Quote:
Originally Posted by strombad
I don't believe anyone should show their names, because as I said, it only helps the management. It quite literally has zero benefit to the NHLPA.
|
I heavily disagree with this. While it has its flaws there's also benefits. I went from voting out Street Pharmacist to trusting him the most based on his obvious cryptic Joe Thornton posts. As the first player to really offer up his name I feel the players can trust him.
I went from suspicious of Blaster86 for his terrible "election post" to trusting him and Flameswin because of their revelation.
Iginla and Ovechkin were obvious players going to be picked in this, at the very least (unless someone comes out claiming to be one or the other) I think it's obvious Hockeyguy15 and dsavillian are telling the truth about who they are.
On the other hand I was very suspicious of anyone voting out Undercoverbrother simply because of his name. However, instead of posting who he was when octothorp asked us to reveal he disappeared and started pming someone. That to me raised a bit of a red flag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strombad
You're the one inviting management to lie. If you don't think at least a couple management have said they're players already, you're out to lunch. If you want to take a look at who might be lying, take a look at players that didn't have a notable role in the lockout or don't have a major role in the NHLPA negotiating committee. Someone like... Jaromir Jagr?
|
Having management lie isn't a bad thing. It's what we need to do so we can catch them in a lie and out them. It has its risks but if we don't force discussion with things like this it simply allows them to hide and we're left playing at random.
As for your point about Jagr. That's pretty much the point. If someone came out and revealed themselves as Michael Stone from Phoenix I would be pretty suspicious of him given how prominent most of the other players are. Does Jagr really fit that role though? As the active player with the most points by a long shot he could easily have made the cut when listing 20 players, but it does lead to some discussion.
We can guess as to who a couple left over players are and it would make sense why people would be hesitant of posting them but since the ball got rolling only a few posters haven't revealed who they are. There's a good chance that at least one management is among them. So going for a poster who didn't reveal himself, at least on the first day, seems to be better odds than going after someone who can at least name their player.
I'm all for going after an inactive poster who didn't reveal themselves.