Should the Flames fire Gulutzan?

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by jayswin

This is very poor form relative to the great discussion that's taken place on both sides of the argument. I've been extremely disappointed in the moderator comments in regards to the coaching debate in the last year.

Maybe it's because of Bingo's stance on the subject, I don't know, but you guys have been incredibly snarky and needlessly trollish and combative towards the segment of the board that hasn't approved of the job Glen Gulutzen has done.

You can infract me if you want but in addition to that I'd hope maybe you guys would also reflect on this a little, as well. It may not be your true intentions, so maybe you guys can tone these types of posts a little as it's very unbecoming.

This is the type of stuff (especially Jiri's comments earlier in the thread) that you guys as a team preached as a no go for this site in an effort to clean things up and encourage people to post in a positive manner.

*yawn*

You know these people are allowed to be posters AND moderators at the same time, right? That's one helluva holier than thou stance to take. So they aren't allowed to be as opinionated as some other posters that they also allow to post extreme opinions in an effort to keep this site open to all thoughts? That's bullcrap. They also do a tough job of walking the line between managing appropriateness yet letting people say what they want. And then you turn around and tell them that they aren't allowed to post what they want. Cool.

I think people need to stop worrying about who is a mod and who is not, and just focus on the content of the post.

Jesus H. Tapdancin' Christ. There are so many agendas for posters around here to prove they're right above all else. Stop worrying about whether or not you're right. Just post what you want to within the guidelines. Don't like what someone else said? Offer a constructive rebuttal, and stop worrying about posting habits or trends.

And back on topic. I wish to change my vote.

[nik-]

Really missed the point of that post huh?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by jayswin

This is the type of stuff (especially Jiri's comments earlier in the thread) that you guys as a team preached as a no go for this site in an effort to clean things up and encourage people to post in a positive manner.

Sincere question - what posts of mine in this thread do you object to? I know you didn't care for the one the other day when I suggested people were stretching to find fault with GG - but that was a different thread. In this thread - where do you view that I crossed a line? Or was that the post you are referring to?

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Duffalufagus

This thread is all kinds of lmao. There was never any chance, at any point between Oct ‘16 and now, that Tre even considered firing Gully.

Prior to this win streak, the Flames were 9 games under .500 in regulation under Gulutzan. Now, they're up to a slightly more mediocre 4 games under .500. A team that loses more than they win without the benefit of gimmicks that aren't used in the playoffs has to at least consider firing the coach.

The team is playing some great hockey under Gulutzan right now and I hope they keep it up, but I'd question our management if a coaching change wasn't at least considered in late December.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by nik-

The mod team in general has seemed to have turned into company men over the last 18 months. I mean, how dare a fanbase question the decision making of the vaunted Calgary Flames, they of continual organizational success.

A couple things
- The mod team doesn't have a collective opinion.
- My view on this type of thing goes back years. I think it is well established that I feel coach's get too much blame, probably dating back to Playfair's days.
- I've noticed a common reaction from you when someone has a different opinion than you is that you try to suggest some sort of bias on their part (e.g. that we are "company men"). It IS entirely possible that somehow simply has a different opinion and that it means nothing more, or nothing less than that.
- Nowhere have I suggested that fans can't question the organization. If you can point out where I have - please do so. Someone challenging your opinion doesn't equate to them saying you can't have it.

Frankly I find your post offensive and baseless.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

A couple things
- The mod team doesn't have a collective opinion.
- My view on this type of thing goes back years. I think it is well established that I feel coach's get too much blame, probably dating back to Playfair's days.
- I've noticed a common reaction from you when someone has a different opinion than you is that you try to suggest some sort of bias on their part (e.g. that we are "company men"). It IS entirely possible that somehow simply has a different opinion and that it means nothing more, or nothing less than that.
- Nowhere have I suggested that fans can't question the organization. If you can point out where I have - please do so. Someone challenging your opinion doesn't equate to them saying you can't have it.

Frankly I find your post offensive and baseless.

offensive? Come on.

There is one previous thread where I have stated someone has a bias when it comes to the Flames , so that's clearly the only place you've noticed this "common reaction". Common to one area of discussion.

There are plenty of people that I disagree with where I don't question their motives, the seemingly blanket defence of Flame organization decision making that some on the mod team seems to have developed is suspicious and yes I question the motives behind it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

*yawn*

You know these people are allowed to be posters AND moderators at the same time, right? That's one helluva holier than thou stance to take. So they aren't allowed to be as opinionated as some other posters that they also allow to post extreme opinions in an effort to keep this site open to all thoughts? That's bullcrap. They also do a tough job of walking the line between managing appropriateness yet letting people say what they want. And then you turn around and tell them that they aren't allowed to post what they want. Cool.

