Jump to content

Soxtalk and YASNY featured in Sports Illustrated


Buehrle>Wood
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 269
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 02:44 PM)
On this topic of Chicago Media members lifting material from Soxtalk, there's one person--perhaps the most well known in this city--whose raised my attention in the past.

 

When Mariotti was on ESPN 1000, I recall several instances it was almost eerie how similar his comments were to posts on Soxtalk. I don't believe I posted on the issue, but someone--believe it was SS2k5--said something one morning about the Sox which Mariotti repeated WORD for WORD. It wasn't "Sox are terrible," but an assessment I recall ssk25 mentioning which struck me as familar after Mariotti said it.

 

I hope this SI article doesn't change our website. And by change, I mean a WSI scenario where we're more concerned about appeasing the media than serving our own members. I doubt this would happen, but just want to throw it out there and hope it's shunned upon.  :usa

Its shunned upon. We are who we are and we continue to build and we'd like to think aim this site toward what the vast majority of the users want. We will always be free to members and popup free as well. That said we do hope to continue to grow and see our network continue to grow.

 

We hope our new sites can turn into the success that is Soxtalk.com. It couldn't have been done without all of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the best article in Sports Illustrated I have read in awhile, but they really should have done one about spreading rumors on MLBTradeRumors.com, not a site that actually is worthwhile like SoxTalk :P

 

 

Then again, press is press :D

Edited by Felix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 05:58 PM)
So, I guess, now we're "Soxtalk.com: As mentioned in Sports Illustrated and ESPN the Magazine".

 

I just don't know how Gage does it.

blind luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 05:58 PM)
So, I guess, now we're "Soxtalk.com: As mentioned in Sports Illustrated and ESPN the Magazine".

 

I just don't know how Gage does it.

no...like this

Soxtalk-As-mentioned-in-Sports-Illustrated-and-ESPN-the-Magazine.com

 

do it now :bang

Edited by TheBlackSox8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 07:12 PM)
Maybe I'm way off, but wouldn't every other source and place that mentioned these rumors be in the same boat as us?

They claim that SoxTalk started the rumors, so I think SoxTalk would be the only one held responsible.

 

Then again, Clemens and Damon (as public figures) won't have a case of libel against ST even if they tried to bring one up, so there really is nothing to worry about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 06:12 PM)
Maybe I'm way off, but wouldn't every other source and place that mentioned these rumors be in the same boat as us?

why do this article now though? is this good timing? shouldn't this have come out earlier, I haven't read it or anything, i'm just saying.....maybe this would be more relevant if it came out when it happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 23, 2006 -> 10:58 AM)
So, I guess, now we're "Soxtalk.com: As mentioned in Sports Illustrated and ESPN the Magazine".

And now we're going to take over the WORLD!!! :bang

 

Nothing like gettin more publicity for the site though. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 05:24 PM)
I wonder if spataro's seen it.  Says he logged in yesterday.

 

Seen on a NY fan forum -- "If you can't trust spataro51, then who can you trust in this crazy world?"  Lol

 

 

 

While this didn't pan out, he does have some solid sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 06:14 PM)
They claim that SoxTalk started the rumors, so I think SoxTalk would be the only one held responsible.

 

Then again, Clemens and Damon (as public figures) won't have a case of libel against ST even if they tried to bring one up, so there really is nothing to worry about.

 

In all reality here is how I look at it.

 

Actually each poster is responsible for their own actions. The site is just a vehicle, and that vehicle is for sox fandom. Jason and Co do a good job of cleaning up stuff that is over the top, but how can you police rumors. Some people on the site do have some inside information and provide an insight to the whitesox that we as a normal fan cant provide. Some posters are even some of the minor league players themselves. I find it funny that reputiable journalists are so quick to nibble on any rumor that they would take a poster on a fan board seriously without spending lots of time on the site, knowing what type of poster this person is. I found it humorous at best when some guy claimed to be a relative of one of the owners of the whitesox posted some rumor, and then a few days later that same rumor appeared on mlbtraderumors.com. I thought that was some shotty journalistic work, but this rumor jumping to these levels without anyone in the journalistic community checking a source or the facts is funny. It goes to show you how much of the news we see is the truth, and how much of it is made up bulls*** on some blog site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 06:31 PM)
I'm obviously completely retarded.  But it didn't take this post for ya to figure this out.  :D

 

 

 

Jim just about busted his pants when he read that... :lolhitting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 23, 2006 -> 12:32 AM)
While this didn't pan out, he does have some solid sources.

Wasn't meant to be a knock, just a funny quote. (I literally loled. I am, yes, easily amused.)

 

Though, to be honest, I can't say I'll trust his "sources" the next time. But that's just me, I'm not calling for his head or anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 06:38 PM)
Wasn't meant to be a knock, just a funny quote.  (I literally loled.  I am, yes, easily amused.)

 

Though, to be honest, I can't say I'll trust his "sources" the next time.  But that's just me, I'm not calling for his head or anything.

 

 

 

No, I totally understand. Trust me.. I've been in his shoes. :rolly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 22, 2006 -> 07:33 PM)
In all reality here is how I look at it.

 

Actually each poster is responsible for their own actions.  The site is just a vehicle, and that vehicle is for sox fandom.  Jason and Co do a good job of cleaning up stuff that is over the top, but how can you police rumors.  Some people on the site do have some inside information and provide an insight to the whitesox that we as a normal fan cant provide.  Some posters are even some of the minor league players themselves.  I find it funny that reputiable journalists are so quick to nibble on any rumor that they would take a poster on a fan board seriously without spending lots of time on the site, knowing what type of poster this person is.  I found it humorous at best when some guy claimed to be a relative of one of the owners of the whitesox posted some rumor, and then a few  days later that same rumor appeared on mlbtraderumors.com.  I thought that was some shotty journalistic work, but this rumor jumping to these levels without anyone in the journalistic community checking a source or the facts is funny.  It goes to show you how much of the news we see is the truth, and how much of it is made up bulls*** on some blog site.

I agree with that, and yea, I think its pretty sad that Soxtalk gets mentioned for starting some rumor, while MLBTradeRumors.com has been doing that all the while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...