Serial Bannings at BCB and Chicago SB Nation
by TurkWendellsToothpaste on Jun 8, 2010 12:47 PM PDT
Email
PrintI am interested in any other people who have been banned without explanation from Al Yellon sites. A while ago, I was banned from Bleed Cubbie Blue for reasons unknown (no profanity, or other apparent TOS violation). Today, I responded to an article on the new SB Nation Chicago and while the post was admittedly a bit sarcastic, I was just questioning how Al Yellon could be so angry at the Blackhawks for not meeting Bobby Hull's (unprecedented) demands, yet be willing to forgive the Cubs for getting rid of both very popular players at the end of their careers (Ron Santo, Billy Williams, Mark Grace, Greg Maddux, Andre Dawson, Bill Buckner, Sammy Sosa, Kerry Wood) and players in their primes (Kenny Holtzman, Fergie Jenkins and Greg Maddux).
I noticed another commenter suggested Chris Chelios was a Sox fan and not a Cubs fan and linked to something that had a Chelios quote professing to being a Cubs fan.
At any rate, I find this very frustrating. How can a "columnist" or "editor" or "blogger" have this thin a skin?
73 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I would post a picture of the comment I left that got me banned....
Except I was banned before leaving a single comment. Perhaps they are reading my vulgar thoughts?
I simply wanted to show that Chelios is a south side guy
And has admitted to being a Sox fan first while not totally hating the Cubs. Banned.
Yellon's an unironic fascist...
He eliminates the most benign comments rather engage in honest discourse. And then he typically goes a step further by banning said “offender”. The only thing more prodigious than all of the comments he’s left on the cutting room floor are the thousands of comments he’ll obsessively reply to at BCB on a daily basis splitting hairs with the shut-ins whom he has so benevonlently allowed to stick around.
What a sad human being.
Egregious
I did the two most egregious things out of all of us to get banned from BCB. I called Al a “simp” and then later I made fun of those photos he likes to run taken by Dave Somebody that are always shot from about 900 feet from the subject of the photo.
And as all of you know, since that time, if he thought any of you read Desipio or have ever heard of Desipio or might some day think of hearing about it, you got banned immediately and without reason.
Because Al is such a thin skinned dope, this new site has no chance of ever developing a readership. I feel bad for the buys at Blogabull and Second City Hockey because he won’t be comfortable with their posters. Especially the hockey guys.
You can see it already. Second City Hockey has plenty of great, new, content and the hockey page at the Chicago SB Nation site features Al and George Castle. What? Pat Benkowski wasn’t available?
by Desipio on Jun 8, 2010 1:07 PM PDT reply actions 5 recs
Thumbs Up
I’m recommending this post on the “Pat Benkowski” reference alone.
If this was BCB, we’d be told to say when we rec a post.
by LetsMakeADeal on Jun 8, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions
SB Nation should be careful
Bleed Cubbie Blue is very popular. What Yellon does well is update the site daily. Few bloggers have time to, and Yellon does focus on some minutiae that daily newspapers don’t. However, he provides little inside access you can’t get anywhere else.
However, if SB Nation is looking to grow and SB Nation Chicago is going to be directed by Yellon, I would suggest that setting a pallet full of $100 bills on fire would be a better use of cash than this. If he is going to ask readers to engage, and then reflexively ban anyone who disagrees with him or points out an error, the site will have no readers.
by TurkWendellsToothpaste on Jun 8, 2010 1:09 PM PDT reply actions
Or to simplify
the site will have no readers. Unless his plan to lure new members is to relate all things back to the Cubs, which 75% of the city hates. A lot of that percentage is made up of Cub fans.
by Andrew Cieslak on Jun 8, 2010 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Not only that
but they are competing against the Chicago National Organization for Women for local sports fans looking for blog content. What exactly gives SB Nation credibility? George Castle? Al Yellon chasing readers away?
by TurkWendellsToothpaste on Jun 8, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
We don't want nobody that nobody sent
Disagrees with him? The petty tyrant appears to be using a Ouija board.
Some truly offensive stuff...
http://i.imgur.com/YUS98.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Rg3Wg.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/LEZqk.jpg
Can you blame Al from not wanting to allow readers to have to see such depraved stuff?
I love
the nickname of CHELI. HE KNOWS WHO HE IS
by LetsMakeADeal on Jun 8, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Great - so he had actually replied to my post
then researched that I also came from Desipio and banned me. Nice work, Don. Capeche?
by Andrew Cieslak on Jun 8, 2010 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
For the record...
