My letter to Ailene Voisin:

[VF21]

The issue REALLY was about free speech, what she put in the article offended someone to the point of writing her an e-mail (which stated that he/she was speaking for all posters on Kingsfans.com) and then POSTING Voisin's privately e-mailed response here. Then when her PRIVATELY E-MAILED response was dogged, it became my mission to a) defend myself as a poster at Kingsfans.com and b) defend AV who I have ALWAYS agreed with. You believe she shouldn't have included the Web/McDyess comparison, and I would tend to agree with you. But, again, that wasn't my point!

And no, the tone was NOT to dog Webber supporters. It's your right to support Webber, just like it's my right to say I don't. Nothing personal.

News flash: Her PRIVATELY E-MAILED response was made with the full and most likely probable knowledge that it would be posted on a message board. Don't ever think she didn't know that. bigbadred00 made it apparent he was a member of a message board. If she didn't want the possibility of having her response posted, she had a very simple solution. She could have opted simply not to reply.

It wasn't her private emails being discussed. It was an email extension of her work; AILENE VOISIN of the Sacramento Bee was responding, not Ailene Voisin private individual.

I have written Mark Kreidler several times as a member of this board. He has responded and at no time did he NOT fully expect me to share his response.

Look at the bottom of every single column written by Voisin, Kreidler, or any other name with a by-line. They ALWAYS include their email, so you can correspond with them about their articles. Those aren't private communications.

 

[thesanityannex]

Originally Posted by albeitrue


I don't see how you think I blindly support EVERYTHING she says from that, thesanityannex.



It's all good. AV will be who she is..... deal with it.

Here's what you said, two statements that led me to assuming your blind faith:

1.guess I'll just leave that job to you(Voison) and support it
2.b) defend AV who I have ALWAYS agreed with.

AV will be who she is (however awful that is) and THIS is how its dealt with. Looks like you are the one who has to deal with it. I fortunately don't have to read her crap in my local paper.

 

[albeitrue]

Good lord, excuse my language but, talk about sucking someone off.

Once again, if her point was accurate, there would've been no debate, no letter writing. The letter that was written to her and posted here was a rebuttal to her comparison that the two situations were similar. A fact that seems to be lost on you. Blinding hating people can do that.

Sucking someone off? No excuse for that language! Seriously, it wasn't about sucking up, what would possibly be the reason for doing that? Could she include me on her mailing list or something, I don't get it.

Her POINT was to compare Web with McDyess, and she scrupiously wrote the headline about McDyess, but who says she can't include a comparison about a former King? Or a present one? Or last years 12th man? People take it way too personal the things she writes, a fact that seems to be lost on you. But, blinding loyalty can do that, I guess.

 

[VF21]

Okay, folks. Let's take it down a notch. We don't need the "deal it with" type personal confrontations.

 

[VF21]

Sucking someone off? No excuse for that language! Seriously, it wasn't about sucking up, what would possibly be the reason for doing that? Could she include me on her mailing list or something, I don't get it.

Her POINT was to compare Web with McDyess, and she scrupiously wrote the headline about McDyess, but who says she can't include a comparison about a former King? Or a present one? Or last years 12th man? People take it way too personal the things she writes, a fact that seems to be lost on you. But, blinding loyalty can do that, I guess.

Oh please. First, the writer doesn't create the headline. The headline is created by someone else entirely...

Second, if her point was to compare WEbber to McDyess, she sure wasted a lot of verbage on stuff about McDyess and didn't include Webber nearly enough.

READ her article again. But first, take out the stuff about WEbber. You'll see one thing: The article stands alone as a good piece about Antonio McDyess. IF her intention had been to compare the two, there's no way that would be possible.

----------------------------------

From VF21 the moderator: The insults and personal sniping stops NOW. I don't care what's already been said; I don't care if people don't get the last word, etc. THIS BOARD is not about tossing insults at other members. Never has been, never will be. Period.

 

[albeitrue]

Here's what you said, two statements that led me to assuming your blind faith:

1.guess I'll just leave that job to you(Voison) and support it
2.b) defend AV who I have ALWAYS agreed with.

AV will be who she is (however awful that is) and THIS is how its dealt with. Looks like you are the one who has to deal with it. I fortunately don't have to read her crap in my local paper.

No, you don't have to read her, in fact the only time I read her is here usually. I don't subscribe to the Bee because (newsflash) it is largely democratic and seeks to sway political viewpoints...I know, that's a contradiction but it's the truth. I can CHOOSE to not read. At times I DO read. It's my choice.

I would contend that you all hate me WAY more than I have ever hated Web, could I be right? But in the end it's an exercise in futility, all this hating on Web, hating on Voisin...because we are all fans with one purpose in mind, just different beliefs about how to get that purpose accomblished. It isn't so bad as everyone makes it out to be, if Web is great then Ailene can't take that away from you, don't you KNOW that? Stop giving her so much power, and believe what you believe with conviction, you don't have to defend your stance by constantly taking potshots as a local newspaper writer (who you don't even read)...

There now. Poof dust is just around the corner, I'm thinking...

 

[thesanityannex]

For the last time, as a professional reporter, your job is to report a story as an unbiased observer. She could have made the comparisons without the obvious stabs in the back. To me, those comments are unnecessary, unprofessional, and childish. This has nothing to do with defending Webber as a Kings fan, it has nothing to do with my feelings for him on a personal level. This is all about integrity, which she seems to be lacking.

 

[kingsfannPDX]

sure, she can write whatever she wants. i just don't understand what she's trying to accomplish. even if her points were right (which you think they are albeitrue and that is fine) what good are they going to do now? IT'S OVER!!!

no wait i get it. we didn't win a title and it's all webber's fault. if he would've just done what mcdyess did. damn him. how could he be so selfish. let's keep talking about it two years later!!

 

[thesanityannex]

I would contend that you all hate me WAY more than I have ever hated Web, could I be right?

You don't have to defend your stance by constantly taking potshots as a local newspaper writer (who you don't even read)...

First, I have no hate for you, and thats sad you hated Webber. I am pleasantly entertained with this thread. Second, I am not defending any person or any stance. I am just stating the obvious fact that she can't keep her personal agenda/hate/issues out of her articles.

 

[loopymitch]

I think I behaved very well considering what I wanted to say, only out of respect for this board and it's members. If this had been anywhere else I wouldn't have been so nice.
No poof dust for me

 

[Packt]

Sucking someone off? No excuse for that language! Seriously, it wasn't about sucking up, what would possibly be the reason for doing that? Could she include me on her mailing list or something, I don't get it.

Her POINT was to compare Web with McDyess, and she scrupiously wrote the headline about McDyess, but who says she can't include a comparison about a former King? Or a present one? Or last years 12th man? People take it way too personal the things she writes, a fact that seems to be lost on you. But, blinding loyalty can do that, I guess.

You must admit there was a lot of unnecessary fawning in your letter.

Once again, her point was inaccurate; someone decided to point it out to her. She didn't seem to want to argue over it, probably because she knew she was off in the first place. We aren't dimwits and when she makes statements that aren't true, she'll get called on it.

This is all pointless to begin with. I'm moving on unless you're making an argument against the letter.

 

[VF21]

No, you don't have to read her, in fact the only time I read her is here usually. I don't subscribe to the Bee because (newsflash) it is largely democratic and seeks to sway political viewpoints...I know, that's a contradiction but it's the truth. I can CHOOSE to not read. At times I DO read. It's my choice.

I would contend that you all hate me WAY more than I have ever hated Web, could I be right? But in the end it's an exercise in futility, all this hating on Web, hating on Voisin...because we are all fans with one purpose in mind, just different beliefs about how to get that purpose accomblished. It isn't so bad as everyone makes it out to be, if Web is great then Ailene can't take that away from you, don't you KNOW that? Stop giving her so much power, and believe what you believe with conviction, you don't have to defend your stance by constantly taking potshots as a local newspaper writer (who you don't even read)...

There now. Poof dust is just around the corner, I'm thinking...

Poof dust? Excuse me but you're vastly overestimating your talents if you think you're even close to being banned for your comments. If anything, I would lock the thread if it became more contentious. Why would I ban you? This thread has been more entertaining than most anything else that's come up lately. Mildly amusing? Yeah. In danger of being closed if people make too many personal attacks? Maybe. Banning you? Dream on.

Do you have any idea what the purpose of a columnist on a newspaper is? Voisin is loving this. Her column is - once again - the subject of a lot of talk and controversy. She relishes having people take potshots at her, in the same way people like Chad Ford, Ric Bucher, etc. like being talked about.

