the Studio, and therefore the key reason their big animation hits have been Pixar's projects and not the traditional projects from the Burbank and Orkando studios. Eisner was the one who decided to pull the plug on the Orlando animation studio (and smaller outfits in Paris and Tokyo), even though that studio has had much more recent success with its projects (Mulan, Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear). The move was because the Company was unhappy with the progress on the unfinished "A Few Good Ghosts," but meanwhile signs off on features that completely miss the core animation audience like Atlantis and Treasure Planet. Blech.

Nosirree. He was booted as Chairman in March but is still CEO. Not releasing F 9/11 was all Eisner, because he was worried about the wrath of Governer Jeb and losing some of the sweet deals Disney has in Florida if he backed a movie that ripped Brother George.

Happy Happy J4L!

Yep, that will definately keep the shareholders from calling for Eisner's head for passing on the $100+ million box office receipts of Fahrenheit 9/11...

What was your Mom doing in Clinton's limo?