Canucks Management "NO-SHOW's" at STH/Memebers only meeting.

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, Curmudgeon said:

Come on, Alfie. If Francesco stays away, then he's a jerk for not caring enough to face the paying customers, but if he does show up, then he's a jerk for being a meddling owner. On Melmac, it seems that both things can be true, no? 

Aquilini at a STH meeting is like me surrounded by hungry cats.

 

[JayDangles]

9 hours ago, DS4quality said:

By why point out their girls? We had just as many terrible seasons with guys as gm and assistant gm's. There's literally no reason to bring up their gender. It doesn't matter if it's publicity or not. I get you don't like inclusion, but was Benning and the boys better? No one once called out the fact they were all men. Now that there's girls you you like to point out their gender?

Asked and answered on page 5 &6

[JayDangles]

4 hours ago, Zerofaith said:

Saw them at ikea 

Culturalist!

 

Hey humans we got a culturalist over here!

 

Get him! Or her! Or they or them or it or that.

[EddieVedder]

On 1/11/2023 at 2:15 AM, RU SERIOUS said:

Apparently this past weekend (According to what was stated on the Donnie & Dhali show) the annual STH's/Members only meeting was held at Rogers, where the STH's get to meet and ask questions of the Canucks management.   Well believe it or not, neither Rutherford, Alvin or any of the Chipmunk Girls bothered showing up and dis-appeared out of sight leaving Stan Smyl on the Hot-Seat to answer angry fans questions.     In the over 20+ years I was a STH, I never saw such a thing happen - ever - and is a slap in the face of the remaining STH's and to many displays cowardice and disrespect towards the paying customers and leaves many wondering why and what they are truly hiding from by staying out of the public eye.   

Slap in the face to Smyl more than anything 

[awalk]

11 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

There are good fans.  Maybe its just bad ones that are too loud?

 

Here are some snippets from front page yesterdays PGT;

 

 

 

At least this last one has some satire?

 

I'm not sure what a "good" or "bad" fan is. 

It's all just varying degrees of being disappointed these days and being able to cope with it.

[awalk]

12 hours ago, You Mad Bro? said:

Did you just assume my gender!?

....yes...

I'll see myself to the cage of shame...

[VforVasili]

1. CDC poster calls out other poster for using language that is blatantly sexist.

 

2. Other posters jump in with endless over the top statements about cancel culture, wokeness and society going down the tubes and conspiracy theories about diversity hires (the fact that we hired immensely qualified women to fill 2 positions is somehow a tsunami of wokeness). 

 

3. Everyone asks the poster who brought it up why they are so worked up, offended and melodramatic.

 

LOL

[JayDangles]

9 minutes ago, awalk said:

....yes...

I'll see myself to the cage of shame...

No no! You can't see yourself anywhere, it's not your choice.

 

You must wait until you are put in your place by someone who is more righteous than thee.

 

[awalk]

Just now, JayDangles said:

No no! You can't see yourself anywhere, it's not your choice.

 

You must wait until you are put in your place by someone who is more righteous than thee.

 

STABBING MY EYES OUT WITH THE PEN OF SHAME 

[JayDangles]

1 minute ago, awalk said:

STABBING MY EYES OUT WITH THE PEN OF SHAME 

Well now you're just making it all about you and playing the victim.

[DrJockitch]

15 hours ago, JayDangles said:

I'm not an arbiter of equality, I was merely stating that I don't view myself as sexist, and am a firm believer that women as a sex are capable of many of the same achievements as men. I want it on the record so to speak.

 

Now, because we are two men (I'm assuming, and no, it's not because your a Dr. Lol) arguing about whether a comment regarding girls/women is sexist, I reached out and had my wife read the post. I intentionally didn't prepare her ahead of time that there may or may not be a sexist comment. I wanted to see her reaction.

She did not acknowledge the word girls in any way. Her take away was that management is gutless and failed the fans in that scenario.

When I asked her to go back and look at what was written and whether she viewed it as sexist her answer was a flat no. She felt it is not written in a way to intentionally imply that the fact they are women and referred to as girls means that's why they are being called out. She saw it was calling out all of management as a whole because Allvin is included.

