Revisionism II -- no one gets away clean

Old Oct 5, 01, 1:22 pm
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: YVR
Posts: 9,999
Revisionism II -- no one gets away clean

With regard to the WWF-like battle going on in AC's Reputation and elsewhere, here's my take...

Four people (you know who they are) entered into a complex arrangement to help each other out, that in the end went awry, through no fault of the parties involved. This was exacerbated by some confusion and mis-direction of some lounge passes. And in an all too common ironic twist of fate, in the end the only person who got burned was the only person who didn't stand to benefit in the first place. (Proof that no good deed goes unpunished.)

So Andrew W, you got what you bargained for, albeit later than planned, due to the aforementioned take. You came out slightly ahead.

Shareholder, you got nothing, but in reality lost nothing that you would have had otherwise - a wash if you will.

Empress, well, you got screwed. But that's not the fault of anyone participating in the arrangement. It was due to yet another unwritten rule that sprung up at the last minute.

FlyBoy, you're a moron. Not because you continually bash AC (as I often do) but because even though you were the big winner you apparently don't have the courtesy to say thank you, and at least acknowledge the bad luck that befell Empress. A simple "I owe you one," or other similar minor gesture would not only have put this entire episode to bed, but would have been entirely appropriate. To suggest that it's not your fault and has nothing to do with you, while technically true, is the height of bad taste, worse than anything AC might have ever done. It's just plain undignified.

Everyone else, pack it in. This continual inference and vague allusion that FlyBoy or anyone else has done something illegal, immoral, or fattening is gossip mongering of the worst kind. It's character assassination -- guilt by inference. If you have a case, make it! Make it here, or make it to AC. But no more innuendo. It's just plain dishonest, and it stops right here, right now.

(BTW, I'm not interested in hearing further arguments or discussion -- I've heard it all before, and I've read all the posts. I'm a bright boy {or at least I play one on TV} and I understand exactly what went down. No need to explain it to me yet again. It's over.)
Ken hAAmer is offline  
Old Oct 6, 01, 6:08 pm
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, Canada (YVR), AC
Posts: 756

Lurking in the shadows gleaming the words of wisdom from those who traverse this "space" in Cyberland (& periodically interjecting my $0.02 worth of input) I enjoy the more-often-than-not friendly exchanges of "wisdom" (aka friendly bantering/opinions). Without a doubt, though, the recent blatant public bashing amongst a few FT'ers here has soured the professionalism we have become accustomed to, so much so that I have been shaking my head wondering why a moderator has not nipped it in the butt sooner.

Your words, as always, politically & poetically, hit the nail on the head! Thank you. You are hereby nominated as Honourary Moderator of the AC Forum. :-)
Dogstar is offline  
Old Oct 8, 01, 11:48 pm
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Vancouver, BC, Air Miles GOLD Collector
Posts: 56

Have you submitted your CV to the Globe & Mail for a more permanent byline?

matintin is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread