Re: Cadwell
Probably his sources. He won't get heat for revealing the truth, but may get heat for having to reveal his sources. A source may not reveal future information if the source knows that he will reveal the source. This is why newspapers and television reporters do not reveal their sources, because once the source knows that he will be exposed, the source will not provide any more information in the future.
On this site though, you have to reveal your source or you can not post about student athletes.
[/quote]
NorCal: I think if Blue had answered my questions, it would tell us something. Blue has been dangling the Cadwell rumor for weeks. One of the following was likely: 1) his sources told him not to tell and he agreed to embargo the information; or 2) his sources didn't give a rip whether he revealed the information and in that case, it was a little bit of 'I know something you don't know'.
Now, there were other possible answers to the questions, too, but those seemed to be most likely.
If the first of what I think are the two likely responses would be Blue's response -- you seem to think that would be his response -- then why would he give up his sources and risk taking such heat? Hmmm.... Certainly it's not out of some sense of altruism for the good of the Jacks. That takes us back to the second reason: I know something you don't know.
Blue writes for the Collegian and I doubt he wants the reputation of being a journalist who cannot be trusted with information because, as you point out, sources are unlikely to trust him in the future. So, I have a hard time believing he was giving up his sources and was really worrieD about taking heat. A little melodramatic, if you ask me (a not-too-subtle attempt to put some blame on the moderators).
On this message board, the rumor/attribution rule is limited to rumors of student athletes leaving. Blue and others have enjoyed pimping the moderators about what I think is a reasonable rule set up by filbert.
Blue's revelation -- the way it was presented -- may be nothing more than just another sideways shot at the original rule. So, I suggest the following: some on this board have taken time to talk about one rule which most seem to understand and support (I get private messages saying that). Let's quit talking, directly or indirectly, about the rule...play by the rules...and enjoy talking about the Jacks. Example: Jacks up 4-2 against the U of MN Gophers in baseball and I'm going to turn the radio back on.
GO JACKS!
[/quote]
Nope not worried about my sources as much as getting harassed by the involved athletes on facebook or in emails. Which has happened a time or two.
Originally posted by JackJD
On this site though, you have to reveal your source or you can not post about student athletes.
[/quote]
NorCal: I think if Blue had answered my questions, it would tell us something. Blue has been dangling the Cadwell rumor for weeks. One of the following was likely: 1) his sources told him not to tell and he agreed to embargo the information; or 2) his sources didn't give a rip whether he revealed the information and in that case, it was a little bit of 'I know something you don't know'.
Now, there were other possible answers to the questions, too, but those seemed to be most likely.
If the first of what I think are the two likely responses would be Blue's response -- you seem to think that would be his response -- then why would he give up his sources and risk taking such heat? Hmmm.... Certainly it's not out of some sense of altruism for the good of the Jacks. That takes us back to the second reason: I know something you don't know.
Blue writes for the Collegian and I doubt he wants the reputation of being a journalist who cannot be trusted with information because, as you point out, sources are unlikely to trust him in the future. So, I have a hard time believing he was giving up his sources and was really worrieD about taking heat. A little melodramatic, if you ask me (a not-too-subtle attempt to put some blame on the moderators).
On this message board, the rumor/attribution rule is limited to rumors of student athletes leaving. Blue and others have enjoyed pimping the moderators about what I think is a reasonable rule set up by filbert.
Blue's revelation -- the way it was presented -- may be nothing more than just another sideways shot at the original rule. So, I suggest the following: some on this board have taken time to talk about one rule which most seem to understand and support (I get private messages saying that). Let's quit talking, directly or indirectly, about the rule...play by the rules...and enjoy talking about the Jacks. Example: Jacks up 4-2 against the U of MN Gophers in baseball and I'm going to turn the radio back on.
GO JACKS!
[/quote]
Nope not worried about my sources as much as getting harassed by the involved athletes on facebook or in emails. Which has happened a time or two.
Comment