You defending her honor and her right to freedom of speech is the exercise in futility because she is going to keep doing what she's doing and people are going to continue to rant about it.

You chose to make a new thread about YOUR 'letter to Voisin" when you could just have easily posted it in the thread already in existence about the whole Voisin column. You brought all of this on yourself and I think you fully intended to do so. Cool. You've provided some mild entertainment on a pretty boring Saturday afternoon. Don't confuse that for a troll who comes here with the clear intention of disrupting this board and ends up being banned for it.

 

[albeitrue]

For the last time, as a professional reporter, your job is to report a story as an unbiased observer. She could have made the comparisons without the obvious stabs in the back. To me, those comments are unnecessary, unprofessional, and childish. This has nothing to do with defending Webber as a Kings fan, it has nothing to do with my feelings for him on a personal level. This is all about integrity, which she seems to be lacking.

Unbiased observer and professional reporter do not go hand-in-hand, imo. Never has, never will. Even authors of columns in STEROPHILE magazine tells you what their favorite equipment is. The makers of he equipment may agree, but that's not what we have here...we have a reporter giving their opinion, the way they see things. You can agree or disagree, is my point.

As for being a Web hater, I really don't hate anybody! But I did not support him being a King, if that makes me a "hater" to you then so be it. I don't know him, I only speak of what I am allowed to see. He seems like an alright guy in my eyes. If you feel Voisin lacks integrity, fine. I think they mostly ALL of them (news reporters) lack integrity to a certain degree, it's a dog-eat-dog world and fiercely competitive, you gotta have some gonads to even be out there, harsh realities are what they deal with the best and it definitely translates into the work. She goes a little overboard on the bashing thing, I agree. But at least she's being honest ALL THE TIME, and that helps when you read the next article of hers that doesn't include bashing, right? Just my .02 about that.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Even you, a most ardent supporter, agree that she takes unneccesary pot shots (read has an axe to grind) It under-mines her credibility and her objectivity. And yes, she does have gonads

 

[thesanityannex]

I would contend that you all hate me WAY more than I have ever hated Web, could I be right?

On the issue of hate.
Have you already forgotten what you've written.

 

[albeitrue]

You must admit there was a lot of unnecessary fawning in your letter.

Once again, her point was inaccurate; someone decided to point it out to her. She didn't seem to want to argue over it, probably because she knew she was off in the first place. We aren't dimwits and when she makes statements that aren't true, she'll get called on it.

This is all pointless to begin with. I'm moving on unless you're making an argument against the letter.

Re: fawning, I attempted to make my connection with her, pointing out that I believe what she does. I was countering, if you will, the former letter written to h er by encouraging her beliefs because, well, I believe he same thing! I wouldn't call that fawning or sucking up. Your statement that "her point was inaccurate" was lost on me though, since I believed the statements to be accurate, maybe not necessary but accurate. Saying this: "She didn't want to argue over it, probably because she knew she was off in the first place" is assumptive, so your statement about being thought of by her as a "dimwit" is moot.

She honestly believes what she writes, nothing wrong with that. If she didn't I would have a real problem with it.

 

[bigbadred00]

Sorry, I meant ALOT of posters on Kingsfan.com not all if that really offends you to the hilt.

 

[VF21]

albeitrue - Do not assume that "she honestly believes what she writes." You have no way of knowing whether she does or, possibly, whether she's convinced on some level the continuing jabs against Webber keep her columns being talked about. Or, also alternatively, if her jabs against Webber and/or Adelman are rooted in something that happened and was never made public? She has used the bully pulpit for several years against Adelman and Webber while, on the other hand, both of them have pretty much continually taken the high road, except when Adelman finally snapped when she asked him a question at a press conference, stared her straight in the face and, without replying, said, "Next question."

Reporters are about reporting the news. Columnists are about writing things that will get readers talking, and waiting to see what she'll write next. Some columnists, like Dave Barry, do it with humor and with absolutely no malice. Others prefer the more ascerbic route. Hence my primary and ongoing objection. Voisin is capable of writing GOOD pieces that will accomplish the objective of getting her columns talked about WITHOUT resorting to the constant, never-ending bashing of Webber and Adelman. Her decision to continue to utilize that form of journalism is IMHO actually more of a detriment than anything else. And, considering how long it's gone on, it's simply gotten past old. The horse is dead. It's been to the rendering plant. It was turned into byproducts. For her to continue to beat it is evidence she has a grudge.