… and to further illustrate the fragility of the Managing Editor’s ego, here are the links used to illustrate TurkWendellsToothpaste’s point in the deleted comment from 1:57 PM CDT (seen here http://i.imgur.com/YUS98.jpg ):
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/holtzke01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jenkife01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/madlobi01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mondari01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santoro01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/willibi01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bucknbi01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/dawsoan01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/maddugr01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/woodke02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gracema01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/maddugr01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/derosma01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sosasa01.shtml
By any estimation this was a thoughtful comment that was responding directly to a key point in Al’s post.
And Al initially even initially responded to it, if curtly.
Then, mere minutes later, he changed his tune, banning the commenter and deleting the comment without so much as offering a reason.
I appreciate your concerns about this
The beauty of our network is that we’ve always allowed our individual bloggers to run their communities as we see fit. Al was chosen to run SB Nation Chicago because he’s got a fantastic record of building great community by having the biggest Chicago Cubs community on the Web and being extremely dedicated to his craft. He’s also a very good writer.
We’re not corporate overlords who mandate how our editors run their community. We give them best practice documents but we also allow them to be who they are, that’s why you have a community like Bleed Cubbie Blue and Second City Hockey run by very different personalities.
I’m confident that Al will be able to create a fantastic Chicago regional site.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jun 8, 2010 1:39 PM PDT reply actions
So you just hire crazed overlords, then?
What’s the justification for banning someone before they’ve ever posted?
by Maitreya on Jun 8, 2010 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly
I don’t see this at all. I suppose association is justification. I clicked on a link from a site he doesn’t like, so I am therefore banned? I run a blog of my own. I’m an avid reader of many SB Nation blogs, I’ve never seen a site run like this. I don’t approve of this practice of running me out of town before I’ve even arrived.
Tyler
How can a blog that takes comments not allow for contrary opinions to be posted, especially when they are don’t in a non-vulgar or personal way?
How does that build a community?
Hey, nobody said how "regional" it would be
Less than three feet off the ground, perhaps.
I'm confident
that it will be a fantastic site, too. Full of buttkissing, mediocre SCRAPPY player love. Then there will be bannings of people he doesn’t like. To act that he has a community that “encourages” discussion and then bans people who don’t have the same opinions as him is laughable. I know BCB is a popular site, and it is in the best interests of SBNation to defend it and its author. However, the MO of Al Yellon has been nothing but a dictatorship.
And to say he’s a good writer is laughable. He is not. His blatant disregard for normal sentence structure even offends this downstate hick. He makes claims that are unsubstantiated (“Lou Piniella would never do something innovative like have a 6-man rotation”… This said just a month after he took the team’s best starter over the last 5 or so years and put him in the bullpen). I’m sorry, but Al Yellon is not a good writer. He is a buttkisser. He will do anything he can to make himself look good to the organization.
by LetsMakeADeal on Jun 8, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait...
Is SBNation Chicago an Al site, or is it a community of all the writers?
I am forbidden to comment on other SBNation Chicago articles, Al’s or not. Doesn’t seem right.
Al is "managing editor"
And he will not be trifled with.
I appreciate you're not a corporate overlord
But for your good and for Yellon’s, you need to urge him to relax a little bit and allow for some disagreement, even sarcastic disagreement. I read his page, and I felt the need to respond. It was not ad hominem, but it did expose a big hole in his reasoning, in my opinion. He responded with his opinion, and then I was banned.
I do think it’s ludicrous that he’d be so hurt by Dollar Bill letting Bobby Hull play in a rival league for an unprecedented sum of money, but he would remain a season-ticket holder for a franchise that chased so many beloved and good players away, either denying them the chance to retire as a Cub, or losing out on some great years. What about the Greg Maddux or Fergie Jenkins affairs did Al Yellon find forgiveable?
by TurkWendellsToothpaste on Jun 8, 2010 1:44 PM PDT reply actions
To everyone who posted here, my response.
Obviously, many of you have been banned at BCB for past bad behavior. I may have pulled the trigger too fast on some of you because of that, and perhaps I overreacted.
I don’t want any of you to think that SBN Chicago is about me, because it’s not. It’s going to be a site about all Chicago sports — and yes, I am a fan of more than just the Cubs, and know about other sports, though not as in depth as I know about baseball.
While you may disagree with the choices I’ve made regarding the writers I’ve brought on board, I’m going to be opening up the site later on to others, including the Blog a Bull guys and the Second City Hockey guys.
