Don't Mess With the WAMMA
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 10:11 AM EST
in Events
469 comments
Some of you might have wondered about this FanPost issuing an apology and retraction of this FanPost. Here's the correspondence which led to that retraction, Mr. Lynch was thoughtful enough to cc the Bloody Elbow editorial staff.
Matt,
Do you have any intention of issuing a public retraction to the below article, given that you are well aware that the statements "Under the recommendation of Pat Miletich WAMMA enacted the rule that to be eligible to be in the top 10 in a weight class you have to have fought a top 10 contender in the last 6 months" and "So since BJ Penn had not fought a top 10 contender since 5/24/08 WAMMA voters can no longer vote for him in the WAMMA lightweight rankings" are both completely false?
Michael B. Lynch
Chief Operating Officer & Secretary
World Alliance of Mixed Martial Arts
And following Matt's response:
Matt:Thanks for taking time to respond.This is not an attempt to chill your right to free speech. However, libel is not free speech. In my opinion as a trial attorney for over 12 years (although be no means an expert on 1st Amendment law), your article crossed the legal line notwithstanding your attempt to cover yourself which was woefully insufficient. If you wanted to write a so-called comedy piece or parody piece, you should have identified it as such openly and upfront. There is lots of stuff on the Net about WAMMA, both positive and negative, and as long as folks have the facts straight I have no problem with divergence in opinion. On a personal note, I have always taken ample time to answer any of your emails and find your article harmful and just plain spiteful, to be frank.I would suggest that your lawyer contact our attorney Pete Kaufman, Esq. I will not lecture you on the law (I will let your lawyer do that). I would also suggest a refresher course in journalism and professional 101.That being said, a simple, public retraction within the next 24 hours (to give you time to contact your attorney and he ours, if you seek that route) that your both statements attributed to Pat and WAMMA's Ranking policy had no basis in fact, and you apologize for any confusion, will completely suffice and I will deem the matter concluded. This retraction must take the form of another fan post with your retraction (a comment to your original post will not suffice).Please be guided accordingly.Mike
Let Mike Lynch know what you think in the comments.
UPDATE by Brent Brookhouse: I'm upset by WAMMA's behavior in this situation. These were guys that I did have some respect for when I first spoke to them and I thought that their hearts are in the right place but were just fighting a losing battle. The truth is, they're the same kind of guys that make pathetic money grabs in every sport. I've covered this in a previous piece that I wrote and I'll ask you all to check it out again.
The truth is, Mike Lynch, Dave Szady and yeah, even Pat Miletich need to realize that you don't get anywhere in this sport without the fans behind you. Their attitude is that the fans and MMA community at large don't matter...as long as they can get some promotions behind them, they'll be just fine. But that isn't the case and unless they change their ways they'll likely be realizing it in ten years when we're all looking back on WAMMA as nothing more than the answer to a trivia question.
1 recs |
469 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
WAMMA is trying hard to cover their lack of relevance by slinging legal threats at people who poke fun at them. Shameful.
by Carl P on Dec 18, 2008 9:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Did you know we are in high demand, Laura?
by Eugene Schelfaut on Dec 18, 2008 11:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn’t you be pissed off at the world if you looked like Carrot Top?
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is that really Lyncy
He looks like a fat Stephen Bonnar with a bad wig
by dedstrk316 on Dec 18, 2008 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He looks a little bit like Rob Zombie now.
Did you know we are in high demand, Laura?
by Eugene Schelfaut on Dec 18, 2008 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Where the fuck did Michael Bolton go? Are comments just disappearing?
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's suing for the comparison to Lynch
by Blackout612 on Dec 18, 2008 11:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you better take that back before you get an email tomorrow..
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was my doing...
It was a little more petty on my part than I like to get…so I removed it. Since it was my own comment I felt that I was within my rights to do so…sorry.
He sucks at business…but getting into namecalling and whatnot wasn’t the direction I wanted my own posts to go on this…so I removed it…sorry. Feel free to post it up yourself ;)
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was going to warn you about that shit, but I figured my warning and potential ban wouldn’t hold up under the scrutiny of the BE rules committee.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Y’all have a rules committee? With, like, rules meetings and rules debate and shit?
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If a committee exists, I’m not aware of it. The editors are in charge.
No name calling, no ethnic or sexual slurs, no threats, and no political discussion. Those are the rules.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just kidding Brent, btw.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah...
no rules committee exists.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That you want us to know of…
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 18, 2008 11:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was about to say
The idea of you guys sitting around a table debating rules… it made me sad.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are few rules, but they’re taken very seriously. Some order must be kept here.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So seriously, in fact, that there is no debate.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 11:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Really
That “no name calling” rule must not apply to Michael Rome. Scroll a few of his posts.
Read My Blog
"Life's tough, tougher if you're stupid."
by Brandon Jones on Dec 19, 2008 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It applies. Michael’s just not a big fan of rules.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is a certain...
“invisible line” when it comes to the name calling. Calling someone stupid in one context is different from another (i.e. You’re being stupid or Your point is stupid is different from You are stupid). If someone crosses that line they are told with a gentle warning at first and scaling upward after.
Trust me…as an editor on this site I myself have received at least one warning for crossing that line.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
'at least one'
I’ll set the over/under at 17. Just kidding!
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 6:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
good thing I read this first..
How far am i allowed to go using somebody’s picture and some great Photoshop work?
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sometimes, you gotta fight petty with petty (and no, that isn’t a NASCAR joke).
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One of the few still-funny In Living Colour sketches. Rec’d.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
THIS JUST IN.....
If you’re initial article was parody and/or satire that’s protected. You can make fun of whoever you want. You’d think someone who was a lawyer for 12 years would know that.
by Dexerion on Dec 18, 2008 9:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wow...
First of all…a satirical fanpost on a blog is something they’d go after for libel? I guess they have a lot of time on their hands what with not being relevant.
The newest problem with WAMMA I guess is that they’re starting to lash out at MMA fans because they can’t get respect for their horribly weak strategy. They refuse to acknowledge that to be successful in MMA you HAVE to have the fans on your side. If the fans don’t take you seriously you are worthless.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 9:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
“I guess they have a lot of time on their hands what with not being relevant.”
That’s classic and this Lynch character is a joke.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 9:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But the fans are stupid, Brent. That’s why us unwashed masses NEED WAMMA to tell us who’s the best.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a valid point. I think you’d be better off reading out Meta-Rankings instead, though.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, fuck WAMMA – just listen to Richard.
Until he threatens to sue you.
Richard smells!
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is that some people took it seriously.
That last sentence trying to say it was satire kind of sucked and could have meant that WAMMA itself is a joke concept. Which it is.
by zeroword on Dec 19, 2008 9:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Poor reading comprehension on the part of other visitors to the blog isn’t the fault of Matt.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be honest, I read the post and didn’t really understand the last sentence (that it was satire). It didn’t read that way and IMO wasn’t funny either. Can you help a brother out and point out of what the post was a spoof.
by !claw on Dec 19, 2008 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Satire and spoof/parody aren’t necessarily the same thing nor does satire have to be in any way humorous well written or obviously labeled to be satire. Your confusing two different things.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right. I think the main issue is that a fairly large percentage of people don’t know what satire is.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
H.L. MENCKEN IS A GOD!
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I used to use Richard’s sig quote as my sig quote on a different forum.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
(No So) Fun Fact: They quoted that line on Criminal Minds this week.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 6:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That almost makes me sad, because the people that watch that show will by and large give the writing staff credit.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 6:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They cited Mencken when they said it.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 7:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In Soviet Russia...
internet blogs you!
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 9:57 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Awesome!
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What are the odds..
..that I’d see that episode of Family Guy an hour after you wrote that? Haha..
by Blackout612 on Dec 19, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
fantastic rec’d
Being on the internet gives me a right...nay a responsibility to bitch about things
by beery_pbr on Dec 19, 2008 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Making up quotations and attributing them to milatech is not an opinion. It is in fact a lie. I’m no lawyer but I don’t think you can say somebody said something when you know they did not say it.
by !claw on Dec 19, 2008 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In the context of satire...
or parody. Yes…you can. Otherwise shows like Family Guy would be in a lot of trouble. Or sites like The Onion…etc
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Look at the article that Fightlinker put up about Cantwell after his last fight. Hilarious, made up quotes and all.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 5:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Carl and Brent
You are right on. Nobody gives a damn about WAMMA or their silly “belts” so they get their panties in a bunch when somebody makes fun of them. Way to endear yourselves to the hardcore MMA fans WAMMA. You’ll be going the way of Affliction soon.
by dedstrk316 on Dec 18, 2008 9:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
WAMMA is going to sue some guy on a website for a fanpost?
WAMMA makes money how again? Now they are going to pay a lawyer $400 an hour to chase a go nowhere lawsuit? Their business model keeps getting better and better.
I’ve always been a defender of WAMMA mostly out of there willingless to answer questions from MMA fans on this site and my utmost respect for Pat Militech but its pretty hard to root for them after seeing this nonsense.
The WAMMA email reeks of empty intimidation that most people that aren’t in the legal profession bow to because they don’t know any better.
by Day Man on Dec 18, 2008 9:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I suspect their plan was to develop an idiotic business plan that would inspire satirical commentary. Then, they could sue the commenter for libel.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, if that is the case then I totally retract my comment. That is genius.
by Day Man on Dec 18, 2008 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
More Underpants Gnomes Logic
1) Give the UFC the finger
2) ???
3) Profit!
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:24 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Another thing...
I read the site everyday. I didn’t even notice the offending fanpost until the apology fanpost was put on the site. Now its front page material and the response is almost totally negative towards WAMMA. Nice business judgment.
by Day Man on Dec 18, 2008 10:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Nobody ever accused these guys of being smart.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly a poorly thought out ham fisted and overblown bully attempt to get rid of a satirical fan post that got all of 8 replies before it slid off the first page has now got them a much more noticed fan post and a front page article on what a bunch of incompetant jack asses they are. You know if they didn’t think it was marked as satire properly perhaps they could of contacted an editor and asked for it to be marked as satire better instead of threatening serious legal action against a fan post. Way to not only shoot yourself in the foot but also kill off any goodwill you had with fans around here WAMMA.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rec’d for interesting and relevant wiki page that I had never heard of.
by Day Man on Dec 18, 2008 10:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, if they didn’t like the way the post was presented, why didn’t they just come here and write one of their own? Threatening legal action against a commenter on an MMA blog? This is a situation where I believe the remedy could be more damaging that the disease.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 10:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You know I imagine an editor here would of had no problem going back and putting ’satire" in big letters at the start of the post if WAMMA had asked. Threatening legal action and making a big deal over that was a really stupid move on their part.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 10:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think both the writer and lynch are terribly inept...
first off… if you haven’t realized that rankings in MMA mean ZERO in the grand scheme of who gets title shots, then you’re not paying attention very closely now are you? Second… Lynch is a PR disaster… not only is this merely a fan post, but who cares what anyone thinks about silly rankings that really don’t mean jack squat to begin with? It’s like everyone is all of the sudden concerned about top 10 lists…
The bottom line here is this, and both parties need to come right out and say it… the rankings don’t really mean much… those who sell tickets and ppv buys will get title shots and prime card slots… those that don’t… won’t… regardless of where they stand in anyone’s top 10 list.