 

[albeitrue]

Poof dust? Excuse me but you're vastly overestimating your talents if you think you're even close to being banned for your comments. If anything, I would lock the thread if it became more contentious. Why would I ban you? This thread has been more entertaining than most anything else that's come up lately. Mildly amusing? Yeah. In danger of being closed if people make too many personal attacks? Maybe. Banning you? Dream on.

You DO realize who is and who isn't making the personal attacks. And yeah, I actually didn't expect all THIS, to be honest...but what's a little added contention piled on NOW gonna hurt? I don't feel contentious myself. Defensive, maybe.

Is it still light outside?

You chose to make a new thread about YOUR 'letter to Voisin" when you could just have easily posted it in the thread already in existence about the whole Voisin column. You brought all of this on yourself and I think you fully intended to do so. Cool. You've provided some mild entertainment on a pretty boring Saturday afternoon. Don't confuse that for a troll who comes here with the clear intention of disrupting this board and ends up being banned for it.

Thanks for that, and I'm sorry if I presented a reason to think you could ban me. I made the new thread so my letter would be seen by more people, because I have gonads.

Voisin WOULD be banned in 10 posts though, right?

 

[bigbadred00]

The main issue I have with her article is I believe the McDyess story is a good one. Former great #4 who struggled with a knee injury is now a great backup for the defending titlist. Problem I have is the pot shot she had to take a Webber when the 2 situations ARE ENTIRELY different. McDyess RETURNED as the man to Denver, and then was traded when the team realized he could not meet the needs of the team anymore. He was stuck in NY and then PHX last year and played at an entirely different level. This year he is contributing and has looked great at times. While in contrast Webber returned to the team he was the quote on quote man with and the team struggled during the regular season with but played well with in the Playoffs.

The problems I have with Voison is that eventhough Webber is gone, she still dogs the guy whenever she can. Obviously like her, you enjoy this which isn't the shared viewpoint of many of the Kingsfans.com members. I guess I can only speak for myself though, I don't enjoy it.

What she again forgets is to point out that her favorite player, Peja's team struggled mightily in the playoffs when he was quote on quote playing his best. Yet she never posts about that and takes time to post anti-Webber banter whenever she can when she fails to mention the on-goings and disappointments of the current team.

 

[albeitrue]

albeitrue - Do not assume that "she honestly believes what she writes." You have no way of knowing whether she does or, possibly, whether she's convinced on some level the continuing jabs against Webber keep her columns being talked about. Or, also alternatively, if her jabs against Webber and/or Adelman are rooted in something that happened and was never made public? She has used the bully pulpit for several years against Adelman and Webber while, on the other hand, both of them have pretty much continually taken the high road, except when Adelman finally snapped when she asked him a question at a press conference, stared her straight in the face and, without replying, said, "Next question."

Reporters are about reporting the news. Columnists are about writing things that will get readers talking, and waiting to see what she'll write next. Some columnists, like Dave Barry, do it with humor and with absolutely no malice. Others prefer the more ascerbic route. Hence my primary and ongoing objection. Voisin is capable of writing GOOD pieces that will accomplish the objective of getting her columns talked about WITHOUT resorting to the constant, never-ending bashing of Webber and Adelman. Her decision to continue to utilize that form of journalism is IMHO actually more of a detriment than anything else. And, considering how long it's gone on, it's simply gotten past old. The horse is dead. It's been to the rendering plant. It was turned into byproducts. For her to continue to beat it is evidence she has a grudge.

I just don't see the MALICE in her work, okay maybe she has a grudge, maybe Web & Adelman won't give her the time of day and she resorts to hack-jobs at times. But what comes first, the chicken or the egg? No telling.

Call me simple, but I take at face value what maybe others don't, and I'm not interested in changing my stripes at this late date, LOL! I can usually discern whether I'm being taken for a ride or not, but sometimes the ride is fun and I willingly tag along OR I say "poppycock" and move on. Why should we read her stuff with a cynical mind, just because we don't agree with it? And THAT is my total and sum response. I understand your position, you all LOVED Web and there is NOTHING wrong about that, to me. It hurts you to hear nasty things said about him, but I think you very well could be part of the problem instead of part of the solution. You could agree not to post her articles here, that would get her. Keep complaining if you want, make posts to dog her name, etc. If it all feeds her so-called propensity to generate controversy, I would have to ask "WHY DO IT"?