However she explained that there could be those who would look at that and see it as sexist, but they would have to add an additional narrative to support that view. Some people don't even realize they are creating the narrative, others do it intentionally. 

Her view is that those who intentionally add a narrative to a comment in order to draw out negativity are as much a problem in today's society, as the people who go around making actual terrible comments.

 Then there are those who are just easily offended and take things personal even when it has nothing to do with them. 

Anyways, we can agree to disagree, but at the end of the day I don't think either of us feel adding the word girls was done because the OP is sexist. So if you don't believe the intent was from a place of evil, then what are you trying to gain by trying to push the comment in that direction? 

 

And that my friend is the root of cancel culture. When people decide they personally don't like it even though it has nothing to do with them and therefore the world must also know and be as outraged as them.

 

As an edit, I'll add something interesting. My wife is high up in her professional career. During the discussion of sexism in the work force, she said of all the times she has experienced sexism in the workplace, it was 90% from other women. Obviously not the case for all, but still interesting.

So you have now gone from the arbiter of equality to using the “I have black friends” argument and then finished the trifecta with “sexism is really a woman problem”.

Wish I had the golf clap emoji here. 
‘My comment was a response to someone praising this joke, not to the original comment. Would have not said anything and ignored the thread otherwise. I just commented I felt differently than they did.  You are the one who took it on to arbitrarily decide and explain in great length what I should think is sexist.  

As you can see from the response to my original comment that there is a mixed opinion on whether that comment was sexist though it is mostly tilted toward the fairly clear interpretation that was a sexist comment meant as a joke or not.  Now a number of people will never want to adapt how they use language and certainly don’t think of themselves as sexist or racist while continuing to use language that is perpetuating the problem.   I also bet that the majority here that think there is no sexist intent lean a certain direction. 
Call me woke or whatever name you want.  Not trying to cancel anyone just voicing my opinion about clearly sexist name calling that added nothing to the conversation. 

[JayDangles]

1 minute ago, DrJockitch said:

So you have now gone from the arbiter of equality to using the “I have black friends” argument and then finished the trifecta with “sexism is really a woman problem”.

Wish I had the golf clap emoji here. 
‘My comment was a response to someone praising this joke, not to the original comment. Would have not said anything and ignored the thread otherwise. I just commented I felt differently than they did.  You are the one who took it on to arbitrarily decide and explain in great length what I should think is sexist.  

As you can see from the response to my original comment that there is a mixed opinion on whether that comment was sexist though it is mostly tilted toward the fairly clear interpretation that was a sexist comment meant as a joke or not.  Now a number of people will never want to adapt how they use language and certainly don’t think of themselves as sexist or racist while continuing to use language that is perpetuating the problem.   I also bet that the majority here that think there is no sexist intent lean a certain direction. 
Call me woke or whatever name you want.  Not trying to cancel anyone just voicing my opinion about clearly sexist name calling that added nothing to the conversation. 

Wow.... Your first paragraph clearly clearly solidified my point about you adding your own narrative to things in order to spin it in your mind. 

 

Didn't say either of the comments you put in quotations. Not even close.

 

I'll leave you with a real quote and won't reply again.

 

"It is a very dangerous thing to confuse speaking your mind with speaking the truth."

 

Have a nice day. It's almost Friday!

 

[Gnarcore]

On 1/11/2023 at 4:15 AM, ShawnAntoski said:

"Well believe it or not, neither Rutherford, Alvin or any of the Chipmunk Girls"

 

Well said and lol.  Also, where is Francesco cause it should be him facing the STH's.  Says a lot about Francesco 

I have hoped to run into him up here. Have before...and I would let loose this time 

[DrJockitch]

8 minutes ago, Gnarcore said:

I have hoped to run into him up here. Have before...and I would let loose this time 

Don’t bother, it just generates the typical responses. 

[SerenityNow]

16 hours ago, AriGold said:

Yeah I don't think this event was a real event, I didn't hear anything about it.