I think both WAMMA and BloodyElbow.com look pretty stupid today.
by scottyweb on Dec 18, 2008 10:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’m curious what you think Bloody Elbow did to “look pretty stupid.”
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
A fanpost by one of our readers makes us look stupid?
The purpose of the MMA community is to cover things in the sport and WAMMA IS trying to be a major part of the sport. So one of our readers wanted to comment on it and that is stupid? Get off your high horse chief.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
‘trying’ being the operative word in that sentence.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a very good question.
Does BE look stupid for allowing anyone in the community to write FanPosts?
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
seriously?
posting emails someone sends you for mass consumption… I mean come on now, BE didn’t even remove the phone number for his lawyer… this reeks of unprofessionalism from both parties. Lynch and BE… it’s a schoolyard battle between two little girls… or at least that is what the actions of each would suggest…. not a respected news site which is usually one of the best mma news sites out there, and not a CEO of a multimillion dollar organization…
Speaking as someone who consults people like Lynch on how to deal with media and communications, I’d hang him from a yard arm for not passing this through someone first. But to post those emails… that was pretty lame… this isn’t watergate and you’re not exactly breaking a news story here… you’re making a clear cut attempt to embarrass Lynch for his embarrassing reaction to a fan post…
BE took an opportunity to gain some insight and access to WAMMA and the organization and slammed the door shut on themselves… if I were Lynch, I’d never speak to anyone at BE again.
So yes, I think both parties look very silly in all of this.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Lynch wanted the e-mails kept personal
Why did he cc the Bloody Elbow staff?
If I were Lynch, I’d go piss up a rope.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
put yourself in his shoes to figure that out...
I would assume he thought that if the editorial staff was made aware, they might aid him in his attempt to correct something he felt was incorrect. Again though, his judgement and quick-draw reaction was pitiful at best, but why beat the guy up for it publicly?
Good luck with that rope thing… hope that works out for you.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because the guy didn’t just ask Matt to post a retraction – read the e-mails. He asks Matt like he’s supossed to know he fucked up, then when Matt goes ‘sure, but WTF?’, Lynch fucking leaps to threatening legal action, condescention and general asshattery.
There are about 872 better ways to handle this, if I’m in his shoes.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
agree 100%
there are 872 better ways to handle this… no arguments… but because someone behaves like a moron, the immediate response is to go tit-for-tat?
I am not defending Lynch or Wamma… looking at this objectively as a BE reader who enjoys the site, and an MMA fan who enjoys the sport. I see the intentions of both sides and my personal opinion is they both weren’t very bright.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad we agree - lemme try to summarize...
Well, the way I look at it, if BE had handled this in a way more to your liking,
1) This asshattery would’ve gone unnoticed
2) Matt wouldn’t know how many people have his back
3) I wouldn’t have a post on the rec list and
4) WAMMA would only look kind of stupid instead of powerfully so.
So I guess I vote BE’s way.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you proved my point there...
I don’t really think anyone needs to have Matt’s back… he should be happy his post has garnished so many reads…
Matt made an attempt at a funny post that caught the attention and dire of the CEO of WAMMA… not a bad effort… look at the views it’s getting now… he should be pleased. He’s somewhat of the insignificant party here even though he’s the writer of the post. He’s not a journalist, nor a CEO… he’s a fan who posted something he wanted people to read… mission accomplished, well done. The reactions are what we are debating here… on behalf of BE and WAMMA.
A better way to deal with the issue for BE would have been to post about the issue, to note they read the emails and they support the fans rights to post opinions… right, wrong or otherwise… they could have further stated that they felt Lynch was misguided in his understanding of how the posting/community works and that it’s not considered “news” but “commentary” which can be biased, and incorrect if it wants to be. But to post those emails and then say… ya, WAMMA sucks… ya… that’s not really something to be impressed by…
A better way for Lynch to have handled it… is to hire a communications director and filter everything he sends to any media outlet of any kind through someone who isn’t prone to act on any slight thing that pisses him or her off… he might find the general consensus of WAMMA and himself might change if someone who knows what they’re doing handles his PR.
That’s really all I care to say about it… agree or disagree, those are my opinions on the matter and I respect yours even though they may differ from my own. I understand your position and your desire to have BE’s and the fan’s backs… I don’t
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
one last note...
as far as anyone getting sued for libel… the extent of those threats would have gone as far as a cease and desist letter from a lawyer… then the lawyer would likely consult the client that any further action would be frivolous and way too expensive for very little impact.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was the old internet lawsuit ploy, it meant nothing and wouldn’t of gone anywhere it was just a hollow threat backed up with “I’m a lawyer”.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's my final point here
He’s not a journalist, nor a CEO… he’s a fan who posted something he wanted people to read
AND WAMMA HAD THEIR CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER HARASS HIM.
An utter pox on the idea that this shouldn’t be in the public eye.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 1:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I think BE should have reported on it, without question, we don’t disagree there. I don’t agree in posting email correspondence however… it’s childish… and no better than Lynch threatening someone with legal action on an internet forum where anyone can post anything….
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
I guess I distinguish differing levels of morality between the two actions. Agree to disagree.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 1:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By posting the original email, it lends credence to BE’s argument and eliminates any confusion over the contents of the correspondence. It’s no different than trying to get a copy of a contract during negotiations, like the Couture or Fitch episodes.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 1:42 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
UM
We didn’t post ANYTHING until have EVERYTHING cleared by lawyers. So do I think there’s anything inappropriate? No.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 19, 2008 7:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
um2
you’re taking guidance on what is and what isn’t appropriate in journalism/commentary from lawyers? Do they check your spelling too?
Those are 2 very distinct and different areas of expertise.
I think most of you are generally missing the point I’m trying to make here…
Posting the emails didn’t cover you legally for anything… you were never at risk of anything… even public perception hits… there’s no justification for going public with the emails… you didn’t need to go there… you could have reported about the incident without the emails and commented on what you thought about it… your decision to do so made BE look incredibly spiteful and petty. You didn’t have to take the low road is all I’m saying about your part in this… you stooped to Lynch’s level and you are not willing to see or understand that for some reason.
You also made it clear that you’re just as big of a bully as you claim Lynch to be… how dare anyone take issue with anything ever posted on BE… if you do… and you email us about it… we’ll post all your emails and call you a moron for everyone to read about… so while I read about how hypocritical and terrible WAMMA is… I pose the question… are you not doing the exact same thing by bullying Lynch for his silly emails?
It all reeks of a junior high school pissing match to me… in the end, nobody really wins because you all walk away smelling like urine.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 11:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is so typical. When someone’s idea is bad and I refuse to waste energy going to detail about how bad it is, the general from the person with the bad idea is to retort that I “missed the point”. Folks, my reading comprehension skills are actually pretty good. I understand everything you’re saying. But if we don’t agree, it’s not because I’m missing your point. I get your point, I just happen to think it’s awful. No, I don’t think I’m a bully, I don’t there are are legal or reasonable journalistic standards I’m betraying and I don’t think it’s a “pissing match”. Your characterization is little more than contrarian. Am I really supposed to respond to a sentence like this?:
“how dare anyone take issue with anything ever posted on BE”
If you think there’s a shred of intellectual merit to the idea, you are in need of help no one here can provide. There is no bully, no lout and no children here.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 19, 2008 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
you're right, this is typical...
you’re not going to convince me that my opinion lacks merit by calling me stupid…
Lynch is a douchebag for having an opinion on a fanpost that he didn’t like, and sent the kid threatening emails as a logical response in his mind… that’s your position. Got it. Can’t say I disagree with that, in fact I haven’t yet.
But now here we are… I have an opinion that you don’t like, and I’m all of the sudden stupid and in need of help no one here can provide.
Point proven, you’re not a douchebag bully like Lynch is… not at all… you’re the good guys because you have the higher moral ground to stand upon right?
Same shit, different pile…
Let me try to sum this up now… I have an opinion, you have an opinion, I understand your reasoning for the actions taken, and while I don’t agree with them, I can respect them. I respectfully agree to disagree and choose to stop wasting both our time debating who’s right or wrong as it’s not going to solve anything or change anyone’s mind.
fair enough? ok then… moving on…
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This went well beyond I have an opinion and you have an opinion when you went after their personal character for posting it. Of course I am having a hard time following your opinion, your saying that you would be ok if they told us what was said and commented on it but it’s not ok that they just showed us what was going on? Honestly where is this huge difference between telling us what was in the e-mails and what is going on because of them and actually just showing the e-mails that makes things from completly ok to “you guys are horrible bullies that look silly”?
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
look...
you’re not going to tell me what is generally accepted behavior regarding email communication in the communications field and have it totally oppose everything I’ve learned and experienced in the past 15 years within the industry… there’s a common practice that email correspondence is considered direct, private and otherwise off the table unless you’re out to expose, embarrass or prove false claims/statements made. It’s generally considered lacking in terms of professionalism… if you can’t write around an email to make a story, then you should probably be doing something else for a living.
I have my take on it, they have theirs and you have yours… each of us feel we are just and correct… and that’s ok… again… we can agree to disagree. Opinions are like a-holes… everyone has one and most of them stink… this is life.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When you cc an email to a reporter or the head of a blog, I think you are waiving any thought you should have that email is direct, and/or private.
by Phildo on Dec 19, 2008 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So writing up what was said in your own words is completly ok but posting the e-mail is a horrible thing to do? Seriously I think you are applying the wrong industry measure to this specific situation. Your knolwedge and experience in the industry seems to be causing you to not see the forest for all the trees here.
Of course the only reason to even write an article about the e-mail (even with the write arounds you are suggesting) would be to expose the situation which is one of your own qualifiers mentioned. Yes they are trying to expose what this guy from WAMMA did to a fan poster on their blog, that is the whole point of all of this. This is site news and they are exposing the reason for the odd fan post retraction to the site.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am doing something else for a living. So is Luke, so are all the BE writers. We try to conduct ourselves in a professional manner but we are ultimately fans writing out of passion for the sport.
If you write to Bloody Elbow we reserve the right to publish it, so does any publication.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
in light of all of this...
I think you guys are doing a fantastic job… one exception will not outweigh the overall impression you guys are making on me as a fellow mma fan. So apart from the one item discussed, I think you’re doing a great job as far as professionalism and entertainment value goes. Let that not be lost on you regarding what I’m saying about the post in question.
Keep up the great work guys.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well I'm a bully
If some fucktard comes around legally threatening our posters over bullshit, I’m going to hoist him on his own petard.
There was nothing I could have written that would have conveyed the tone of Lynch’s emails as well as his own words.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought there was no name calling
If some fucktard comes around legally threatening our posters over bullshit, I’m going to hoist him on his own petard.
Read My Blog
"Life's tough, tougher if you're stupid."
by Brandon Jones on Dec 19, 2008 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
P.S.
Just to be clear, I fully support BE and their action on this matter. If you are going to send an email to a news source (and a blogging site for that matter!) you would be foolish to think it wasnt getting published.
I would argue that WAMMA wanted it published. Like they say, there is no such thing as bad press and having a story about you commented on over 400 times on the most popular MMA site on the web isnt a bad thing no matter what they say.