I think people need to stop worrying about who is a mod and who is not, and just focus on the content of the post.

Jesus H. Tapdancin' Christ. There are so many agendas for posters around here to prove they're right above all else. Stop worrying about whether or not you're right. Just post what you want to within the guidelines. Don't like what someone else said? Offer a constructive rebuttal, and stop worrying about posting habits or trends.

And back on topic. I wish to change my vote.

That's some top quality brown nosing.

[TheScorpion]

I'll say that in the past I've been a touch surprised by the tone taken by certain members of the moderation team regarding certain issues, both in this thread and elsewhere. I generally like the mod team -- they're all quality posters with good humour and rationality -- but I have noticed a couple instances of mods being rather aggressive in interacting with posters in almost a self-righteous way. I'm not saying that there's a systemic issue or anything inherently wrong with this current mod team. Again, it's pretty good. I just want to put this out there.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by nik-

offensive? Come on.

There is one previous thread where I have stated someone has a bias when it comes to the Flames , so that's clearly the only place you've noticed this "common reaction". Common to one area of discussion.

There are plenty of people that I disagree with where I don't question their motives, the seemingly blanket defence of Flame organization decision making that some on the mod team seems to have developed is suspicious and yes I question the motives behind it.

You make accusations like this, while wondering why offense was taken? You're questioning their integrity ffs.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by nik-

offensive? Come on.

There is one previous thread where I have stated someone has a bias when it comes to the Flames , so that's clearly the only place you've noticed this "common reaction". Common to one area of discussion.

There are plenty of people that I disagree with where I don't question their motives, the seemingly blanket defence of Flame organization decision making that some on the mod team seems to have developed is suspicious and yes I question the motives behind it.

What could those motives possibly be? That we are on their payroll somehow?

And yeah I find someone accusing me being a company man offensive.

There is no blanket defense of the Flames organization. There is just an effort to understand that most decisions have some rationality behind them. But do I love every move this organization has made? No I do not. If you want I can list some of them.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by the2bears

You make accusations like this, while wondering why offense was taken? You're questioning their integrity ffs.

ok, fair enough.

Originally Posted by Wild GM

What could those motives possibly be? That we are on their payroll somehow?

And yeah I find someone accusing me being a company man offensive.

There is no blanket defense of the Flames organization. There is just an effort to understand that most decisions have some rationality behind them. But do I love every move this organization has made? No I do not. If you want I can list some of them.

You have a member of your team calling this thread an embarrassment, a thread with 65% of voters agreeing with the need to fire him. Sorry, that's just not an effort to understand the rationality, that's shaming a pretty large segment of the people who took the time to vote by a member of the team who apparently is supposed to be here keeping discussion civil.

You guys can't have it both ways.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

What could those motives possibly be? That we are on their payroll somehow?

And yeah I find someone accusing me being a company man offensive.

There is no blanket defense of the Flames organization. There is just an effort to understand that most decisions have some rationality behind them. But do I love every move this organization has made? No I do not. If you want I can list some of them.

The fact that you're replying instead of just pounding your ban hammer like other sites is cool. They are raising concerns that are worth listening to. It must be difficult to be both a fan and a mod.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by 4X4

The fact that you're replying instead of just pounding your ban hammer like other sites is cool. They are raising concerns that are worth listening to. It must be difficult to be both a fan and a mod.

Generally when I posting as a mod I now use the moderator account.

Though sometimes if I'm on my phone or need to take quicker action I'll do something from my user account. But I'd prefer to have more distance between Jiri the mod and Jiri the poster.

As a poster I try (emphasis on try) to lead by example but we are also passionate fans and we get passionate in debates like others. So are we perfect? No.
I appreciate someone like Jayswin pointing out when he is concerned (which is why i asked for more details) even if I don't always agree with where he views the line and when it is crossed. I appreciate the fact he approaches it though out of a place of respect.

TLDR: yes being a fan and a mod is hard sometimes. But we signed up for it.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by nik-

ok, fair enough.



You have a member of your team calling this thread an embarrassment, a thread with 65% of voters agreeing with the need to fire him. Sorry, that's just not an effort to understand the rationality, that's shaming a pretty large segment of the people who took the time to vote by a member of the team who apparently is supposed to be here keeping discussion civil.