 

[VF21]

You DO realize who is and who isn't making the personal attacks. And yeah, I actually didn't expect all THIS, to be honest...but what's a little added contention piled on NOW gonna hurt? I don't feel contentious myself. Defensive, maybe.

Is it still light outside?

Thanks for that, and I'm sorry if I presented a reason to think you could ban me. I made the new thread so my letter would be seen by more people, because I have gonads.

Voisin WOULD be banned in 10 posts though, right?

Voisin is a registered member of this forum.

 

[Yoda]

According to one episode of MythBusters, it could actually have been raised with lots of ping pong balls.

OK, you have now gained major bonus points in my book for your MythBusters awknowledgement. Best show on television

On the subject.
Webber gave us great years. Leave him alone. Voisin needs to get rid of the hatred. Her tune is overused and tiresome. Find someone else to pick on, that includes RA.

 

[VF21]

I just don't see the MALICE in her work, okay maybe she has a grudge, maybe Web & Adelman won't give her the time of day and she resorts to hack-jobs at times. But what comes first, the chicken or the egg? No telling.

Call me simple, but I take at face value what maybe others don't, and I'm not interested in changing my stripes at this late date, LOL! I can usually discern whether I'm being taken for a ride or not, but sometimes the ride is fun and I willingly tag along OR I say "poppycock" and move on. Why should we read her stuff with a cynical mind, just because we don't agree with it? And THAT is my total and sum response. I understand your position, you all LOVED Web and there is NOTHING wrong about that, to me. It hurts you to hear nasty things said about him, but I think you very well could be part of the problem instead of part of the solution. You could agree not to post her articles here, that would get her. Keep complaining if you want, make posts to dog her name, etc. If it all feeds her so-called propensity to generate controversy, I would have to ask "WHY DO IT"?

It's not about "all of us" loving Webber. And I honestly find it pretty pathetic that of everything that's been written, that's the only tune you keep singing.

It hurts me to hear nasty things about him? Whatever floats your boat. You think I could be part of the problem? What problem? That Voisin hates Webber and you worship at her feet?

Why should we not post her articles? The vast majority of people were having a good time discussing her column, including some who agreed with her. You're the only one who had to start a new thread to make sure more people saw YOUR comments.

Get over yourself.

And to the rest of the board I apologize for breaking my own rule about personal attacks. I'm not going to continue the discussion. Sorry everyone not named albeitrue.

 

[albeitrue]

The main issue I have with her article is I believe the McDyess story is a good one. Former great #4 who struggled with a knee injury is now a great backup for the defending titlist. Problem I have is the pot shot she had to take a Webber when the 2 situations ARE ENTIRELY different. McDyess RETURNED as the man to Denver, and then was traded when the team realized he could not meet the needs of the team anymore. He was stuck in NY and then PHX last year and played at an entirely different level. This year he is contributing and has looked great at times. While in contrast Webber returned to the team he was the quote on quote man with and the team struggled during the regular season with but played well with in the Playoffs.

The problems I have with Voison is that eventhough Webber is gone, she still dogs the guy whenever she can. Obviously like her, you enjoy this which isn't the shared viewpoint of many of the Kingsfans.com members. I guess I can only speak for myself though, I don't enjoy it.

What she again forgets is to point out that her favorite player, Peja's team struggled mightily in the playoffs when he was quote on quote playing his best. Yet she never posts about that and takes time to post anti-Webber banter whenever she can when she fails to mention the on-goings and disappointments of the current team.

Truthfully I don't ENJOY the dogging of Webber in Voisin's column, obviously she could generate a lot more good will by simply leaving out that stuff. And it is with respect that I won't go where I want to...McDyess being traded because he was no longer meeting the needs of the team. Again, those are my opinions I'm talking about but it can only generate bad feelings here, so why? I have somewhere else I can talk about all of that, and I do....though it's pretty much a "dead horse" issue over there too.

