• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Fateless last won the day on May 12 2019

Fateless had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,415 Gaming the system

About Fateless

  • Rank
    Best Shot
  • Birthday 07/11/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Campbell River, British Columbia
  • Interests
    Lawyer, Otaku, Gamer.

Recent Profile Visitors

8,595 profile views
  1. The NHL website writers never cease to amaze me at their anti-Canucks bias. Last week I was shocked to see they had listed Markstrom as only the 13th best goalie in the post-season. But now they have put out an article about the top 16 centers in the post-season and Petey didn't even make the list. What kind of mockery of the sport is this?

    1. Show previous comments  4 more
    2. Phil_314


      The fact that they only mentioned his pending UFA status in Marky's description compared to guys like Bishop leading their teams on playoff runs YEARS ago shows how much depth/ substance (or lack thereof) their posts contain.  Hard to even get mad anymore. 

    3. Phil_314


      For the center list, Connor/ Sid/ Mackinnon (top 3 centers in the league without question) Bergeron (elite two-way play speaks for itself)/ Draisaitl (Art Ross winner)/ Malkin (championship pedigree)/ Matthews (Leafs love speaks for itself)/ O'Reilly (can see him getting favored due to last year's championship) are without question above Petey and that's nothing against him.  

      He should belong readily among the likes of Stamkos, Schiefele, Tavares, Barkov, Zibanejad, Toews, Backstrom and Couturier though.  For what it's worth he ranked #18 in the official list behind Aho, and was as high as #11. 

    4. -AJ-


      I strongly disagreed with their Markstrom rankings, but I could see a better argument for Petey outside of the top 16. There are a lot of really good centres in the NHL.