 

Honestly, I make too much money off it for my business and it's a full write off. I'd like to make a stand but can't...

I'm going to say there was no meeting, I've talked to some other people who are full STH and nobody has heard a thing.

I have since heard from another STH that it was actually an "open practice" that some STH selected as a benefit with their ticket package, and I guess this post-practice meeting was thrown in?  It's all a bit hazy.  Just like most things with this organization these days.

[Gurn]

2 hours ago, VforVasili said:

1. CDC poster calls out other poster for using language that is blatantly sexist.

 

2. Other posters jump in with endless over the top statements about cancel culture, wokeness and society going down the tubes and conspiracy theories about diversity hires (the fact that we hired immensely qualified women to fill 2 positions is somehow a tsunami of wokeness). 

 

3. Everyone asks the poster who brought it up why they are so worked up, offended and melodramatic.

 

LOL

And hours later we get someone trying to re stoke the fire, out of the embers that where still glowing.

[Ballisticsports.]

9 hours ago, lmm said:

well, lets see, Huberdeau was traded and so was Matt TKchuck

Miller was just entering the last year of a really good contract

 

Basically if you are not a good poker player, you probably won't be a good GM

GMs have to make decisions about the future

they can't wait til the player has peaked to trade for or away

 

a decision needed to be made, Mik or Boeser.

Allvin chose "BOTH"

a decision needed to be made, trade Miller or sign, or wait til the deadline

Allvin chose sign

was that the correct decision?

Time will tell, but not looking so good right now

I was surprised when they signed both Mik and Kuz, but then thought at the time BB was to start the season with EP and build his value up and trade him (and then move those 2 up in the line-up)

BB got hurt and I think ruined that plan, but then Kuz excelled playing with EP before they could move BB (which backfired on that plan)

We still may see BB (and Miller) moved just, not for the returns that his injury of showcasing him at the start caused

 

This is my concern of holding out too long for the trade deadline, if indeed the plan is to move out players and they get injured beforehand or teams scoop up other players and limit your trade options

[Sanj]

12 hours ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said:

 

I disagree, and don't believe I'm missing the point at all. I believe your comment "I'm missing the point" on the subject is exactly what I'm staying. 

 

Just as much as people are saying it's making excuses that they are not doing their job, I think the comment is making excuses to be unsupportive.

 

Someone can say they are supporting while showing negative behaviour, analogous to someone being abusive by belittling another to somehow get them to improve. Or more extreme, beat someone up to make them tougher.

 

Sadly, I'm not even surprised anymore when some describe "support" as just showing up, if not less.

 

Support, like trust, is a two-way street.  We can only show so much support as fans without getting the on-ice support of what the team is producing. Ultimately, that support fades away when the team displays a lack of effort or commitment to the game and similarly the support from management that acknowledges what is happening.  I am not saying its all the players, but it is clearly evident that there is something happening so no matter how much support we show them, at some point the team needs to step it up and say, we need to also do it for the fans who are ultimately paying a part of their salary.

Nonetheless I will end our debate here, because we can agree to disagree.  You seem to take the extreme path in all of your replies to make a point: "beat someone up to make them tougher".  

[Zerofaith]

3 hours ago, JayDangles said:

Culturalist!

 

Hey humans we got a culturalist over here!

 

Get him! Or her! Or they or them or it or that.

[Drive-By Body Pierce]

50 minutes ago, Sanj said:

Support, like trust, is a two-way street.  We can only show so much support as fans without getting the on-ice support of what the team is producing. Ultimately, that support fades away when the team displays a lack of effort or commitment to the game and similarly the support from management that acknowledges what is happening.  I am not saying its all the players, but it is clearly evident that there is something happening so no matter how much support we show them, at some point the team needs to step it up and say, we need to also do it for the fans who are ultimately paying a part of their salary.

Nonetheless I will end our debate here, because we can agree to disagree.  You seem to take the extreme path in all of your replies to make a point: "beat someone up to make them tougher".  

Interesting take when the sentence literally right before is to a lesser level, and I describe your quoted sentence as extreme, but ok. Likewise.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Drive-By Body Pierce