Read My Blog
"Life's tough, tougher if you're stupid."
by Brandon Jones on Dec 19, 2008 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
clearly you don't deal with many news sources or sites...
it’s not common practice to share direct contact emails with the general public unless of course your news source is a myspace blog… just because you’re on the internet doesn’t mean you have to behave like you are…
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No name calling with regard to other commenters.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ok
I understand your position and I can respect it… you have no need to justify the actions to me, you really don’t. I was sharing my own opinion and perception, right wrong or otherwise… much like your fanposter was…
are we starting to see the connection here yet?
I’ve now got BE staff on me for having that opinion… what do you really have to gain by debating it with me? You’ve made your point, I get why you did it… it’s your site and your right to do what you feel is best. We can agree to disagree here.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We like to discuss with our community. Frequently you guys are right when we’re wrong.
If we wanted to be bullies we’d ban you and delete all your comments.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And I want to ban someone. It looks fun.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You understand their position and respect it yet you call their character into question? and what is with the victimization association here? They aren’t threatening legal action against you for libel and demanding that you apologize for your opinion they are discussing your calling of their character into question, the “connection” isn’t what you seem to think it is here.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I posted the correspondence
because I didn’t want to be threatened with a lawsuit myself or accused of distorting his behavior.
When you send an unsolicited email to the editor-in-chief of a publication you should expect that said email might be published and edit accordingly.
Lynch’s behavior has been exposed to the public for what it is, no more no less.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 9:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you’re going to threaten to sue someone over nonsense that you can’t sue them over, you deserve to have your emails made public.
by Phildo on Dec 19, 2008 12:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
I just don’t agree. This is a community. BE editors treat it like a community, and that means sharing information with us. They’ve always been very good about that, and it’s one of the things that makes this website so great. WAMMA is not a community; it’s a (half-assed) corporation. Practice and protocol are necessarily and ethically different. We can’t conflate the BE website with WAMMA just because they talk to each other (or used to). To parallel, I work for the BC provincial government, but in a capacity where I interact with communities around the province. If I’m going to be ethically sound in my actions, I necessarily treat the communities and my fellow government employees differently. In this case, there’s no one person or organization straddling the divide; I mean, if WAMMA wasn’t completely fucking stupid, they might TRY to do that, and actually reach out to the MMA fanbase… but apparently not.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 12:18 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Thanks! I’ve never been rec’d before.
…does this mean I might get sued?
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 12:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The more recs, the more more likely you will get sued.
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 12:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But you didn’t rec! ‘Actions’, then ‘rec’!
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Recs don’t show up unless you refresh the page.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with this too
the immediate knee-jerk response here is contagious… the replies are very defensive and under the impression I’ve picked a side and it’s WAMMA… that’s not the case at all… both sides look silly in my opinion.
Simply because the site is community based, doesn’t establish it as being obligated to post every email they get from anyone involved in mma… so why now? Because it was a prime opportunity to embarrass Lynch… they knew it, they jumped at the chance… did he deserve it? Perhaps he did… the fact is BE had options, they chose this route for clear cut reasons… note the update… it’s a long-winded way to say… WAMMA sucks.
Sometimes things that are not said are much more convincing than what is said.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 12:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re fully entitled to your opinion. I think we did a fine thing. Because it goes to the point that I’ve been saying about them for quite a long time. They DO NOT care about MMA fans which is a legitimate issue when they are so desperate for acceptance. The willingness to threaten to sue someone over a fan post on a blog is incredible for a company that is trying to be “fan friendly”
I gave them enough chances, I interviewed them…I let the readers interview them…but they proved that they’re completely lying about their intentions (they will only sanction fights that will provide them with potential monetary gains whil.e claiming that they are trying to crown the one true champion…those two things don’t go hand in hand).
As for going after one of our readers? I’m nothing if not protective of this site and I appreciate everyone that comes here to read, comment, post…etc. You can’t come in here and bully our readers in such a way without us getting defensive.
Lastly, this is SITE NEWS as the lawsuit would have involved BloodyElbow…Obviously. So this was a situation involving BloodyElbow and a “high profile” entity in MMA. So I think it qualifies as site news. You’re more than entitled to feel that we could have done this without fully posting their e-mails. But that is the route we chose to go and as such I stand behind our decision.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 12:59 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I think that gets to the point and I am glad that something like this that affects the site was made public. Nothing wrong with scottyweb’s opinion I just don’t agree with him and I don’t think this makes the site look bad at all, it makes the site look like it sticks up for it’s fans/posters.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can respect that...
both your protective nature of readers, and your perception of your position on it being site news.
I do take exception to the ongoing commentary from here and other mma sites about rankings, true champions and how companies involved are only interested in money. Welcome to Capitalism, grab a bank account and come on in!
If Brock Lesnar isn’t the proof you need to understand that those who make the company money… will get title shots and prime card slots / fights, then I don’t really know what to tell you. Every org in MMA wants to make money… the goal isn’t to be a purist society of hardcore mma fans to crown a true mma fighter in every weight class… they want to sell tickets, merchandise, advertising and ppv buys… end of story.
Sure… Fedor is likely the best on the planet, I’m a huge fan… but will he outsell Brock Lesnar vs a tin can full of olives? I don’t think so… he has some serious PR problems with his management. But the fact remains, the best fighters won’t always get title shots and kid-glove treatment. Remember Tim Sylvia when he kept winning and people kept booing? The UFC couldn’t have unloaded that PPV disaster fast enough… he went from title holder… to being shipped off to the competition with a warm good-bye and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
So I guess I take exception to the fact you’re so up in arms over WAMMA claiming they want to crown a true champion as opposed to making loads of money… because let me ask you… if there was a joint promotion where they did crown a true HW champ, wouldn’t it be logical to assume that event would make them loads of money? Come on now… are you really serious that you think there should be no connection with crowning true champions and making money? Everyone in this business, including the fighters want the same thing… a paycheck. A hefty one if possible…
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
WAMMA claims to be unbiased in their attempts to rank fighters and sanction fights, that is where the issue with them being in it for the money comes in. It’s really hard to claim to be unbiased and for profit at the same time because making decisions for profit is a built in bias. That is what separates WAMMA from the UFC as far as this discussion, they are claiming to be a step above what the UFC does.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and the ufc claimed brock lesnar deserved his title shot
so come on… apples and oranges here… most MMA org’s are run by lunatics… we know this to be true… why do we care so much that they try to sell their outfit as being better than anyone else? We buy right into it… pride vs ufc… affliction vs ufc… bla bla bla… I just want to see great fights, I don’t care about Gary Shaw, Dana White or Mike Lynch… if they want my money… put on great fights… whatever else you do or say… doesn’t really matter to me.
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No the difference is that WAMMA claims their reason for existing is because of things like Brock getting a title shot shows a need for unbiased outside sanctioning yet they don’t act at the higher standard they claim. WAMMA isn’t a MMA org like the UFC or Affliction and they aren’t trying to sell themselves as an org that is better than any other org they are trying to sell themselves as being unbiased and above all the org infighting so that people would accept them as an authority on the sport above all the many separate organizations. There stated goal isn’t to take the UFC’s spot it is to take on the athletic commissions role and to unbiasedly decide who is and isn’t deserving of title shots as a all encompasing rules and sanctioning body for the entire sport.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ya... and?
I understand wamma’s position in the sport… so you’re telling me there is no money in being considered the “official” governing body for rankings in mma? Regardless of what they say of course because no company, business, or individual in business ever lies about making money vs the greater good right? Come on dude…
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No I am saying that if you are going to say that your whole stated reason for existing revolves around being unbiased and being above the things the UFC does to make money but you aren’t you should be called for it. The UFC doesn’t pretend to be something different, hell they said right up front that they were doing to Lesnar vs Couture fight to sell a huge number of PPVs and have been very clear that this was a big money fight for everyone involved (including the fighters).
WAMMA claims their goal is true unbiased ratings and sanctioning of undisputed champions. What really makes me scratch my head here is that it seems that you think they shouldn’t be called down for putting profit before stated goals and lying about it. Seriously WTF? I know that they are going to put profit first because that’s what for for profit organizations do but that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be pointed out when they are saying one thing and doing another. The logic of “they all do it so it must be ok” is a very sad way of looking at things.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think I agree...
papa johns… better ingredients, better pizza… they really don’t care about the ingredients… they want to make money… should they change their ads to say… we want your money, so we’re using better ingredients…
do you really need to be told that?
if wamma becomes the main sanctioning body… they stand to make a lot of money… their path to get there in their minds is to declare themselves to be totally unbiased and all that better ingredients stuff… why do you need them to say… we want to make money too?
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For someone who continually accuses others of not getting his point, you really don’t seem to get who me’s rather obvious point.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was beginning to think it was me. Glad someone else can see where he is completly missing what I am trying to say here.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe you are right, perhaps I don't understand your "rather obvious" point
the main issue was the conduct of both Lynch threatening legal action via email to a fanpost, and BE posting that email for public consumption and following it up with a comment that says… WAMMA sucks so to speak…
So no, I don’t really understand the point you’re trying to make about WAMMA saying one thing and doing another… I don’t disagree with it, but I don’t really understand how that justifies the action of posting the email. For me, it looked and read like a cheap shot from someone who was angry. I could care less about WAMMA saying one thing and doing another because they would have to approach govt to overpower the sanctioning bodies of the athletic commissions and pardon me if I’m mistaken, but I’m sure a load of similar boxing outfits tried and failed to do the very same thing. In a word, WAMMA is insignificant. They don’t have much impact on much of anything in MMA. I don’t think a WAMMA belt is respected much by even those who hold the belts.
So if I fail to see your point, my apologies. I do understand what you’re saying and do not disagree, I just don’t see the relevance. Fair enough?
by scottyweb on Dec 19, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You said: “I do take exception to the ongoing commentary from here and other mma sites about rankings, true champions and how companies involved are only interested in money. Welcome to Capitalism, grab a bank account and come on in!”
and my reply:“My counter wasn’t that WAMMA is evil for being for profit it was that there is nothing wrong with outside sources pointing out that being for profit conflicts with their public statements and does have a affect on how they do business.”
I don’t know how to make it any clearer than that.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is Papa John’s slogan.
They don’t go around telling other people that the only reason they exist is to make pizza with better ingredients. When asked, they’d probably readily admit that they exist to make money.
According to WAMMA, they exist to crown undisputed MMA champions and have unbiased rankings that are outside of the politics that currently exist with mma promotions and rankings sites. Yet they don’t do that. They appear in videos calling the orgs that work with them “forward-thinking” implying that Zuffa is somehow backwards thinking. They have policies and procedures about awarding belts that directly contradict their stated purpose. That is the difference.
by Phildo on Dec 19, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not saying Papa Johns should have to admit to wanting to make money I’m saying if they are pissing on the pizza and calling it better ingredients than yea someone should call them out for it. I haven’t said that WAMMA needs to own up for being a for profit group I have said that they there is nothing at all wrong with people pointing that out and showing how that affects their publicly stated goals.
You made an argument disparaging sites that discuss WAMMA being for profit and then refute my counter-point by saying the company shouldn’t have to say they want your money. Do you not see where you have drifted off to a different point here that has little to do with what I was saying? My counter wasn’t that WAMMA is evil for being for profit it was that there is nothing wrong with outside sources pointing out that being for profit conflicts with their public statements and does have a affect on how they do business.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s different with WAMMA.
Everyone else will readily come out and say that they are in it to make money. WAMMA continues to say that they aren’t in it for the money, they just want to crown “true champions” because “that’s what the fans want.”
