Flames Owners are good guys

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Split98

I'd love to get back to this if we can:
"“I’m just so humbled and grateful that Amanda is alive,” the 72-year-old philanthropist said of Saturday evening. “But you know, I’m nobody in particular,” he added, modestly.

Markin acknowledged that he cut a cheque for $750,000, “back at a time when I had too much money,” to ensure Lindhout’s release from 460 days of captivity, that included bouts of torture and almost daily rapes from multiple captors."

Out here I don't know much about the owners besides what's written on CP, so I don't know much about Allan Markin. But wow, that's the kind of guy you're proud to share a country with - let alone a hockey team!

[Coolstorybro] I met Amanda Lindhout in Kabul in May 2007 (when she was just beginning her career as a "freelance journalist"). I don't remember much about her except that she seemed bright, idealistic, and a little naive (which, to be fair, put her in much better stead than me; I was just naive). Anyway, there is little doubt that she put herself in a rather vulnerable position in Somalia when she was abducted (I haven't read her book or listened to her speak but I expect that, in hindsight, she acknowledges that). It was a very generous act by Mr. Markin to make such a significant contribution to her release. And to her credit, she has rewarded his investment by becoming an active advocate since her release for important topics such as violence against women. [/coolstorybro]

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Makarov

[Coolstorybro] I met Amanda Lindhout in Kabul in May 2007 (when she was just beginning her career as a "freelance journalist"). I don't remember much about her except that she seemed bright, idealistic, and a little naive (which, to be fair, put her in much better stead than me; I was just naive). Anyway, there is little doubt that she put herself in a rather vulnerable position in Somalia when she was abducted (I haven't read her book or listened to her speak but I expect that, in hindsight, she acknowledges that). It was a very generous act by Mr. Markin to make such a significant contribution to her release. And to her credit, she has rewarded his investment by becoming an active advocate since her release for important topics such as violence against women. [/coolstorybro]

It's interesting to hear about who she was in 2007. You certainly wouldn't fault her for becoming hardened or distant, but she does seem like a great advocate driven with passion instead of fear.

It's just great to see people with 'too much money' making sure they're available for times when their surplus could save a life. Even better when that life could go on to save others.

[Magnum PEI]

Originally Posted by BurningSteel

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...-gave-her-life


Good read. Also another "benefit" of having a pro hockey team here. I imagine there are many more stories similar in nature.

Wouldn't he have done this whether or not the flames were here?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The post right above you made an attempt to put things back on track.

Back on track? C'mon man, in retrospect this was an "arena" thread from the get go (albeit a thinly vailed one) unless you actually think that...

Originally Posted by BurningSteel

Also another "benefit" of having a pro hockey team here.

... wasn't in reference to that. If that's the case, well I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like you talk to you about investing in.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Back on track? C'mon man, in retrospect this was an "arena" thread from the get go (albeit a thinly vailed one) unless you actually think that...



... wasn't in reference to that. If that's the case, well I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like you talk to you about investing in.

I like how you turned veiled into "Eric V"ailed"

You point out a post from higher up as an example of back on track? If I'm dumb enough to buy a bridge you don't own, at least I can understand chronological order.

[Parallex]

Other then pointing out that I misspelled "veiled" I have no idea what you're talking about.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Back on track? C'mon man, in retrospect this was an "arena" thread from the get go (albeit a thinly vailed one) unless you actually think that...



... wasn't in reference to that. If that's the case, well I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like you talk to you about investing in.

There was a specific request to get back on the topic of the OP. You followed up right after with your post which was criticized. It was the timing more than anything else.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Other then pointing out that I misspelled "veiled" I have no idea what you're talking about.

Split98 put the topic back on track.

You took it off again.

You defended it by pointing out someone before Split98 did the same.

To which I pointed out chronological order suggests what came before the request is certainly different than what came after it.

[nik-]

The topic was off track by post two. That is the topic now. Why don't you get on rotten?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

The topic was off track by post two. That is the topic now. Why don't you get on rotten?

Huh? You'll have to explain that.

I think I was pretty clear. It never should have been off. It was. Someone smartly suggested it just go back to the story itself. Then someone took it straight off again.

This shouldn't be this hard.

[nik-]

No one said it was hard.

Someone immediately poisoned the well, so maybe just shut it down and repost the article in a new thread, or delete the off topic posts. It's going to flow in the direction it's taken.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

No one said it was hard.

Someone immediately poisoned the well, so maybe just shut it down and repost the article in a new thread, or delete the off topic posts. It's going to flow in the direction it's taken.

What did this mean?

Why don't you get on rotten?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What did this mean?

That would be the user who immediately turned the thread toxic. Instead of quoting at Parralex, address the problem.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

That would be the user who immediately turned the thread toxic. Instead of quoting at Parralex, address the problem.

You say it's not hard, but it sure seems to be.

I read the whole topic in one shot. Was disappointed it got off on the wrong foot, was happy to see it came back. Then it was knocked off again.

That's pretty much it.

When someone made a smart request to be on topic only be followed up with a fire ken King comment five minutes later you push it back to the topic don't you?

Man ...

[Flash Walken]

No, he's saying if you don't want the topic off topic then moderate the thread instead of shooting fish in a barrel by quoting aderailer and driving the thread further off course.

[Bingo]

I've seen plenty of moderation on this site that suggests we should go back on topic well into a discussion.

Pretty consistent.

[Hockeyguy15]

Is this a mod topic? No? Back on topic.

Mighty nice of him to pay her ransom.

[sempuki]

Wait are we on topic or off topic? I'm confused and need someone to blame. #MakeCPOnTopicAgain

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by BurningSteel

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...-gave-her-life


Good read. Also another "benefit" of having a pro hockey team here. I imagine there are many more stories similar in nature.

I don't see how thia is another benefit in relatimg to having a pro sports team?

He is rich whether he owns part of the team or not?? Are you saying these extremely wealthy owners only perform philanthropy in Calgary because they own the Flames? Wouldn't they do them anyways?

[Split98]

I think he's saying that it's nice to have such a philanthropist in the Calgary area, and having an NHL team could be what draws such people to the area.

Allan Markin was in Calgary before the Flames, but I get the mindset