Squirrel

You had already made this post: 'I'm starting to think the OP had his Eggos stolen by Nelson Cruz.Wax off, are you Logan Morrison?' Which was humorously chiding the OP. And it stands. Then you followed it up with the video clip. Providing no content of your own. Is that all you were going to do? It was enough. And you were PM'd about it. You received no warning point, but were told to, at the very least, provide some kind of context rather than just tell the OP 'That was horrible a idea.' It was suggested that you elaborate your response rather than just respond with chides to a new poster. As for celebrity death pools, those have been in existence for years, all over the internet. Most of the posts in that thread address death respectfully and nostalgically. If you find it offensive, don't participate. Same with all the threads and articles on here, you don't like, you think ridiculous, stupid, horrible, whatever ... why make a post at all then? If you can't at least rebut the idea, as eye-rolling as you think it is, move on. If you noticed, everyone in that thread responding thinks it's a poor idea, yet managed to get their points across, sometimes even humorously, and yet still provide some kind of rationale for it.

Could be a lot of things ... he probably had some unknown congenital condition. This is just very sad.

This is how I see it. Someone mentioned earlier Mauer signaling from 2nd base ... totally legit for players to see things with their eyes and relay the information. But when it is orchestrated to the level the Astros did this, with technology? No, wrong. And I hope they are slapped hard, not lightly, so discourage other teams from doing this, too. And maybe they can find a better way to hide or camouflage the signage between catcher and pitcher. I'm sure teams will look into ways to do this.

Oh my gosh ... that's really terrible!!! How awful.

Just so everyone knows ... there are lots of 2020 blueprints to read and comment on in the blogs area of TD. Take a gander ... http://twinsdaily.com/blogs/

Warning points and how they work are covered in the comments policy. And no, you will not be banned for posting something that is pro-Twins. You will, however, be given a warning point for being disrespectful, or complaining about things in a baseball discussion thread, which is off topic and thread jacking. And I’m sorry, but I cannot continue this right now. I’m visiting my 90-yr-old Mom in Florida and we’re heading out for the afternoon.

What you received from me and nick were PM’s. A notification is different. And as I said, I don’t know why you didn’t receive one, as it should be automatic with the site whenever a warning is issued. I can’t respond to what might be amiss technically with the site at this time, because I have to look into it with Brock.

The site sends the poster a notification when a poster receives a warning, which you did for the several posts that were removed from that thread. It shows up in your notifications box, not your PM’s. And if you click on that notification, it should take you to the explanation. If you didn’t receive a notification, I will have to check with Brock why, because you should have. It should be automatic. But if you want to see Brian’s explanation, click on the warning points under your avatar, then click on the explanations. And I will talk to Brock about why you didn’t see it. All the moderators receive a notification when anyone gets a warning, so I saw it as Brian issued it, prior to his statement to you in Patrick’s thread. So he didn’t lie about it. Warning points and their explanations don’t come via PM. Brian PM’d you later, yes, after you said you didn’t receive any communication from him. Again, I don’t know why you didn’t see the notification, but he didn’t lie about it. As to your other issues, which I’ll sum up as site content complaints, that’s beyond my scope and responsibilities here. That would need to come from an owner. But I will say in general, if you don’t like a topic of discussion, don’t read it. There is so much content here that spans the gamut, I would think you could find some threads that appeal to you. This site is not designed to be pro or anti Twins ... it’s designed to generate discussion on people’s opinions. Some do know a lot more than others, and some, like me, just like to keep up with the current goings on. Some will be critical, some overly, and some the complete opposite ... and all of that provokes thought and discussion, that’s how sites like this work, that’s how we exist ... disagreement of ideas and thoughts. I have nothing else but that.

Do you have your notifications set so that when you receive a warning, you are notified? Because you were given a warning for about half a dozen posts that were disrespectful to the author of the article as well as other posters, and with that warning came the explanation that Brian gave you. He did not lie. And if you don’t like the site, why bother with it? Calling another poster unrealistic in the manner you did, offering no content of your own to rebut the post is antagonistic and disrespectful, but that was just one of I think 4 or 5 posts that were removed from that thread. On top of this, you were sent PM’s by both nicksaviking and myself previously about being disrespectful toward contributing writings and other posters. But, I will give you this much credit ... you did right by logging your complaints here. If you can’t find the warning point with the explanation in your notifications (it’s the icon to the right of the envelope in the black bar at the top of the site.) If you are on your phone, click the black and gray grid, notifications are smack dead center. Click on that bell, it should bring up the warning your just received with Brian’s explanation. If you still can’t see it, PM one of the moderators directly for Brian’s explanation.

Lol

Congrats, Rocco!

I wish there were a way to stop the bleed, but I guess it’s praise to the Twins FO for having so many of their personnel coveted by others.

The new AP poll has them at No. 7!

Because that’s what the topic is about. And it was a manipulation, justified or not. If there weren’t a service time issue, he would have been up. But the two players’ situations were not the same.

Here you go, Van ... three recipes for Brussel sprouts ... https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/11/06/brussels-sprouts-thanksgiving-recipes?utm_term=nprnews&utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR01FnyE1P8ctoeoQHbMots_y27ZL6sIyKPbd91yvcrFOKWjhmjrixf79Uk

I agree that the players and the situations are not comparable, but is only in that there was service time manipulation. That's really the crux of the topic ... service time. In Bryant's case it was blatant, as someone said. There was nothing wrong with his play and it was obvious exactly what the Cubs were doing. Bryant was ready, he wasn't plagued by injury or poor play, he was ready, and his play that season proved it. The Cubs made some excuse of not being ready to send him down and called him up the minute they got that extra year control. While it might be to the letter of the law of the contract, it certainly wasn't in the spirit of it. I'm not sure Bryant will win his case because of that, but I think he has a case and has a grievance. Why make up excuses then? If by contract they can do what they did, then just say so? Why manufacture an excuse? And Bryant has turned down offers of extensions with the Cubs. I wouldn't be surprised if that blatant 'misuse' of the contract is a factor in that. As for Buxton's service time, again, it's not the same situation. I think that was the sole reason for his not being called up ... because they wanted that year back. I think there is justification for doing so and don't think Buxton has a case for a grievance in the same way Bryant did. I think Buxton's case is as you said, why that exists in the contract. I don't particularly care for it, but I get it and understand. But my question for GM's, is if you can do this rightfully, by the terms of the contract, then why not just say that's what you are doing? In Bryant's case it was obvious. By not just saying 'because we want the time of control, and the contract says we can take it', then why not just say it? Players who are affected by it will get upset, yes, but then that becomes an issue for the next negotiation, where it is clarified that the purpose for such a rule is for cases like Buxton's, but not for cases like Bryant's.

You were there???? Wow, how fun!

Where will they be ranked next week?

I just posted on FB, for the benefit of my PennState friends, ‘WE ARE ... SKI-U-MAH!!!!!!’

Now this. Ugh.

Geeez ... I can’t stand it! Heh.

I know people who never came back after that one. And I think baseball is in a more precarious position this time around. As someone who has been through a work stoppage after failing to come to an agreement ... no one wins, ever. And what you lose does long-term damage. In my situation, those who were in charge are about to lose their jobs.

I rarely follow football, pro or college, and even I'm excited about this game!

https://chicago.eater.com/2019/10/23/20928605/cards-against-humanity-chicago-board-game-cafe-restaurant-logan-square-bucktown-chicago-escape-room

They've opened (or will be opening) a restaurant in Chicago. It will be a board game restaurant ... they will have tons of selections, so, you choose a board game and play while dining.