Yet their actions never seem to be in sync with the words come out of their mouth.
WAMMA can’t and shouldn’t be treated like any other fight organization because they are not a fight organization. They claim that they are something else, but they never act like what they claim they are.
by Phildo on Dec 19, 2008 1:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
agree with scottyweb.
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Dec 19, 2008 5:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This post is only evidence that WAMMA threatened legal action against a BE commenter unless he wrote up an apology. One can draw their own conclusions about the incident.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 19, 2008 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why I posted these emails.
I don’t like anyone threatening BE and our readers with lawsuits over satirical fan post content that wouldn’t even be libelous if its true.
To me its a freedom of speech issue and a message to MMA organizations not to try to bully our readers with their bullshit.
As the founder of BE I consider this a fan site first — I still rarely contact news sources but prefer to comment on the news while trying to keep my conflicts of interest to a minimum.
This is an opinion and analysis site. Some of the other writers have more sources and break news but that’s not my thing nor is it the primary mission of Bloody Elbow.
Our mission is to host the best, most thoughtful and most fun MMA discussions on the web.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 9:06 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’d argue that the lawyer for WAMMA trying to bully fans of the sport is newsworthy.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not to hug nuts here, but BE posts meta-rankings- composites of the other major subjective rankings. The goal of using such a model is to get a truer idea of what the MMA community as a whole thinks. All BE is doing here is shedding light on some asshattery.
by Drewplata on Dec 18, 2008 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Props to Kid Nate
Hilarious post title. Its important to remember how ridiculous this whole situation is.
by Day Man on Dec 18, 2008 10:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
lets all boycott Affliction..
see how fast WAMMA goes out of business.. fucking pussies!!!
I look forward to reading more of matts fanposts from now on.
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 10:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Honestly I was already torn on which events to order in January (being as three are just too many to afford) and this crap from WAMMA isn’t helping Affliction’s chances of getting any of my money.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brent, you’re dead on with the update brotha. The word of the day is: FANS
by poundnground on Dec 18, 2008 10:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
"Remember when WAMMA tried to...."
We’re going to be saying things like that in the near future. Much of the MMA community, myself included, have tired of Dana White’s egotism and and general ridiculousness. The last thing we need is another douche trying to tell us that he wants to “put on the best fights with the best fighters” when he knows damn well it’s impossible in the current state of the sport.
by Drewplata on Dec 18, 2008 10:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
For some people, every topic comes back to how much they dislike Dana White.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Unreal.
…notwithstanding your attempt to cover yourself which was woefully insufficient.
Aside from Matt said IN THE ARTICLE that it was SATIRE???
On a personal note, I have always taken ample time to answer any of your emails and find your article harmful and just plain spiteful, to be frank.
That sounds like someone at a diner ordering a full plate of ‘who gives a shit?’.
He could’ve easily registered, posted himself and squared what Pat said with WAMMA’S rankings and policies. But because that’s fucking impossible, he decides to leap to libel (which would never, ever, ever be held up in an American court) and order around a fan whose only crime was to read what people said and care.
Frankly, according to the first Amendment, I can write this:
My sources say Michael B Lynch is a crossdresser – a serious allegation if backed up by subsequent events.
How about a refresher course in not being an asshole?
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:21 PM EST reply actions 15 recs
I have no clue how to do that.. my bad :)
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Click actions, then click Rec.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The “sources says” thing? No, you really couldn’t say that.
Well, you might be able to make the argument that it’s preposterous and therefore couldn’t be believed. But I wouldn’t want to go to court with that. Most people would laugh it off, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.
“Sources say” doesn’t provide you much legal protection.
by Beau Dure on Dec 19, 2008 8:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess we'll see
Al Franken did the exact same thing to Tony Blankley in Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (And Other Observations)
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure it does...
If I tell him that I am his source…and that doesn’t make me right or wrong. He has a bad source. People have bad info from sources all the time.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 9:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If “sources say” wasn’t ok then TMZ would be sued multiple times every day. It’s not stating a fact it’s stating a unconfirmed story, rumor or information leak.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 9:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just wait till Fightlinker gets a hold of this story.
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 10:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It reads like it was written by Fightlinker.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Mr. Lynch was so butthurt by what Matt wrote, he should stay off the internet tomorrow.
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or just forever and ever. I’m cool with either, frankly.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
JUST WAIT TIl...
Deadspin gets a hold of this story!
by poundnground on Dec 18, 2008 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
actually edit that...
JUST WAIT TIL…Rick Chandler gets a hold of this story!
by poundnground on Dec 18, 2008 10:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please no. They’ll fuck it up royally.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 18, 2008 10:27 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Woah... We can be sued?
For crap we say on here? I think i’ll stop writing the Fanpost ‘Why Fedor is Gay’…
brb
Do I need to say this was a sarcastic post?
by Discman2 on Dec 18, 2008 10:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Apparently, you owe all of us an apology.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I find Discman2’s comment to be harmful and just plain spiteful. GIVE ME MONEY.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 12:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Go ahead and write it, because Fedor dosen’t care about petty FanPosts on the internet…he has a life.
Lynch on the other hand…
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who’s going to write the first Fanpost about Lynch?
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 10:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t burn the calories needed to type the letters. I’d rather scratch my ass (which, by the way, has a more consistent ranking system than WAMMA) or something.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
i just watched the fox news fightgame video with lynch, and lynch looks like he just rolled off of a park bench wearing an Affliction t-shirt. lol!
by bdw on Dec 18, 2008 10:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Shameful and Abhorrent
WAMMA is so desperate to protect their deteriorated image that they are lobbing threats at a forum member of an MMA blog? I’ve heard of not going down without a fight, but this isn’t even remotely applicable..
by Blackout612 on Dec 18, 2008 10:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
(1) Legally, they would have had some type of claim since a disclaimer should be readily apparent. Putting “I’ll continue this satire” in the bottom of the article doesn’t really count. But, realistically, lawyers cost money as do other aspects of litigation. WAMMA would have to prove they suffered some type of damages and that would be likely as eveyrthing this guy made up was on par in terms of dumb shit they had said themselves. We could’ve said, go fuck yourself I’m not changing shit, and nothing would’ve happened.
(2) The fact that this guy is supposed to be the COO of a company yet he is responding personally to shit written on a message board in negative light about his company is foreshadowing further reasons why they’re going to fail in EPIC fashion. The reason Dana doesn’t punk kids out on the internet is because HE IS RUNNING A FUCKING BUSINESS AND DOESN’T HAVE TIME FOR THAT SHIT. The fact that this guy has time to comment on message baords when he should be spending his time trying to legitimize his organization baffles me.
by dropkick101 on Dec 18, 2008 10:27 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
Yep a situation were a “hey you need more clearly label that as satire” request instead jumped straight to an overblown “I’m going to sue your ass”. Either they are being overly defensive or they are just assholes, either way it was just pathetic and uncalled for.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd for
The reason Dana doesn’t punk kids out on the internet is because HE IS RUNNING A FUCKING BUSINESS AND DOESN’T HAVE TIME FOR THAT SHIT.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can assure you from personal experience his lawyers do.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 18, 2008 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah thank Dana’s lawyers every time I don’t post a Judo Chop.
I had a great one in the queue about Demian Maia’s drop to guard whizzer takedown against Quarry. But without the animated gifs it was just pointless.
by Kid Nate on Dec 18, 2008 10:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Damn. That would’ve been a quality article – all the Judo Chop’s have been.
I take you guys at your word. This is just flat out stupid on Dana’s part – a gif is basically a Sportscenter highlight. And who would want millions of fans having access to those.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 10:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Reenactment.
All we need are some actors with top level jiu-jitsu. That’s in the budget, right? Never mind.
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pivot Stickfigure Animator
Pivot stick figure animator might cover basic moves, and the price is right (freeware)
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 11:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s pretty cool. The stick figures don’t bare much resemblance to Demian Maia, but who’s really paying close attention?
by Cannon Jacques on Dec 18, 2008 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Corey Hill however...
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I haven’t messed with it in a while but it does allow for some pretty neat animations and I think it even has more complicated figures with multiple joints than just stick figures too.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 11:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
how about getting the actual fight scene then cover them up with digitally to look like someone else or a cartoon maybe? or is that illegal?
by Johann on Dec 18, 2008 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If there were more hours in the day. Sadly BE is still a part-time hobby for me between working a full-time job and raising a kid.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 9:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So, since Dana doesn`t have time for that shit, how come he has time to make VLOGS bashing Terrel (that comedian he was talking about)? Does that mean that none of us posters have jobs or other obligations since we have time to post? If you are a fan, you check the web. Maybe Mr Lynch is a fan?
And Where do you draw the line for who`s worth replying to? What if one of the Editors? Or maybe Mr Thomas himself had made the very same satire? Wouldn`t it have been kind of a compliment Most people here are hardcore MMA and will spread the word if satire suddenly becomes reality. (I give you Turtle and Meadow Soprano as an example) I actually think some bad-mouthing of Wamma here might affect them more in the long-run than an itsybitsyteenieweeny-piece in a newspaper.
And finally. The tone is veeeery much Sherdog. “BJ sucks! Yeah. BJ Sucks big-time! He`s a chicken shit! He is constantly lying!” or maybe
BJ Penn recently said that He didn`t expect Leben to get caught, which means that he now has to change his whole training routine. As one of my trainers I had him try out a kind of cycle that didn`t quite pan out. But I promise all my fans that I won`t get caught! And yeah, GSP is a pussy.
Oh. And the last part was satire.
(I do wonder if this could be a banning offense…`)
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Dec 19, 2008 5:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and btw, why wasn`t mattmans response in there?
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Dec 19, 2008 5:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think we asked lawyers permission to publish it.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 19, 2008 7:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t want to publish Matt’s correspondence because he’s not a public figure and he didn’t forward it to us. Lynch did.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 9:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to figure out what you are trying to say, you are all over the place but instead of dealing with “what ifs” just look at what actually happened.
It was a fan post that was stated to be satire and got all of 8 replies, most people didn’t even see it until the official apology fan post went up the next day and that did much more damage to WAMMA than any potential fans misunderstanding the original post did. The damage here was inflcted on WAMMA by WAMMA because of a heavyhanded and poorly thought out attempt to get this guy who apparently offended Lynch(he stated as much in the letter). A simple letter to an editor asking that this be labeled properly would of made it all go away without any issue at all.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 7:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm. yeah
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Dec 19, 2008 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just re-read my post. I gotta start thinkin before I right something down. That stuff actually made sense in my head. (It still does, which is even more scary. My head is a mess…)
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Dec 19, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently my arguement above has devolved to the quality of pizza toppings, it’s when things don’t even make sense in your own head anymore that there is a problem :D
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, the WAMMA website lists Micheal Lynch as COO…and secretary. Perhaps he is just fulfilling his secretarial duties?
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One of the biggest requirements for libel/slander (spoken libel)...
Is that you need to show that it did or would lower/harm their reputation in the minds of right minded people.
So right there, there claim fails… their reputation among “right minded people” is that they are a phony, crock of shit organization that can’t even follow their own senseless rules, full of d-bags looking to snatch any sheckle they can get their greedy hands on.