Tell you what. Let’s all make peace here, shall we? I am going to remove all the bans from earlier today. We are all Chicago sports fans and all want the same thing. I won’t delete comments on this site as long as they remain clean and do not devolve into personal attacks, whether direct or oblique.
Fair enough? I’m removing the bans after I post this comment.
Go Hawks!
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
This is fair enough
But I would like to know why my other SN (Irish Yeti) wasn’t allowed to comment even before I typed something. You say you don’t want attacks, but if we don’t even say a word then how are we banned? By association? Because you see what website I came from? That, sir, is pretty petty. I’m going to guess that many of your readers read HJE or Desipio or any of the other blogs you hate.
by LetsMakeADeal on Jun 8, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Like I said.
My reaction was due to what had happened in the past at BCB. I’m willing to start fresh here. Are you?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
How about restoring deleted comments?
You know… for sake of showing that this ‘welcoming all opinions’ isn’t all talk?
Willing
I’m willing to call out anyone who says things in contrary to either/or past statements or logic.
So long as such is done sans vulgarity, it’s fair game in the wild west that is the internet. I’ve been called out many times on my site. I’d suggest if you can’t deal with that, you are in the wrong line of work.
On my site I’ve only ever deleted spam and comments from a specific Sox fan who was there only to cause trouble.
I've been called out plenty of times...
… and had plenty of reasonable discussions and disagreements.
With you, it hasn’t seemed possible. I’m happy to try, though.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Couched
“Seemed possible.”
Seemed to you.
Has it ever occurred to you that your sense of what is Direct or Oblique or Snark is overly sensitive?
Maybe, but...
… I’m entitled to that sense, just as you are.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Direct or Oblique
So, a soft nudge about your predilection for witnessing history over loyalty would be an oblique attack worthy of banning?
People call out the stupid things I’ve said in the past and held them against me. Such is the life of an internet blogger. Where is the line?
I can have reasonable discussions about things you disagree with.
In the past, you haven’t been reasonable; further, you keep bringing up what you call a “predilection for witnessing history over loyalty” because five years ago, ONCE, I said it might have been worth seeing a no-hitter when the Cubs were one-hit after being down 7-0 in the second inning?
Do you think maybe that was a one-time thing, or a fulltime mantra?
For the record, I’m glad the Cubs now hold the record for most games without being no-hit. If they do have a no-hitter or perfect game thrown against them this year — seems to be going around — yes, I’ll cheer, the same as MOST fans of a team that has that happen against them do for the pitcher who accomplishes that feat.
That doesn’t mean I value history over loyalty; it simply means I appreciate an historic accomplishment.
Now, if you can respond to that without snark, you and I can have a discussion.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Heh!
“If they do have a no-hitter or perfect game thrown against them this year — seems to be going around — yes, I’ll cheer”
So, the answer is yes: History over fandom stated today, not five years ago. You are now open to be called out on that.
Right?
Snark
So, just checking, it’s now Direct or Oblique or Snark.
Man, this list is going to get longer and longer….
I'm actually laughing, really.
I don’t know why this is so hard to understand: yes, if a no-hitter happens vs. the Cubs, I’ll cheer for that pitcher. One time. Virtually every baseball fan — except, apparently, you — does this.
That should not call into question my loyalty to the Cubs. If you believe that, I respectfully disagree with you.
Fair enough?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
The question
I’ve never questioned your loyalty. Just your order of preference.
If you cheer for an opponent to beat the Cubs, EVER, your preference is clear.
There’s nothing wrong with this view. But it does state clearly what your first love is.
You really think I root for a no-hitter every day?
You’d be wrong about that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Strawman
You just restated my opinion in a way that I didn’t say to make an easily refutable point.
When have I ever said that’s what you rooted for every day?
But, if next week, the Cubs are down 1-0 in the ninth getting no hit, you’ve said what you would be happy with.
Unequivocally.
Today.
And you should be held to this view. And every other thing you’ve said.
Like keeping Michael Barrett and trading Carlos Zambrano in 2007.
That calls into question your ability to scout the team and see who are good and bad players.
And that effects your credibility as a writer.
And that’s fair to comment back on.
I kind of figured you'd mention "strawman" eventually.
How often have the Cubs been in that situation in the last 30 years? I can recall one — in Philly in 2005. And Barrett, IIRC, broke it up.
You can disagree with my analysis of players. Fair enough. Obviously, I was wrong about the Barrett vs. Z thing (IIRC, I called for one or both to be traded).
What you often do is take these isolated statements and make them seem as if they are carved in stone. Like I’d never change my mind about anything. Which is 100% wrong.
Criticize me? Sure. Just don’t make it personal.
