Randy Johnson vs. a seagull has to be under consideration imo. He pretty much vaporized that bird.
4 Likes
or Dave Winfield
I suggest you read the thread.
“If I hadn’t’a nailed down that Norwegian Blue, he’d go up to those bars, muscle 'em apart, and FOOM!”
1 Like
Am I the only person who thinks that a RIH thread is weird? I think the “[Mr X] has died” threads are fine to fully discuss the person’s cons, along with their pros, but the idea of people being happy that other people died is unsettling.
1 Like
I know I created a RIH for at least one person on the old AO, but I can’t even remember who it was
eh, it’s better that way
https://stump.marypat.org/article/287/let-s-bring-back-damnatio-memoriae
I know Maddoff had one
1 Like
I’m sure that I’ll get one.
1 Like
I think there’d be very few instances where I was happy someone was dead. Relieved perhaps, but not happy.
how can we be the most murderous species in history if others dying didn’t even make us a little happy?
I was going to go with Johnny Cueto kicking the shit out of Jason LaRue.
That was indeed classic, but I guess I was thinking of injuries to players during the course of play.
I was curious whether the decision was made in ignorance or not. It seems it was.
It is certainly common knowledge and for anyone unfamiliar, simply Googling “Ray Fosse Pete Rose” will generate a ton of hits.
If I was unfamiliar with the incident and saw that, I’d probably think “huh, Pete Rose must have harmed Ray Fosse somehow” and then depending on my interest level, I may or may not have spent the 5 seconds to Google the two names plus however long to scan the results.
I don’t know that we need to require hand puppets on every post though. I think that’s where I have an issue.
It was related and common knowledge and IMO, appropriate.
But it sounds like y’all are saying that it would only be allowed in an “RIP Ray Fosse” thread, not the generic RIP thread.
So what is the guidance for the generic RIP thread then. No discussion of the person’s life?
more simply put, if you don’t know of the connection, you couldn’t even know who Ray Fosse was
1 Like
Yes, that’s a better way of putting it.
You’d be wrong.
Baseball-specific? Back in the day, I’d agree that it would be “common knowledge” . . . for the US. Not sure about outside and in today’s environment.
No; but I would suggest adding some additional context around a post and not just leave an unexplained epithet toward another person that may not be well know at the time of the post.
ITA. And if the thread was about baseball or Ray Fosse, I don’t think there would be any problems with making such a statement as the context for that post is far better defined.
Huh? Lucy said she didn’t know.
Common knowledge among anyone who’s heard of Ray Fosse.
Yes, i think that’s true. And that’s why it would have been fine in a thread devoted to Fosse. Because it’s fair to assume everyone posting there is familiar with him, or at least interested. And because it’s obvious that the “f Rose” comment is about the interaction between the two.
In contrast, the generic RIP thread attracts all sorts of people, including some who have no interest in either of those. And it’s a bit jarring if you are there to post about someone else and run into a random “fuck XYZ” post.
I think that’s exactly why the two feel different to me.
And i guess that’s also why I’m not a huge fan of the generic RIP thread, because that sort of thing is common, and discussions about different people can interweave in confusing or unsettling ways.
1 Like
Huh? I said i didn’t know but assumed it was exactly what it was. So my moderation was not “in ignorance”, but “despite the connection”.