If anything that fan post “upped” their reputation.
by The_Gaijin on Dec 19, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I have a feeling the fan posts will be filled with apologies tomorrow morning. From every single one of us!
by poundnground on Dec 18, 2008 10:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I said I was sorry!
Oh, OK. Class act.
Sorry you’re such jerks!
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 18, 2008 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL…I’m staying away from this….
WAMMA is a joke, though.
by IHateMMA on Dec 18, 2008 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
JUMPED THE SHARK?
does anyone else feel that WAMMA has officially “jumped the shark”. or did they do that already with the aoki/alvarez being the lw champ over b.j.
by bdw on Dec 18, 2008 10:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I guess they just gotta go with what they can get…. if you think about it.
by poundnground on Dec 18, 2008 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dear Matt and Kid Nate
Much respect for you both, f*ck WAMMA
by banter on Dec 18, 2008 10:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
FYI...WAMMA
Feel free to sue me for that, seriously, f*ck you for smothering free speech.
You’re clueless about what the fans want.
by banter on Dec 18, 2008 10:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What a dick.
Did you know we are in high demand, Laura?
by Eugene Schelfaut on Dec 18, 2008 10:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I digress..
..but MMA Live Episode 32 went up not long ago, for those who are as anxious for it as I usually am..
by Blackout612 on Dec 18, 2008 10:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
A question. Did Lynch not understand that this was a fan post? Did he threaten the whole site over this?
This qoute made me wonder if he thought this was being pushed as actual news by an actual reporter instead of just a fan post:
I would also suggest a refresher course in journalism and professional 101.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 10:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure...
it sounds like Lynch copied Nate and maybe Luke on the chain of e-mails with Matt. I wasn’t involved which I find funny considering I’ve interviewed them on multiple occasions for the site. You’d think that they may have wanted to reach out to the person they most know here…but whatever. I’m sure Nate or Luke can clarify if they see fit.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That was my assumption too. I’m also assuming he’s ignorant of the relevant case law regarding web site liability for third party content.
by Kid Nate on Dec 18, 2008 11:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But he’s been a trial attorney for over 12 years. He’s not ignorant of anything.
by Phildo on Dec 18, 2008 11:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt it was ignorance...
it was entirely an attempt to scare someone into taking back something they didn’t like.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, at least WAMMA got their way and the issue is now dead. They made it smaller by mentioning it, actually.
Wait a second…
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you mean...
8 comments on the original “offending post” and 36 on the retraction…
and now over 100 on this post in under 2 hours?
Good job controlling the news cycle ya’ll.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Even before this, the apology post had more replies than the original. These guys are not very bright.
by Phildo on Dec 18, 2008 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And a top-of-the-rec-list satire piece by yours truly. That shit wrote itself.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you God for posting that. You too, Nate.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats a possibility...
He might not able to digest the idea that a FANpost was written by FANS and filled with “Community blog posts and dicussion.”
But who knows, he supposed to be a 12 year trial attorney..
by Johann on Dec 18, 2008 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I explained to him quite clearly what a FanPost was.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 18, 2008 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It will be interesting to hear if you wake up tomorrow with another email from Lynch after this post.. lol
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha.
Or, your lawyer will let you know and then you will let us know.
Did you know we are in high demand, Laura?
by Eugene Schelfaut on Dec 18, 2008 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He’ll give us a toll-free number to contact if we ‘really want to go down that road.’
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So he is accusing a random fan making a post of a lack of journalistic integrity and professionalism even though he was aware that it was a fan and not any kind of professional journalist posting any kind of actual story? Perhaps he needs to head back for some refresher courses in professionalism 101 himself.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are no words to adequately respond to this with. Just pure, unadulterated, disgust.
by Rundownloser on Dec 18, 2008 11:06 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
This is the truth.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 12:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Even the kitten avatar has to avert its eyes in revulsion.
by Rundownloser on Dec 19, 2008 12:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have no problem with it really. When first reading the Fanpost before all this nonsense, I had difficulty telling it was satire. I thought it was real news and that the ‘satire’ comment on the end was just an amateur writer trying (and failing) to add a witty comment about the state of WAMMA and Pat Miletich’s alleged comments.
Perhaps there should be a law that only talented writers should be allowed to attempt satire?
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Why yes, there is no way I could possibly disagree with the BE hive mind unless I were the COO of an organization I have criticized since they were first ordained.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm..
I’d hate to bag on matt cause I myself is not a talented writer or is unable to write such article..
However, the original article, from what I remember, had disclaimers both at the start and at the end of the article. So, that really puzzles me how they’d interpret it as such..
by Johann on Dec 18, 2008 11:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if you click on the link to his original post, there is no disclaimer at the beginning and the one at the end:
“I will try to stay on top of this breaking story to see how far I can go with this satire but ultimately this satire should point out a major problem with WAMMA’s intergrity.”
That is only real part that could be interpreted as a ‘disclaimer’ and it’s really quite ambiguous as to whether the writer is referring to the piece as a whole as satire or whether the writer thinks that WAMMA’s described actions are almost a form of self-satire.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think we’d be bagging on the guy if he’d wrote a request for the fan post to be more clearly labeled as satire instead of him jumping straight to accusations of libel and threats to sue.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 11:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s just the lawyer in him. With them, it’s all about going for overkill with the first contact, so you can increase the chances of scaring the crap out of a person and having them settle immediately. You waste less time and resources that way.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well the lawyer in him needs to head back to reading comprehension 101 and perhaps take a few courses in public relations before WAMMA allows him to play Internet cop anymore. A simple request for a re-label of the article would be a much preferable outcome in this situation as opposed to what he was forcing on the guy to start with.
by who me on Dec 18, 2008 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
There’s a reason people don’t like lawyers, and that’s probably one of them.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s not generalize too much. I know plenty of decent lawyers. Just because the prevailing attitude is to be a ruthless douche, doesn’t mean that all lawyers HAVE to be that way. Personal choice is still involved.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Dec 19, 2008 12:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I stand corrected.. but still, like what who me said.. this would’ve gone unnoticed hadn’t they strong armed the writer in retracting an opinion/satire piece.. and if that’s all laywer talk, then may be he (lynch) should learn PR 101 cause he only made more mess out of his action..
by Johann on Dec 18, 2008 11:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know, if you’re not happy with the quality of the FanPosts, you could, like, write a FanPost before you start bashing the ‘talent’ of those that actually do write them.
Or just keep it to yourself. You know. Whatever.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well I guess everyone here who isn’t a professional mixed martial artist, is involved in running an MMA promotion, or even (LMAO) running a sham rankings/sanctioning body should keep their criticims of those who do to themselves too.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, that’s not what I’m saying – I can’t afford a gym right now – but if you’re going to say we need better writers in the community, we’d love to read what you got.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i second that...
ilostmydog: do a fanpost defending Mr. Lynch and the lack of BE rules and well apologize.
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about no? I’m sure my feelings will recover without an apology. Thanks anyways. ;)
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I get you. Sorry if you feel I misinterpreted your post. And I feel you on those gym costs, nothing is cheap with them.
by ilostmydog on Dec 18, 2008 11:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s all good, buddy. I wasn’t being sarcastic, either – I want everyone on this site to post.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This guy fails at the internet. Look at it this way, there’s one less thing you guys can cover and put out there for people to learn about/give publicity to etc.
by Dexerion on Dec 18, 2008 11:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is this serious this whole thing seems like a huge joke to me
by drano on Dec 18, 2008 11:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
100% serious...
I promise you this isn’t us pulling a fast one.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 18, 2008 11:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They expected you guys to stay hush hush about this…LOL..
FAIL.
by IHateMMA on Dec 18, 2008 11:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was wondering the same thing at first. Especially since BE has interviewed them. It’s just hard to realize they decided to take this path because of a Fanpost before sending a polite email to the owner of the site asking to take it down.
by steveoc24 on Dec 18, 2008 11:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean wouldn’t that be the right thing to do instead of threatening a frivolous lawsuit I mean how could any of this really hold up in court Judge Judy would kick Mike Lynch’s ass in court with this one
by drano on Dec 19, 2008 12:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, the way I look at it, if BE had handled this in a way more to your liking,
1) This asshattery would’ve gone unnoticed
2) Matt wouldn’t know how many people have his back
3) I wouldn’t have a post on the rec list and
4) WAMMA would only look kind of stupid instead of powerfully so.
So I guess I vote BE’s way.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
2) Matt wouldn’t know how many people have his back
And I really appreciate this.
by mattman73 on Dec 19, 2008 12:49 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm the one...
who has interviewed them on multiple occasions. And yeah, I do consider it to be mildly insulting that they wouldn’t reach out to me and ask me if we could work something out rather than threaten to sue one of our readers.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 12:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that would involve professional courtesy/respect.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 1:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It is boggles the mind that they didn’t just contact you (or any other editor here) for a simple fix and instead jumped straight to lawsuits for libel like they did. Even worse than that is that this goof tried to tell mattman73 that he needed to act more professional(professional fan post writer?) when he was acting like such a unprofessional douchebag himself.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
High School Musical 4
Lynch’s years spent in law school and all the swirlies that took place…
Honestly…a guy who is in no way related to the site posted a piece dogging Wamma, and half assed a disclaimer at the end. What the hell is the problem?
WAMMA gives itself too much credit, not a damn person even looked at that piece for the sole reason it had WAMMA in the title…sounds like Lynch didn’t get his ass kicked enough when he was a teen.
disclaimer I love Mr. Lynch and this was all Satire. He is an upstanding member of the community and is loved by all the members of the mma community. Also I find WAMMA to be the prominent MMA Ranking in the sport as a whole. Their rankings are perfectly legit and are destined for glory and riches.
disclaimer to people who aren’t fucking retarded LMAO
by kyfm621 on Dec 18, 2008 11:54 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
What are the chances I can explain my side of the story without getting into further trouble?
by mattman73 on Dec 18, 2008 11:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You weren’t in any trouble to begin with, my friend – that assclown had, and has, no legal ground whatsoever to ask anything of you.
You ought to feel awesome, Matt – your satire piece has now generated almost 200 total comments and has shown us all how truly petty MMA is. I’d send you a fucking medal if I had one.
To repeat: WAMMA cannot touch you for what you have done.
by subo on Dec 18, 2008 11:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By MMA I of course mean WAMMA – I guess I just subconsciously removed that ‘WA’ tumor from the beginning of my beloved ‘MMA’.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing you are guilty of Matt is some bad writing! Not that I could do any better mind you.
by Benicio on Dec 19, 2008 4:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
do it in another Fanpost!!!!
just have BE’s permission before posting it.
by steveoc24 on Dec 19, 2008 12:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No Don't Ask Our Permission
You’re responsible for your own posts.
As long as it doesn’t violate our rules or SBNation policy we’re gold.
And as far as my opinion, you had nothing to apologize for in your first post.
Since Lynch was indirectly threatening BE we kept quiet until we could hear back from the SBN lawyers.
Post away Matt.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 9:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do tell...