You guys can't have it both ways.

I'm not going to speak for him. He is more than capable of outlining why he feels the thread is an embarrassment (heck I started the thread, albeit, at the request of many posters). I think he's entitled to feel that way and post that - but that is a discussion you can have with him.

My response was because you referred to the mod team "in general" meaning, I assume, a comment about us all, or at least the majority of us.

[Galakanokis]

Originally Posted by 4X4

The fact that you're replying instead of just pounding your ban hammer like other sites is cool. They are raising concerns that are worth listening to. It must be difficult to be both a fan and a mod.

If I was a betting man I would put my money on the hammer coming down on Nik. Easier than dealing with the issues raised. I assume this will go down the same road as the last thread that questioned the mods.

I like what Scorpion said, there has definitely been a "tone" to some recent posts by a certain some that I was surprised at. Worse than anything Nik just wrote.

I also get where Nik is coming from with the"company man" comment, maybe a tad over the line but didn't think it was a big deal. I really only see a few mods post in the more politically charged threads usually if not always on the Flames side of the issues and rarely do you see those individuals in the more hockey related threads. Maybe the business side of hockey is more interesting to them than the game itself but I could see where one could draw a conclusion there.

[MRCboicgy]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

If I was a betting man I would put my money on the hammer coming down on Nik. Easier than dealing with the issues raised. I assume this will go down the same road as the last thread that questioned the mods.

I like what Scorpion said, there has definitely been a "tone" to some recent posts by a certain some that I was surprised at. Worse than anything Nik just wrote.

I also get where Nik is coming from with the"company man" comment, maybe a tad over the line but didn't think it was a big deal. I really only see a few mods post in the more politically charged threads usually if not always on the Flames side of the issues and rarely do you see those individuals in the more hockey related threads. Maybe the business side of hockey is more interesting to them than the game itself but I could see where one could draw a conclusion there.

So let's just unpack this a bit then so everyone is on the same page:

You're referring to the previous thread where - before it careened off the cliff - to a general ask of more transparency?

Here the vibe is more about applying the law equally to mods/non-mods? Allowing more discussion to foster? not seeming like we all toe the company line? Something else?

I think a bit of clarity is always a good thing to strive for.

[cannon7]

Mod or not, Textcritic has every right to be wrong as the rest of us.

[Shazam]

There are two Wild GMs?!?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Shazam

There are two Wild GMs?!?

Think of me as the Mick Foley of Calgarypuck

Jiri: Mankind
Wild GM: Dude Love
Jorje: Cactus Jack (bang bang!)

[Galakanokis]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

So let's just unpack this a bit then so everyone is on the same page:

You're referring to the previous thread where - before it careened off the cliff - to a general ask of more transparency?

Here the vibe is more about applying the law equally to mods/non-mods? Allowing more discussion to foster? not seeming like we all toe the company line? Something else?

I think a bit of clarity is always a good thing to strive for.

As far referring as this going down the road as the other thread yes, I was referring to the thread a while back where mods being more transparent was brought up. I didn't mean to suggest these threads are the same just that they would have the same fate.

Definitely agree about the vibe in this thread. As I mentioned, I was surprised by the tone of certain posts and obviously I am not the only one. Are the mods being held to a higher standard? Not sure I would say yes. Hell, maybe nobody reported said posts but would anybody reasonably report a moderator post?

I was just pointing out how one could come to the conclusion that certain posters who happen to be mods can give off the impression that they tow a company line. Is there a benefit to it? I have no idea but one could assume that being "nice" to the Flames on here could prove to beneficial outside of the forum. Don't we all question whether or not this is happening with main stream media and the NHL? Wasn't Leah Hextall just brought up recently and the reasons why she was let go? Is it far fetched to assume there are other Flames related interests outside of CP?

I personally think the discussion is fine. People will be questioned on things that others don't understand it have access to. I thinks it just human nature. Comes down to how the mods want to handle that. Helps to be a little more anonymous but that is it the window for most. Although, I don't think I knew you were a moderator and I assume you are by the phrasing of your post.


I don't mean to disparage in anyway, just a conversation I find interesting. I got in crap years ago for picking apart the mod on Sportsnet that worked for AEG or something like that who was horribly biased and would shut down anything critical of Sportsnet. I have never been to HF but the mods here sound like they are a thousand times more level headed than them.


Sorry for being all over the place a bit here, trying to do my kids homework and this new math is brutal.