Lock out notice to the STH?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

I do not think the owners even addressed the Wade Redden loophole, but I could be wrong.

Early proposals had such contracts continuing to count against the players' share even when demoted as well as some other changes. They may have also had them continue to count against the cap, though I'd bet not. Not sure if the later proposals addressed that.

[browna]

Exact same terms as last time, and fair.

I also believe the Flames committed to freezing ticket prices for the next season and I believe the one after that as well...after the entire season was lost.

Anyone still complaining about the fact that the email didn't come out for 32 hours after the lockout, or only the 3%, or wanting to have their cake and eat it too by getting all $ back right away, but keeping seniority, have clearly a bone to pick with management/ownership that has little to do with this particular situation.

[Matty81]

Just reading this thread from the start and have to say that it feels like lately every thread on the board that's not a pre/postgame or a transaction reiteration turns into a dogpile of #######s telling the OP why they're such an idiot for even suggesting this. Sometimes the threads aren't ones you would have started yourself but still kinda sad and pathetic to even bother taking the time to just dump on someone else with no gain for yourself - disagreeing is fine but the board would be better off without these kinds of posts, flaming the thread if you don't like it just is going to keep it around longer anyway.

[taxbuster]

Actually, the only thing that pissed me off about the Flames communique was the continual use of the term "work stoppage" instead of "lockout".

To me a "work stoppage" involves a union walking out.....not the writers of the email taking their marbles and going home.

It's "cute", just not reality.

[RM14]

I am on the payment plan, where final payment will be due in February, If the NHL announces that they haveing a shortened season, I would hope that the Calgary flames would just adjust my balance due. Eliminating the need for the final two or three payments.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Actually, the only thing that pissed me off about the Flames communique was the continual use of the term "work stoppage" instead of "lockout".

Well at least they're not working to rule. [insert joke about the lackluster effort of the last few seasons here]

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by RM14

I am on the payment plan, where final payment will be due in February, If the NHL announces that they haveing a shortened season, I would hope that the Calgary flames would just adjust my balance due. Eliminating the need for the final two or three payments.

I am pretty sure that in 04-05, they stopped taking payments from us long before the season was officially cancelled.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Well at least they're not working to rule. [insert joke about the lackluster effort of the last few seasons here]

At least the Flames can't finish 9th again if the entire season is lost.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Actually, the only thing that pissed me off about the Flames communique was the continual use of the term "work stoppage" instead of "lockout".

To me a "work stoppage" involves a union walking out.....not the writers of the email taking their marbles and going home.

It's "cute", just not reality.

Has work stopped? Yes. Thus a "work stoppage"

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Has work stopped? Yes. Thus a "work stoppage"

Um, no, usually when we use the english language we use the dictionary definitions of words

work stoppage. A cessation of work by a group of employees as a means of protest.

The exact opposite has happened in the NHL. What the Flames said is patently false, unless all these smart owners have as much of a grasp on the english language as their "neanderthal" players.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I am pretty sure that in 04-05, they stopped taking payments from us long before the season was officially cancelled.

Yeah, I seem to recall that payments were suspended once we started missing games. Then when the season was offically axed, we were given the option of leaving 10% of our cash in to hold our tickets and seniority or take it all out and lose our tickets.

I don't like the idea of still paying for tickets in November or December if a single game has yet to be played.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

Um, no, usually when we use the english language we use the dictionary definitions of words

The exact opposite has happened in the NHL. What the Flames said is patently false, unless all these smart owners have as much of a grasp on the english language as their "neanderthal" players.

Words evolve. The fact that dictionary.com describes it as "a collective stoppage of work by employees" is simply a reflection that most of the time work stoppages are triggered by employees.

If you are incapable of comprehending that the phrase can be applied in reverse, that is your problem.

[morgin]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Words evolve. The fact that dictionary.com describes it as "a collective stoppage of work by employees" is simply a reflection that most of the time work stoppages are triggered by employees.

If you are incapable of comprehending that the phrase can be applied in reverse, that is your problem.

Well, to be fair, it's not so much "dictionary.com" as "the provincial/federal courts and regulatory bodies of Canada"

Work stoppage has a precise meaning in common law that does not mean owner initiated lockout.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Words evolve. The fact that dictionary.com describes it as "a collective stoppage of work by employees" is simply a reflection that most of the time work stoppages are triggered by employees.

If you are incapable of comprehending that the phrase can be applied in reverse, that is your problem.

No, words generally do not evolve to mean the exact opposite of what they currently mean. This is not 1984, War is not peace, slavery does not equal freedom, and ignorance is not strength. Nor is a lockout a work stoppage. If you are incapable of comprehending the english language, that is your problem.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

No, words generally do not evolve to mean the exact opposite of what they currently mean. This is not 1984, War is not peace, slavery does not equal freedom, and ignorance is not strength. Nor is a lockout a work stoppage. If you are incapable of comprehending the english language, that is your problem.

I enjoy discussing issues with intelligent people who have things to add to conversations, whether I agree with them or not. And you often add to the proceedings.

Unfortunately, you are also abrasive, excessive, insulting, and annoying. You exagerate to the extreme in an attempt to make points. And you stoop to personal attacks, in what I can only assume is a vain and pathetic attempt to make you feel better about yourself.

But whatever floats your boat I guess.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

No, words generally do not evolve to mean the exact opposite of what they currently mean. This is not 1984, War is not peace, slavery does not equal freedom, and ignorance is not strength. Nor is a lockout a work stoppage. If you are incapable of comprehending the english language, that is your problem.

Oh yeah?
Then how come "flammable" and "inflammable" mean the same thing?
Who's got the problem now, smart guy?

[MissTeeks]

Didn't the league in 2004/2005 always refer to it as a "work stoppage" and not a "lockout"?

The Jets and the Oilers also called it a "work stoppage" on their websites:

http://jets.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=83105

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=641589

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Oh yeah?
Then how come "flammable" and "inflammable" mean the same thing?
Who's got the problem now, smart guy?

Did either of those words ever have the exact opposite meaning of what they have today smart guy? I will stand corrected if there ever was a time when inflammable meant an object that could not be burnt or was incapable of being burnt.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Didn't the league in 2004/2005 always refer to it as a "work stoppage" and not a "lockout"?

The Jets and the Oilers also called it a "work stoppage" on their websites:

http://jets.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=83105

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=641589

That is the problem though, they are not using the word correctly. It would be like if the players referred to the 94 strike as a lockout.

[Resolute 14]

There is, as always, a formal definition and a colloquial usage. Enoch Root clearly, and obviously, used the phrase colloquially, which anyone with an IQ over 50 would understand.