What can they do to you? So long as what you’re saying is true, you’re safe. Technically, satire would be as well, which is how The Onion can stay in business – a quick gut-check should reveal something as satire, though the fact that I believed the article until the very end says something about how little credibility WAMMA has.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what kind of trouble would you still possibly be in since you wrote a retraction within 24 hours like he asked?
by steveoc24 on Dec 19, 2008 12:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He isn’t in any trouble.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i understand he was never in any trouble and didn’t do anything wrong.. but his comment made it seem like something was still pending
by steveoc24 on Dec 19, 2008 12:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He wasn’t in any to begin with – there isn’t a court in this country that would’ve allowed that case to proceed.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad to hear that – had it been me, I probably wouldn’t have issued a straight apology, rather just mocked them, and wound up in court. Not like my college-debt-ridden ass has anything of value for them to sue for.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have the same attitude
You can’t bleed a stone, buddy – stone’s ain’t got blood.
Billy Bob Thorton in Bad Santa: ‘You think you can make my life any fucking worse, go right ahead – try it’
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is it wrong that Bad Santa is my favorite Christmas movie?
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They got nothing on you, so long as you just tell what happened and heaven forbit post your own opinion…(insert bitching about libel vs. freedom of speech + lynch’s annoying voice here)…
Lynch and WAMMA look bad enough without anyone saying anything more than what has been done.
I feel like I’m on a playground in elementary school and the really “smart” kid got his panties in a wad. lol
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Does this Lynch have any fanposts...
Or can you derive IP addresses from the Emails he sent?
I’d ban him from accessing the website just to piss him off.
by JCS_FM on Dec 19, 2008 12:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
They could possibly ban Miletich (who I believe is a member), but I think that’d be an unnecessary escalation. If they didn’t have this kind of relationship, we’d have never gotten this glimpse of stupidity and pettiness. Bravo for keeping those lines of communication open, if only to see what other fucked up shit will come from the other side next.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pat Miletich is a member of BE? What makes you say that? (Not doubting, mind you, just curious)
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I saw Brent mention it – not like a contributor, but a lowly member like us guys.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes...
he is…and he has posted comments on here in the past (specifically in the WAMMA “town hall” interview where the BE readers got to have their questions answered by them. He is far from a regular contributing commenter or anything though
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 12:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not only that but I visit the site at least 10 times a day.
by mattman73 on Dec 19, 2008 12:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, this has made my night…I want Lynch to hurry and write back and keep the hilarity coming.
WAMMA should sue Lynch for making them all look like assclowns…crappy rankings are one thing…but being made to look this childish? Now that, is damaging their image.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Have you seen a picture of him? He was making WAMMA look silly even before he wrote these emails.
by ilostmydog on Dec 19, 2008 12:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now we’re really building a case against him. Someone make a fanpost petitioning WAMMA to sue Lynch for damaging their image irreversibly. They can make enough money to stay relevant…or should I say… “relevant” for another year.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to think that Militech has no knowledge of this hilarious fiasco. I really have a hard time believing that he would support idiotic caveman lawyer threatening fans over a satire.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Pat was CC’d on all of the emails and responded to at least one.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 19, 2008 7:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Man, that really changes my opinion of him.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 10:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not that he gives a crap about my opinion, lol.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“In my opinion as a trial attorney for over 12 years”—perfect example of things that don’t mean shit.
“I would suggest that your lawyer contact our attorney Pete Kaufman, Esq., at 850-EAT-SHIT”—I think this was a bumper sticker I saw once.
Congrats to this moron for even further distancing the fans from his shitty joke of an organization. Isn’t it funny how little lawyers actually know about the law?
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:10 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I think it is safe to say...
That it’s going to be a LONG time before there is any positive or meaningful piece of news that envolves WAMMA.
They remind me of the annoying guy who sits around a crowd of friends and tries desperately to get in the conversation.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
This string of commentary is full of ownage to the Nth degree
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 12:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If I was fanpost saavy I would quote all the best pieces and look at it from time to time just to look back and remember the good times.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BLOODYELBOW.COM has more commenters on this blog than people who give a flying fuck about WAMMA. This petty bullshit is just another nail in the coffin for them. Even Tim “pee pee taste” Sylvia admitted that their belt is worthless.
by nitro on Dec 19, 2008 12:18 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. Their relevance is non-existant. The bare facts are, outside of Fedor, the UFC has the best of the best, and the challengers for that title go to the ufc…
WAMMA is worthless for rankings. They would be far better suited…um…hmmm…well the best alternative is NOT EXISTING AT ALL…too late for that apparently.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair..
Tim lost that title fight. Had he won he would be rallying behind WAMMA.
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 12:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fedor beat a guy in less than a minute for a belt that no one had ever heard of before that. That’s like me awarding you the “Best Blogger” award. Congratulations!!!
by nitro on Dec 19, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's one for you too!
There’s chocolate inside!!
by Blackout612 on Dec 19, 2008 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RETRACT THAT STATEMENT OR I SHALL HAVE YOU CONTACT MY ATTORNEY
by nitro on Dec 19, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
WAMMA took everything
He’ll have to find me wandering in the streets.
by Blackout612 on Dec 19, 2008 12:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
slightly used...congratulations??
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:54 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Very nice.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Dec 19, 2008 3:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a feeling you’ll be asking for that belt back, much like EliteXC did with their champions after they folded.
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
should've used this one!
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 1:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s bad when Trump doesn’t have the worst hair in the photo.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 1:13 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Kenny G and the guy that played Drew Carey’s brother had a baby?
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 1:17 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Trump looks like
he’s afraid the thing is radioactive.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Dec 19, 2008 3:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Here is my take.
I truly believe I did nothing wrong. It was never my intention to pass that off as fact and I believe my actions show that. I stated it was satire in the post and then I came back and posted a comment in the comment area below the post backing up my point is was satire by stating I wrote it as comedy. So I don’t see how anyone can say I was trying to pass that as fact.
My attempt at satire was taking the Pat Miletich quote from the Dreamfighters.com interview and thinking what if WAMMA actually thought that was a good idea and enacted it right after that interview took place. Then from there I wrote a satire of what would of happened and my take on it. The consequences of what that one new rule change could cause.
As for the retraction.. I had no problem clearing up any confusion because I as stated it was never my intention to pass that lame satire off as fact and once again I believe my actions show that.
Also concerning Pat Miletich I still hold him in the highest regards for everything he has done for the sport so I had no problem apologizing to him if my lame satire offended him. But like I said it was never my intention to try and make anyone believe Pat actually said or did those things. If it was my intention to try and libel or slander either Pat or WAMMA I would not of tried to label it as satire and I would not have came back and posted in the comments below the post that I wrote it as comedy.
by mattman73 on Dec 19, 2008 12:20 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Well said. That would be an argument that would keep you in the clear. “If it was my intention to try and libel or slander either Pat or WAMMA I would not of tried to label it as satire and I would not have came back and posted in the comments below the post that I wrote it as comedy.” That takes the cake.
by kyfm621 on Dec 19, 2008 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are innocent - don't apologize!
The fact that it had to be explicitly labeled as satire is a shame. That’s how irrelevant WAMMA is. The Onion or The Daily Show with Jon Stewart take refuge in audacity, but the original article was too believable.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude bro
You did nothing wrong. Pat Miletich is a pioneer and a legend. He is also wrong here, as his his organization.
What you did was take that Pat said, applied it to WAMMA’s ranking and went ‘um…. huh?’ Then, you took that feeling of ‘um….huh?’ and translated – well, I might add – into a funny satire piece. Funny because it wasn’t – and what I mean by that is what you were writing would be what is actually happening if Pat’s words weren’t in direct contradiction to WAMMA’s rankings.
So they can either a) square Pat’s comments with WAMMA’s policies (fucking impossible) or b) try to make you feel scared or in the wrong. They chose b). Fuck them, and thank you for being the thorn in their side I can only dream of being.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We are so much more than a sanctioning body – we are a multifaceted fighter and fan forward MMA organization.
From the aforementioned BE interview with WAMMA reps.
You WILL support WAMMA or we will threaten you with litigation. You will not make fun of WAMMA or their dad will beat up your dad. Coincidentally, there dad is a lawyer and he will also sue you. Conform. Conform. Conform.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Resistance is Futile...
You must assimilate to the WAMMA.
by The_Gaijin on Dec 19, 2008 12:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Beat me to it, you bastard.
BJ Penn is the best LW in the world? Irrelevant. We are WAMMA.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
haha and what is their case regarding the whole lindland belfort matchup doesn’t it throw a kink in their whole penn argument
by drano on Dec 19, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exterminate All Bloggers!
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Essential Requirement of Libel =
Is that you need to show that it did or would lower/harm their reputation in the minds of right minded people.
So right there, there claim fails… their reputation among "right minded people" is that they are a phony, crock of shit organization that can’t even follow their own senseless rules, full of d-bags looking to snatch any sheckle they can get their greedy hands on.
If anything that fan post "upped" their reputation.
by The_Gaijin on Dec 19, 2008 12:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wamma is irrelevant
Dave, Mike, and Pat are losers, that’s not my opinion, it’s just fact.
by ProCannonFodder on Dec 19, 2008 12:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hey Luke
Kid Nate called him a Fucktard….isnt that worse?
Read My Blog
"Life's tough, tougher if you're stupid."
by Brandon Jones on Dec 19, 2008 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 12:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It is the most accurate word to describe the way Lynch acted about this.
by iiowyn on Dec 19, 2008 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude...
chill out with the “but the staff does it!” crap.
You’re coming across like a bitter little kid. (note I said LIKE…so please don’t tell on me as it was not actual “name calling”)
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding. We’re above the law.
(I’m not helping.)
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 6:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good luck trying to trace my IP to sue me, commies.
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 1:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Matt Hughes, whats your take on this whole situation?
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 1:07 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
Even bears hate WAMMA
So Mr. Bear what do you think of Mr. Lynch wanting to sue satirical internet bloggers?
by Sokonojudo on Dec 19, 2008 1:29 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
LOL some people here are definitely making a mountain out of a mole hill here, but it ain’t WAMMA. I can’t blame them when mattman has no idea what “satire” or “comedy” actually mean. He made a whiny, failed attempt at an Onion-style post, and the part about Miletich could have easily been taken at face value by readers. I’m more embarrassed for mattman and Bloodyelbow than for WAMMA.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Note to self
use less of the word “here”
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jesus Tapdancing Christ
You are in a minority of one. Oh wait, maybe mmasupremacy, skwirrl and tylerdurden will come running to defend WAMMA’s indefensible actions here.
How would you feel if the UFC’s Chief Operating Officer harrassed a fan for posting something that cast them in a bad light?
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m surprised he didn’t try to blame this situation on Dana White.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Aww, fanboy can’t handle dissenting opinion, thats adorable.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just watch
In a year or two, there simply won’t be dissenting opinion. There won’t be anything dreaming of competing with the UFC, so rooting against it will be like rooting against the NFL for a football fan.
I can’t wait.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who is rooting against the UFC? You need to get a grip dude. This projection stuff is not healthy.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, you’re not rooting against the UFC. You don’t want competition among MMA organizations.
I hope you’re more honest with yourself than with the people here.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Projection
Behavioral concept, look it up
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you or do you not want the UFC to have all the best fighters in the world? Yes or no?
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Projection = Psychological Defense Mechanism
Anna Freud’s area of expertise, is which a person’s undesirable traits are “thrown” on someone else and subsequently chastised for it . Psych 101.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep. And I definitely don’t hate the UFC. I want them to kill WAMMA, eat their bones and get all the best fighters in the world.