  2. The colour scheme on the skate jerseys are gorgeous. The logo it self is atrocious. I think the Orca is actually the best "logo" we've had, although I do like the stick in rink as well. The logo and colour scheme suit the West Coast well.
  3. The plans are 60 years old, but the tech is closer to 70 as they were in development in the 1950's. I'm not saying age is why they crashed, but you have to imagine that a more modern plane with updated safety features could have assisted or made a difference.
  4. This is a tough question. It would obviously hurt the Canucks, but I believe that having a star player, a relative leader on our team, who behaves and acts like that could do irreparable harm to the team and hockey in general. Imagine all the young kids who look up to Petey as a star who would then believe those types of comments/actions were acceptable. So my answer would be yes, I would want him gone. Or at least significantly reprimanded with a sizable suspension and mandatory counselling (I have no idea if this is enforceable in the CBA).
  5. My bad, I must have misread the age thing somehow. Either way, I would hope that someone would be provided an opportunity to explain negative conduct from over a decade ago, seek forgiveness, and prove they've changed. Obviously we've already seen examples of this working and not working, often in the political fields. Cheers!
  6. I'm sure there are things we've all said that we regret later in life. I used to game heavily as a teenager and I had some pretty bad rage fits. I'm pretty sure I said some horrible things. However, there's a few differences between what you're asking and what has occurred here. We're not talking about things said years ago for Leipsic. This is fresh. This is who Leipsic currently is. So we're not judging him for stupid comments/beliefs from when he was 15 like in your example. Had Leipsic said these types of things as 15 year old and immediately come out, apologized, discussed how he's changed, etc., then I would hope people could find it in their hearts to forgive and provide a second chance. That isn't the case here. With regard to the alcohol question you've posed, I guess it depends on context. How much alcohol was consumed, on what occassion, and is it a regular occurrence? I do not have this issue because I do not drink. I don't judge others for drinking (to each their own), but I also don't believe drinking is a valid excuse or cover for inappropriate behaviour. If you're allowing yourself to get drunk and engage in reprehensible behaviour, then I do believe that you can be validly criticized/judged for allowing yourself to be put in that position where you lost control. The fact is that society has evolved, along with technology. It is naive to believe that what you say in text, email, messenger, etc. will never been seen by anyone else. I live my life as if I will one day run in politics. I'm mindful of what I say, even in private, because I always ask myself "how would I feel if this conversation was seen by everyone." And I get that not everyone wants to live like that, but people need to stop thinking they're free of consequences when they say things where they believe it is private. If I started texting anti-LGBTQ+ comments to my buddy and then ran for Prime Minister, I would certainly expect that conversation to be used against me. And it should be. How can I be a Prime Minister for all if I have a vendetta against the LGBTQ+ community? The answer is that I shouldn't be. And my so-called "friend" who outed that conversation and ruined my bid for the Prime Minister's office should be praised for whistleblowing rather than being considered a "rat". Again, it comes down to natural consequences.
  7. Why should it not be used against you. It is direct evidence of your true character. I'd go so far as to call it the best evidence of Leipsic's character. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the story of the Ring of Gyges in Plato's "Republic", but it is effectively the Ring of Power from Lord of the Rings which can turn you invisible. The purpose of the tale in Plato's "Republic" is to pose the question about what someone would do if they had the ability to become truly invisible - would they allow their appetites enslave them (aka, become a thief, rapist, etc.) or would they remain rationally in control of themselves. It is an important question because what someone does in private, when they believe no one is watching, gives us the clearest picture of who they really are. So when we are confronted with evidence of someone's true self when they believed they were "private" or "safe", why would we turn a blind eye and not judge that person? The truth is that Leipsic is a misogynistic degenerate. That is plain as day. As a 28 year old lawyer, I don't buy into this whole "he's 25 and still growing" excuse. That is a cop out designed to continually propagate the "boys will be boys" argument. Just because there may be some further development to be had does not give him a "get out of jail free card" as a 25 year old. Sure he may change his ways over time, but anyone can do that regardless of their age. The fact is that Leipsic is who he is right now - and he deserves to be judged for that. Why would an employer want someone that is an HR risk and who could stain their reputation? Its called natural consequences. I'm working on natural consequences with my three year old right now. It seems like some people were never taught about them.
  8. I'm honestly a little disgusted in how many people on these boards are saying that what they said in their private message group was perfectly acceptable because it was in private. There's a difference between legality and morality. Just because what they said was not legally punishable does not mean we should not hold people to a higher standard. People referencing that sports have become "soft" or "PC" because they no longer put up with reprehensible behaviour is a joke. Society is evolving and so are our social norms and expectations. Just because once up on a time these types of conversations were not only acceptable but expected does not mean that they should continue to be that way into the future. Do better. Be better.
  9. Where did I lump all athletes together? I simply said this is more common in sports culture, despite it being wrong and reprehensible. I did not say that all athletes act like Leipsic. I did not even say most do. Whether someone talks like this or acts like this, it is disgusting behaviour either way. You're okay with your friends consistently insulting women, degrading women, and talking as if women are just a tool for your pleasure? That's pretty f*cked up.
  10. I'd really appreciate if you didn't lump all men into your argument. "Most men" do not talk like Leipsic when there are no women around. I'd actually argue it is the opposite and that it is a minority of men that are disrespectful and reprehensible when they discuss women when they are not around. Unfortunately it is just very common in sports culture. The "locker room talk" as coined by Trump is a very real thing, but its sad that people on here are defending it and normalizing it. The more we say that it is not the "norm" and condemn the behaviour, the less culturally acceptable it becomes and the less and less prevalent it will become over time. Every time someone gives the "boys will be boys" speech, all it does is reinforce that the behaviour is both acceptable and normal. If you're surrounding yourselves with men who talk about women like Leipsic has been doing, then you need some new friends. And you're also complicit for not calling out their misogyny and disrespectful behaviours.
  11. For God's sake, maybe this will make him take it seriously now. Close the damn borders until its contained.
  12. While true, you cannot pretend like Demko would have put up the numbers that Marky has. They're just not statistically in the same ballpark this season. While I hope that Demko steals some games for us, pretending he'll be as good or better than Marky is a bit of a pipe dream. One that I hope comes true, but acknowledge it likely will not.
  13. Why would we be selling? We're in playoff position and 5 points out of the Western Conference lead. Selling would just set us back further and likely guarantee the 1st we gave up for Miller would be a lottery pick either this year or next year. People seem to forget that the price we paid for Miller goes down the better we perform this year or next year. Benning has clearly chosen to hedge his bets and make sure its this year. Benning has put together a solid team for us and once Boeser returns healthy, we'll have a fantastic forward group and goalie with some help needed on the back end.