JdJO sets a new standard for incompetence

[Amy]

I'll quote the complete text here in case the Comical edits it later.  Granted Bidge and Gar didn't give him a lot to work with, but this is just not even trying.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/4968382.html

Biggio to start fewer games for rest of season
Most starts will come at home, as he and Garner have discussed

By JOSE DE JESUS ORTIZ

CHICAGO — Per the tentative schedule he and manager Phil Garner have set up, Astros icon Craig Biggio will likely start fewer games from now on, especially on the road. But the crowd favorite at Minute Maid Park will continue to start most of the games at home.

The Astros appear adverse to even say that they're going to try to give up on this season and rebuild for the future, but it appears that they'll at least get to see what Chris Burke can do at second base.

"We're continuing to reevaluate what the schedule is and go along and then adjust," said Biggio, who became the 27th player in history and the first Astro to collect 3,000 hits earlier this month. "Yesterday, I swung the bat pretty good yesterday, just had nothing to show for it."

Garner has worked closely on the schedule with Biggio, 41, to decide which games the future Hall of Famer would play. Out of dedication to his fans, Biggio has preferred to rest on the road and play as many games as possible in front of his legion of Astros fans.

"We are going to play in all our games at home," Biggio said. "That's a given, and we'll readjust on the road. If you're going to have off-days you take them on the road. You have some fans on the road too. I don't know how to say it: we'll reevaluate as we go."

[Waldo]

Amy, our normal rule is to not allow full quoting of articles.  Never minding that, you also did not include a link to the article.

Any time you quote an article, you also need to include a link to it.

[Amy]

Amy, our normal rule is to not allow full quoting of articles.  Never minding that, you also did not include a link to the article.

Any time you quote an article, you also need to include a link to it.

Oops!  I'm sorry, I meant to include a link and I just flat forgot.  Thanks for adding it for me.

[Arky Vaughan]

Amy, our normal rule is to not allow full quoting of articles.  Never minding that, you also did not include a link to the article.

Any time you quote an article, you also need to include a link to it.

In Amy's defense, it's easy to forget to respect intellectual property when it's the equivalent of a crackhouse overburdened with tax liens.

[kevwun]

What did crack houses do to deserve that comparison?

[Rebel Jew]

i don't see how this is "a new standard for incompetence."  aside from the line about the astros being averse to admitting a rebuilding effort, this article seems factual and filled with actual, in-context quotes from an actual, relevant person.  even the somewhat antagonistic line about the aversion to rebuilding is not that bad because the facts presented in the article-- that the astros are going to give their starting, HOF 2B less playing time in favor of a younger, mostly unproven player--could suggest a rebuilding effort, even those the astros don't admit it.

[Amy]

i don't see how this is "a new standard for incompetence."  aside from the line about the astros being averse to admitting a rebuilding effort, this article seems factual and filled with actual, in-context quotes from an actual, relevant person.  even the somewhat antagonistic line about the aversion to rebuilding is not that bad because the facts presented in the article-- that the astros are going to give their starting, HOF 2B less playing time in favor of a younger, mostly unproven player--could suggest a rebuilding effort, even those the astros don't admit it.

It's unbelievably poorly written, even for JdJO.  The Comical should have the good sense to be "adverse" to publishing such amateurish writing.  In fact, they should have refused to publish it.

BTW, here's the real deal: Link

[JimR]

It's unbelievably poorly written, even for JdJO.  The Comical should have the good sense to be "adverse" to publishing such amateurish writing.  In fact, they should have refused to publish it.

BTW, here's the real deal: Link

what do you do, Amy? are you an English teacher?

[Rebel Jew]

It's unbelievably poorly written, even for JdJO.  The Comical should have the good sense to be "adverse" to publishing such amateurish writing.  In fact, they should have refused to publish it.

BTW, here's the real deal: Link

actually, "averse" is the properly used word here; as in, the astros have an aversion to admitting their rebuilding effort or to admitting a lost season  "adverse" would imply a more hostile, antagonistic stance against admitting that a rebuilding effort is necessary; as in, the astros are an adversary to admitting rebuilding.

JdJO's muckraking tendencies have been well-documented here in the past, but in this case he shows restraint when he could have easily gone the muckraking route, and gives a valid report based on facts he got from primary sources.

[ybbodeus]

It just seems these days that newspapers have taken the approach that no matter what they're covering....sports, news, gardening, movies....that you have to write yourself into the story and pretend that the end game in your story is to deride the decision makers, endlessly.  It's like they see W behind everything they cover....and go after him!  Hostility, derision and disrespect have made reading a newspaper get really old most days.

Signed,

Poor Baby

[Amy]

actually, "averse" is the properly used word here; as in, the astros have an aversion to admitting their rebuilding effort or to admitting a lost season  "adverse" would imply a more hostile, antagonistic stance against admitting that a rebuilding effort is necessary; as in, the astros are an adversary to admitting rebuilding.

JdJO's muckraking tendencies have been well-documented here in the past, but in this case he shows restraint when he could have easily gone the muckraking route, and gives a valid report based on facts he got from primary sources.

Ah, I think I see the communication problem we're having.  The story has been edited since it was originally posted.  Look at my first post which quotes the originally published text [although I now see that Noe has clipped most of it out, so you can't fully appreciate the horror].  The original version used "adverse" rather than "averse", which could have just been a typographical error, but considering the poor quality of the writing as a whole I thought that assumption might be giving him too much credit.  That one word wasn't the part that most bothered me, I just quoted it in my later post for sarcastic effect.

I'm no teacher and I have never claimed to be a good writer.  But this particular article was so poorly done that I felt it to be a new low, even for the Comical.  Understand, I'm not talking about the content here, but the way it was presented.

[Noe]

We cannot cut and paste copyright material in full.

Sorry.

[Amy]

We cannot cut and paste copyright material in full.

Sorry.

Just forget the whole thing then, since the parts that would have best illustrated my point are gone forever.  Suffice it to say that JdJO must keep the editors very busy.  I can't believe he holds down a job at the only daily newspaper in the fourth largest city in the US with those "skills".

[Noe]

Just forget the whole thing then, since the parts that would have best illustrated my point are gone forever.  Suffice it to say that JdJO must keep the editors very busy.  I can't believe he holds down a job at a the only daily newspaper in the fourth largest city in the US with those "skills".

Understood and no one should question any credibility of a shoddy job by JdJO or agendized reporting.  We have to balance it with what is our forum policy and in this case, we have to maintain our standard regardless.

[pravata]

Understood and no one should question any credibility of a shoddy job by JdJO or agendized reporting.  We have to balance it with what is our forum policy and in this case, we have to maintain our standard regardless.

Lets just call it good manners.