Difference between me and smoogy is I actually say what I believe instead of pretending otherwise and accusing others of ‘projection’.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct – you use facts and premises; he uses name-calling.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats rich
His whole shtick is that I am not a “UFC Lover”
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yay or nay on UFC world domination of MMA
Look, until you answer the question, I’m done. This is stupid.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This thread needs a cuddly creature to settle everyone down.
by Sokonojudo on Dec 19, 2008 2:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m from the south – trust me, a roux would be much better – taste better and last longer.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, that question is stupid. I can’t come up with an appropriately stupid answer, to be honest. And it seems like you don’t understand the incongruities in your UFC = NFL equation.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 3:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Proposition: Zuffa holds exclusive, non-cross-promotional contracts with the top 20 fighters in every weight class.
Do you vote yay or nay?
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 3:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not really up for quizzes
Just lay out whatever point you want to make dawg.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 3:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That you won’t even take a fucking position.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 3:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
These hypothetical questions are silly, why would I take a position just to setup whatever false premise you’re going for? The UFC doesn’t even want the top 20 guys at each weight class, and the way things are going they likely never will.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 3:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you have a question pertaining to reality, perhaps I can help you
But I don’t have a lot of insight on your fantasy scenarios. If you’re asking if I like more than one flavor of MMA, the answer is yes.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 3:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Coward
Even if you disagreed with the premise, substitute it with one of your own and say something worthwhile.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’ve name-called throughout this thread, calling mattman, “whiny” and subo a “fanboy” (which is a pejorative here). And if I am wrong, why haven’t you taken a single position instead of just refuse to answer the question? I didn’t like it either, but you never offered any defense to any other accusation. UFC-as-monopoly isn’t the only topic we’re discussing here, and you could have addressed those, but you didn’t, hence why I consider you a coward and a bit of a tool.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
With all the name calling in this thread
I’m surprised no one pulled out this
by Discman2 on Dec 19, 2008 5:10 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
OK, I got a bit carried away with the direct appellation, but I can’t stand when someone just attacks others’ evidence without providing any of their own. Not risking your neck while someone else risks theirs in an argument is, to me, “cowardly”.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At this point, you’ve just stuck your fingers in your ears, attacking everyone but refusing to state where you stand. Either man up and argue for something or stop nay-saying.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:10 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
They are both the dominant leagues in their respective sports (American Football and MMA). What are the differences that would make comparing the two a false analogy?
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope - read through the entire thread.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I love desenting opinions, without them there would be no discussions but I have been around the internet long enough to know trolling when I see it and it is just getting old. The fact is that if someone from the UFC threatened a poster and the site with legal action in the exact same situation in the exact same manner you would be the first in line to condemn them for it.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:38 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Wrong
I’d still be blaming the guy who thinks his non-existant “satire” should be obvious. Not that your equating things, or the UFC, has anything to do with this.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:43 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You’re just lying at this point. You’d rip the UFC a new one for this kind of bullying.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please I’m not equating anything just commenting on your historic trends, play if off however you want but don’t honestly think anyone believes that you wouldn’t jump on the UFC for this kind of situation.
As far as non-existent satire, it definitively satire the moment he said it was satire and he even confirmed that in a reply under the post, whether it was good satire or met your personal qualifications is irrelevant at that point. If your saying he should of labeled it better then you would be making a observation for discussion, saying that it wasn’t satire is just silly at this point as that was established in the article and in a reply.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My point is, you can’t just tag the piece as satire at the end and expect people to take it that way, and that applies especially when you are injecting real quotes and then making up actions by that person immediately afterward. That is the starting point for this exercise in stupidity
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 3:03 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That is what satire DOES!!! It make the implausible seem plausible!!! Watch the Daily Show or Colbert Report, who frequently use real-life scenarios and then skews them. Same for the Onion.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 3:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How people take it is irrelevant, by tagging it at the end as a piece of satire then it is definatively a piece of satire from that point on. Heck the best satire is easily confused with the truth and there is no rule that says that you can’t fool people with satire. Fightlinker does it all the time and there is almost always someone somewhere who falls for it (normally on the Sherdog forum)but that doesn’t mean that it all the sudden isn’t satire.
If you want to talk about it being poor satire or needing to be labeled better then it is a real discussion but establishing that it is in fact satire was done in the writing of the article, that isn’t in question at all.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 3:12 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
making up fake quotations and then saying its satire … does not in fact make it satire. Just like drinking 12 beers and hooking up with a troll who at the time appears decent enough does not in fact make her decent enough.
by !claw on Dec 19, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No making up a fake quote and saying it is satire does in fact make it satire. It is quite common for satire, parody or spoof to contain false quotes.
satire with realistic fake quotes got picked up by a newspaper:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/boston_daily/2008/04/14/the-herald-gets-duped/
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if Dana is evil, then all non-Dana things are good, so WAMMA is good, but that means the UFC is bad, and as an MMA fan I can’t possibly say that, but… my head hurts.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hah, “cast in a bad light”. The crux of the problem is that mattman made up something about Pat Miletich that was not true, and presented in a manner that was not at all satirical or comedic. At best you could call that fanpost sarcastic griping.
Anyway, I’ll let you get back to your dogpile.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The post said 'I'll see how far I can take this SATIRE'
The crux of the problem is WAMMA’s existence.
Know how I know?
Take away WAMMA and none of this ever happens!
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, a throwaway line at the end of an otherwise 100% straight post. Which included an actual quote immediately before the made-up part. Obviously that does not alleviate the problem.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:32 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
So you think legal action would go through in court? If you do, you’re dreaming.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, the original post was lame, but if you want to critique mattman’s satire, use literary criticism, not a lawsuit.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
Its not like I’m saying WAMMA is great or anything.
by smoogy on Dec 19, 2008 2:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just that Matt and BE are in the wrong. Scoff.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is no law that says that satire has to be humor, heck there is no law that says he has to label it satire for it to be satire. I also don’t think that there would of been any of this blow up at all if WAMMA had just made contact to have the post labeled more clearly as satire.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Satire is supposed to be “unfunny” humor. The greatest satirist is Jonathon Swift, yet is stuff is rarely screamingly hilarious because of how painful and raw it considers the human condition. However, the “Inflating Priest” chapter of A Tale of a Tub is a highlight of my lit. education.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:50 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I actually agree with this assessment. The reason this whole ordeal is blown out of proportion is that it isn’t OBVIOUS at all that the post is satirical. By first glance and just reading it, any fan not heavily into MMA wouldn’t know the difference.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
However, my opinion is, even if the post were not clearly labeled as satire, its still not libelous.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is very true. I’m merely stating why I believe this was blown out of proportion by WAMMA. By first glance, he probably read the two lines in question and shot off an email.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 12:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We wouldn’t be having this discussion if they had asked for clarification of the article as satire though. Lynch knew it was intended to be satire, he commented on that in his second e-mail (the one where he goes legal Hulk Hogan on the situation). Him being confused over the satire might of been the reason for the first e-mail but it definatly wasn’t a issue in the second one.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No I looked up the definition of SATIRE.
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.
by mattman73 on Dec 19, 2008 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And you were surely deriding vice and folly.
by subo on Dec 19, 2008 2:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
4. Greatest genre EVA!!! (Satire & Black Comedy is my specialty of study)
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bullshit.
A poor attempt at satire was written and would have been ignored until WAMMA’s legal team threatened action against both mattman and BE. This wouldn’t even be an issue if they had just allowed the post to sink into the foggy memory of the internet. WAMMA tried to throw it’s weight around, and their bluff was called. People wouldn’t even have believed that the original article was true if WAMMA wasn’t considered a joke. Their lack of credibility causes people to consider them enacting such a bizarre policy as legitimate news.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 2:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Coming from you that’s not surprising.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So anyway...
Your next fanpost going to be about Dana and the Fertita’s by any chance Matt? I’d love to see the emails those guys send you.
by Benicio on Dec 19, 2008 2:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Damn.
This was a spirited comment thread…
by Tonley on Dec 19, 2008 2:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
This is getting out of hand. Everyone should stop commenting on this now. We are all going to lose 24 hours like the Fitch thing. I am working on a fan post about WAMMA that is in no way satire, so we will see how they respond to that. That is, if I feel like finishing it and after it is done I don’t throw it in the trash. The working title is “How to save WAMMA”, but we will see what direction it goes.
by szucconi on Dec 19, 2008 3:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...Reason...
Your common sense is acceptable. Looking forward to the post – ideas on how to save WAMMA should be interesting.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 4:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You'r All Wrong
Pat Miletich found the article because he has been monitoring internet articles for false information on his health. From Google you would believe it’s a real article and not a fan post. I doubt Pat was happy reading his quote in the context of bashing Josh Barnett as fighter.
He contacted Micheal to clean up the author’s mess. If you don’t like the letter Micheal sent BE than it’s because you don’t understand how lawyers operate.
It was a pathetic article, taking a cheap shot with no merit.
by bignerd on Dec 19, 2008 4:34 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
1. And you know this how?
2. Guess what even cheap shots (the merit has been discussed in many other threads) that are labeled as satire are still satire and should be treated as such. What it looked like from google is irrelevant to what it actually was because it was stated to be satire in the article. We wouldn’t be here talking about it if they had just made contact to ask that the article be better labeled as satire instead of threatening frivolous lawsuits against fan posters and websites.
3. Michael Lynch did a real wonderful job of cleaning this up didn’t he. I don’t have to understand anything at all about how lawyers work to know cheap bully tactics and an utterly incomprehensible failure at understanding public relations. Regardless of what you seem to think not every lawyer(particularly one’s that aren’t actually working in the position of lawyer when writing something like this)immediatly jump to insults and threats of lawsuits like that, particularly for something so small as this.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 4:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
2) The article was vindictive and misleading throughout with a footnote at the bottom stating it’s to be treated as a satire. To be that harsh the audience has to know it’s satire from the start.
3) I’ve dealt with a few lawyers. When they write letters requiring a party to take action they don’t do so nicely. There are obvious reasons for taking such tact.
by bignerd on Dec 19, 2008 5:31 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
2. Irrelevant and there is absolutely no rule at all that satire has to be set at a certain level of harshness or that it even has to be directly labeled as satire at all. The fact that he made the attempt (twice, he repeated that it was satire in the comments too)might of not made it absolutely clear but then he isn’t responsible for the audience confusion either. If your opinion is that he should of labeled it better then I agree completly but if you are trying to blame him for having an opinion and stating it as satire as a fan post (not any kind of official written story or journalism, this is on the same level as starting a messageboard thread) that was labeled as satire(twice) as something terribly wrong that deserved that kind of over the top bullying response then I wholeheartedly disagree. If you think that this website deserved any kind of threat of suit over any of this then you are crazy.
3. I have dealt with several in my line of work(OSH engineer) and I know that being a douchebag is a choice not a requirement. Besides Lynch wasn’t acting as a lawyer when he wrote that he was acting as a representative of WAMMA and not a lawyer and in that regard he created a huge mess that didn’t have to exist at all over a post that got all of 8 replies and disappeared in a day. Just because he has a law degree doesn’t make for a valid excuse for a PR disaster completly of his making that could of been solved by a simple request to an editor of this site. It’s a law degree not a asshole license.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 6:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pat Miletich found the article because he has been monitoring internet articles for false information on his health.
oh? Do tell..?
by Benicio on Dec 19, 2008 4:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Proof,
12th comment down. He’s been checking internet stories for false info on his health.