As far as Voisin not calling out her favorite player you are wrong, she did write an article criticizing Peja's play at the end of the season (I'll go and dig it up if I can find it here) and also has included criticism of Peja in other articles. She is more objective than many of us give her credit for. True, her anguish about Web seems to linger on, and she can write it all down for all of us to see, that's the hard part.

Who knows, maybe Web will succeed and prove her, and me, dead wrong. If that happens I will be the FIRST one to give him props, and I believe AV would be right behind me, no reason to believe otherwise, since she has given Webber praise in her articles many times. But saying that is kind of like saying "That guy who just cut you off in traffic let someone else in just down the road", I know. It doesn't seem to matter.

 

[albeitrue]

It's not about "all of us" loving Webber. And I honestly find it pretty pathetic that of everything that's been written, that's the only tune you keep singing.

It hurts me to hear nasty things about him? Whatever floats your boat. You think I could be part of the problem? What problem? That Voisin hates Webber and you worship at her feet?

Why should we not post her articles? The vast majority of people were having a good time discussing her column, including some who agreed with her. You're the only one who had to start a new thread to make sure more people saw YOUR comments.

Get over yourself.

And to the rest of the board I apologize for breaking my own rule about personal attacks. I'm not going to continue the discussion. Sorry everyone not named albeitrue.

I have never worshipped at anyone's feet VF. I don't even CARE about Voisin, but I care that those who have differing viewpoints are allowed to be heard, and thanks for allowing me to be heard.

I couldn't sing a different tune because I agree with Voisin, but you just don't get that. Is it blind loyalty? Dunno, but the personal attacks from VF just made my day. Thanks for proving the point that "Hate is blind".

I submit that YOU are the hater, and not I...think about it.

 

[thesanityannex]

I understand your position, you all LOVED Web and there is NOTHING wrong about that, to me. It hurts you to hear nasty things said about him, but I think you very well could be part of the problem instead of part of the solution.

This is not about loving Webber or hating Webber, its about the unnecessary attacks on Webber, WHO IS LONG GONE AS A KING. And what problem are you talking about that we all here at Kingsfans.com are a part of?


"Leaving Your Grudges at Home"-by Ailene Voison

Latest entry into shortest NBA books contest.

 

[thesanityannex]

I have never worshipped at anyone's feet VF. I don't even CARE about Voisin, but I care that those who have differing viewpoints are allowed to be heard, and thanks for allowing me to be heard.

I couldn't sing a different tune because I agree with Voisin, but you just don't get that. Is it blind loyalty? Dunno, but the personal attacks from VF just made my day. Thanks for proving the point that "Hate is blind".

I submit that YOU are the hater, and not I...think about it.

Then let's clear things up here. In your first few posts, Voison could do no wrong and you defended her in every manner. Now, in your last few posts, you've admitted that you don't like her Webber bashing and you don't even care about Voison^^^^^. Stick to one side, either you like her or you don't. And if you like her columns, but dislike her personal attacks, then just simply state that. Stop walking the line.

And I'll take the blame for Vf's personal attack. She drank some of the sanity annex's personal batch of Haterade earlier today.

 

[VF21]

I have never worshipped at anyone's feet VF. I don't even CARE about Voisin, but I care that those who have differing viewpoints are allowed to be heard, and thanks for allowing me to be heard.

I couldn't sing a different tune because I agree with Voisin, but you just don't get that. Is it blind loyalty? Dunno, but the personal attacks from VF just made my day. Thanks for proving the point that "Hate is blind".

I submit that YOU are the hater, and not I...think about it.

You call me a part of the problem. I respond and I'm the hater? I didn't go on your board and attack you...call you names...make barbed attacks at your role as moderator. Can you say the same about me?

Sorry, albeitrue. Just as a leopard cannot change its spots, I don't think you can change your persona - even if you're using a different name. I know what you've been like on sackings. In case you've forgotten I was the target of a pretty vitriolic thread there and it was ALL personal. (And that's just the one that someone felt so badly about they finally removed.) I have shown, I believe, the utmost restraint in not blasting back at you for some of the things you've accused me of.

I have tried repeatedly to answer civilly the points you've made in your posts. You have chosen to ignore most of those points and returned to the same argument over and over again.

This thread has now ceased to have anything resembling ongoing value. Unless someone has a strong objection - or just wants to see the cat fight continue - I'm going to close it.