And again, I want the Cubs to win. Every day. Baseball teams don’t, you know. The best teams lose about 35% of their games. If one of those losses is a no-hitter — well then, I’d enjoy seeing a piece of baseball history. That’s all.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Strawman
I kind of figured you’d use one eventually.
We disagree that...
you stating that I think you cheer for no hitters every day is a straw man?
To be fair...
People call out the stupid things I’ve said in the past and held them against me.
It would be all but impossible to read what you write without doing that, Chuck.
Bookmarked
I won’t delete comments on this site as long as they remain clean and do not devolve into personal attacks, whether direct or oblique.
I’ll be prepared to quote you on this as soon as you return to prior form.
Or, maybe I'll keep up my end of the bargain if you keep up yours.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I'm not sure what that even means.
You have a noted history of straight-up banning people from your site before they’ve even posted a single word (in direct contradiction to your own “community guidelines” no less) out of mere suspicion that they’re some form of no good nogoodniks.
Here you promise to not delete any comments from (one supposes from context) SBN Chicago “as long as they remain clean and do not devolve into personal attacks.”
Readers’ side of the deal: keep comments clean and personal-attack-free or they will be deleted. This seems reasonable.
Your end of the bargain, as I understand it: you vow to keep your finger off the delete button unless someone breaks clearly stated rules.
With this last comment, though, you seem to suggest that you reserve the right to revert to capricious ban-hammer form where you totally flaunt your own rules if… you somehow feel like doing so?
Huh?
That doesn’t make any sense.
I’ll stick to my end of the bargain, if everyone else follows a few simple rules. If you all do that, I’ll keep my finger off the delete and ban buttons.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
It's simple...
All anyone wants is a vow that you will not ban readers or delete comments capriciously and with total disregard for your own rules.
You seem to have promised this much while nonetheless suggesting that this promise is not absolute but conditional.
If people fail to follow the rules, they may be banned or see their comments deleted. In accordance with said rules.
But that doesn’t give you license to renege on this promise and start banning at the drop of a hat again.
Clear?
I think I made this promise above.
But I will make it again: follow the rules and you won’t be arbitrarily banned, nor have comments deleted.
Fair enough?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Not really, no.
Is this an admission to “arbitrary” banning? I think not. There are Rules.
What I’d really like to hear is a full and honest explanation of how one decides to ban someone preemptively. That might be “fair enough,” if done well.
The problem is...
…that your previous interpretation the “rules” has consistently been “It is against the rules to hurt Al’s feelings, run a competing Cubs blog, read a competing Cubs blog, share a link to another Cubs blog, disagree with Al, or expose Al’s lack of knowledge of the game in any way.”
Time will tell if you’ve changed, but color me skeptical.
Fair enough
I’m willing to start fresh. You do have to pardon my sarcasm. It’s what following these teams has done to me.
Cheers.
by TurkWendellsToothpaste on Jun 8, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm going to go one step further here.
… if any of you who were earlier banned are still reading this post.
If any or all of you wants to meet for drinks sometime, I’m up for it. Would like to talk to you all in person and make peace.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Kelly Dwyer
could get a lesson in sincerity
by LetsMakeADeal on Jun 8, 2010 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Bah...
Dwyer knows sincerity.
What he really needs help with is his grammar.
Peace...
I think brokering a peace between Al and some of these people is a good idea. I would just caution on it happening at a bar. We all know how rowdy and obnoxious drinking can make some people. Might I suggest a Chuck E. Cheese or maybe even a Cheesecake Factory meeting?
Good to see...
…that plagiarism is still acceptable on BCB.
http://hirejimessian.com/2010/06/09/the-secret-to-success/
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2010/6/10/1512357/we-need-brenley-to-manage-the-cubs
WHAT A STRANGE COINCIDENCE!
Well...
You know, I thought it was funny that those posts were so similar! I even commented on it on BCB. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence… that’s all.
Did you guys ever go get drinks or eat at Cheesecake Factory?
Arbitrary Ban
I joined BCB last yesterday and I got banned before I even posted a comment. Can someone explain why?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Y! Sports Blogs from Yahoo! Sports
- NHL arena news: Seattle moving forward; gaze upon beauty of Oilers’ proposed barn
- Rafael Nadal has a losing record against just one active player
- ACC commissioner regarding Florida State and the Big 12: ‘I don’t deal in hypotheticals’
- Create-a-Caption: ‘OK, sooooooooo, what’s all this?’
- Mountain West-Missouri Valley Challenge won’t showcase top teams