I doubt Micheal monitors the fans boards of BE like 300 comments claim. If you’ve ever read a letter from a lawyer that is standard, always harsh, threatening to take legal action. It’s what they do. If you insulted Chuck Liddel would he write you a letter or punch you in the face?
BE better hope Micheal didn’t have legal disclaimer attached about publicly sharing that letter or they will really get a lawsuit. CC on an email doesn’t justify public domain as someone on this board suggested.
by bignerd on Dec 19, 2008 5:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Your proof is a post to Dr Benajmin about his neck over a week ago? Seriously that is your proof? That is pretty damn weak for you to be making the conclusions you are making.
As far as that being a standard letter from a lawyer that wasn’t a letter from a person acting as a lawyer it was from the COO of WAMMA, just because he has a law degree doesn’t make all of his e-mail correspondence legal documents. As far as that being standard from a lawyer no being a jack ass and making legal threats is a choice not a requirement when asking someone to change something, lets not pretend that all lawyers are douchebags that immediately threaten everyone they have issue with with a lawsuit. Lets also not act like his legal degree makes it ok for him to send letters like that in his position as COO of WAMMA.
Oh and suing this site for posting that e-mail would really be a horrible public relations move for them. Instead of one site having this on their front page for a day every site would cover this in detail and that e-mail would end up on every MMA messageboard every time WAMMA is mentioned for years to come. Suing would cost them money, they probably would get nothing out of it even if they did win and it would be a devestating PR nightmare for WAMMA.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 6:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, we didn’t do anything until having everything cleared by lawyers. If you think for a second we’re in the wrong for trying to shed some light on WAMMA shaking down a reader for a satirical opinion – the challenge of which wouldn’t hold up 5 minutes in court – you’re dreaming.
Everyone wants to think there was a different or better way to handle this. The former might not be true, but the latter sure is. We dot our i’s and cross our t’s around here.
And I’m glad there are some readers who realize even when we don’t like their post or their opinion, BE tries to protect their right to say it. To those on board with that idea, thank you.
by Luke Thomas on Dec 19, 2008 7:43 AM EST up reply actions 8 recs
Luke, Bravo! This just shows the relevance of this page compared to their company. I applaud you guys for the work done.
by Heenan on Dec 19, 2008 8:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I really can’t believe people are questioning you for posting the emails.
Threatening to sue or starting shit with anyone involved in the media is just completely retarded. Of course you guys are going to go public with the information.
by Phildo on Dec 19, 2008 9:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was on the fence...
WAMMA needs to get over themselves. someone posts a story clearly labeled as “satire” on the bottom of the post and they get their panties up in a bunch. WAMMA needs to disappear. i have not seen the fans want them, the biggest organization doesnt want them, the useless tim sylvia finds them useless… and thats just sad.
by MicahW on Dec 19, 2008 9:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Why was the original posting even retracted? Because Michael Lynch legally threatened a lawsuit? That sucks, guys.
Honestly, it should have sat BOLDED on the front of the page for the day. If Lynch wanted to sue you, go ahead. It’d have been completely insane for him to do so, and it would have been pretty damn funny seeing legal notices get ignored by Mike. When Mike doesn’t show up in court and Lynch pays a bunch of legal fees, only to have the judge laugh about sueing a person who posted in an online community, I think they would have a change of heart and probably a thought of how stupid this was.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 9:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Sadly we had to go through the SBN lawyers before we could respond and Matt’s responsible for his own FanPosts. BE accepts no liability for the FanPosts.
But had he threatend to sue BE over one of our frontpage posts that’s exactly what we would have done.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 10:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, after reading over Matt’s initial posting, the problem revolves around the fanpost really not being obvious in its attempt to be satirical. I didn’t really believe it was satirical at all when I first read it, I believed it to be fact until I put two and two together with Miletich’s quote and Matt’s claim.
That’s the overall problem here. If you read the article, then the comments section, you would know, but most fans won’t do that.
Of course, the underlying issue is why WAMMA is even involved in this fanpost.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good satire is indistinguishable from fact
The fact that you didn’t realize it was satire tells me that his post was too close to the truth for comfort. Example of satire If this wasn’t from the Onion, would you know it’s satire?
by cyph on Dec 19, 2008 11:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, the Onion stories are obviously satire due to the content. The problem with this posting was that it was limited to literally a couple small sentences that didn’t really have any notion of sarcasm, satirical comedy, or anything distinguishing it from fact.
Great satire still needs to have some way of distinguishing itself from fact. Hence why Fightlinker’s articles don’t cause a gigantic legal lawsuit. It’s obvious that Steve Cantwell wasn’t awarded a 30k additional bonus by the UFC, and FL’s little quotes embedded in the posting only make it more obvious.
This posting has what? Two lines that Lynch distinguished as inaccurate. He didn’t even mention the fact that it was satirical until Matt’s reply, which leads me to believe that there are many people who didn’t find it satirical, and it’s evident by some of the feedback from these comments.
In the end, I really don’t care all that much. WAMMA coming in here and being pushy about the posting is absurd.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 11:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is no law that satire has to be well written or properly labeled. I agree that it probably should of been better labeled but then if WAMMA had asked for a clearer label of it being satire in either e-mail then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Lynch himself points out that he saw the last sentence where it was said to be satire, he called it inadaquate and threatened to sue for libel if his demands weren’t met not that it should be edited with a “adaquate” label as satire.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 1:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They also...
specifically said that he could not go back and edit the post to make it more clear. It had to be an entire NEW post.
You know why?
Because on a site with over 25,000 page views per day they get an entire article where they seem powerful enough to demand retractions on satire pieces.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Dec 19, 2008 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t realize it wasn’t real. It seemed like Miletich reasoned that BJ Penn could be taken out of 155 contention for six months of inactivity and mattman just applied that logic to other WAMMA ranked fighters. The line where he called it satire made it seem like the situation was so absurd it could pass as satire.
I can understand WAMMA taking issue with the post, but they handled it extremely poorly. I agree with you entirely.
These WAMMA guys are ridiculous. They are just laying in wait hoping the UFC fails but MMA remains so that they can potentially make money off of it. I don’t think BE should have posted their emails, but whatever… The optimist in my saw WAMMA as a well-intentioned group of people who wanted to bring a unified title to the fractured landscape of MMA, but now I just see them as a bunch of disinterested leeches who want nothing more than to make money where there is money to be made.
by PORkSOdA on Dec 19, 2008 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t see much wrong with Lynch’s first e-mail, it is quite reasonable that he didn’t understand it was satire and that he wasn’t getting that it was a fan post instead of a actual news article. Thing is it was after it was pointed out it was satire that he went lawyer crazy and started making demands. If he’d asked for the article to be clearly labeled as satire because it was confusing then we wouldn’t be talking about this now.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The quality of Matt’s post isn’t the issue. He’s a fan having fun in the fanposts. Threatening him with a lawsuit is patently frivolous and frankly, thuggish behavior.
by Kid Nate on Dec 19, 2008 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is just sad
There has already been some legal commentary in this thread, but I’d like to bring it back around to the fact that the original post itself actually spelled out that the piece was satire. A poster above suggested that the original fan post didn’t meet some kind of necesarry warning requirement labeling such a piece as satire. But satire need not be labeled as such. However, the fact that it is labeled makes it almost impossible for a plaintiff to successfully claim that that a reasonable person reading the article would have a hard time seperating fact from fiction, and that is basically the standard libel suits must meet. And that doesn’t even cover the fact that proving damages in a case like this would be a biatch.
My advice to to Mattman is to retract his retraction. Seriously. A licensed attorney and executive of a (pointless, failing) corporation hassling some guy on the internet over a fan post is just sad. These people can’t touch you, Mattman. The constitution is on your side.
My advice for the WAMMA folks is to sit down with this lawyer you’re so proud of and have him explain to you the holding in Falwell vs. Hustler, Inc. The only good point this WAMMA knucklehead made was the statement that he was no first amendment expert.
by Freedom County on Dec 19, 2008 11:40 AM EST reply actions 4 recs
I was merely pointing out the fact that the post wasn’t obvious in it’s claim to be satirical. It is in fact labeled as satirical on the posting. I wasn’t claiming to be inept to the fact that it is satrical. Claiming that “This is just sad” because I am pointing out a reasoning behind why Lynch so adamantly "jumped to conclusions’ and emailed a threat to Matt isn’t sad at all. I’m claiming that Lynch & company were inept to the fact that it was satirical and that is probably the reason why we are talking about this predicament.
Secondly, satire in blogging and issues involving such things as this are still within the process of being written in the United States. We won’t know for another five to ten years whether or not any of this ever actually can be pushed to a court room, hence why I think it’s downright ridiculous that Lynch is trying to threaten a lawsuit.
I have only heard of one case ever of this occurring, and it involved a lawyer being libeled on the internet by an ex-client. The ex-client was spreading rumors that his ex-lawyer was involved in bribing judges, etc, runing his reputation. Obviously, that doesn’t even compare here. My point is that Lynch’s claim to threaten is absurd, hence why in my ORIGINAL POST, I said that there shouldn’t have even been a retraction.
Matt doesn’t need a necessary warning, I was merely pointing out why idiots MAY not have gotten the satirical part of this posting. My belief is that EVERYONE knows it satirical, but it wasn’t evident to WAMMA, obviously.
This posting should be pushed to the very top of the page, put in bold, and heckled to WAMMA as much as possible.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In the end, WAMMA is satirical
Honestly, everyone here thought WAMMA was made up by the Onion when it was first announced anyways. Who does a presser at a Steakhouse? Come on!
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My belief is that EVERYONE knows it satirical, but it wasn’t evident to WAMMA, obviously.
Ignorance has never been a viable defense.
by cyph on Dec 19, 2008 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lynch pointed out the labeling of satire in his second email, hard to claim ignorance when you have already stated you weren’t. He was aware it was supposed to be satire, he said the statement of satire was insufficient and threatened a libel suit.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lynch may have pointed that out in his second email because Matt replied to the first email and stated it was a satire post. I think he deemed the first post as fact, but was then corrected in that assumption, had a power trip about it, and emailed back with a threat that was obviously not going to work anyways.
So, he either read those two lines and went shot off emails immediately without seeing it OR he saw everything and decided to be a dick about it. Either way, it’s idiotic.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Dec 19, 2008 4:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, the point I was making was that he didn’t go into douchebag lawyer mode until after he was aware it was intended as satire. The first e-mail could be seen as confusion over a poorly labeled fan post, the second was the one that made him look like a jerk.
by who me on Dec 19, 2008 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Satire is protected with the 1st amendment. However, you can’t misquote people.When I first read the article I thought those were Pat’s actual words. In the Falwell case, Jerry Falwell ( a Christian preacher) was made fun of by Hustler. They did a fake interview about him getting drunk and having sex with his mom. Obviously, it couldn’t be true and the page had an ad disclaimer at the end of the page to bolster the disclaimer.
Going after a fanpost on BE with lawyers seems so pointless. How about Sherdog’s posts next? Be warned there are 10x the grammatical mistakes at the site. Under teh rule u no can fight cuz u dumb dawg. I wish WAMMA would just crawl back into their hole and go hibernate b/c they are nothing but a nuisance.
by Sokonojudo on Dec 19, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What a comical situation. Lynch is the equivalent of the Bluth family lawyer, what a clown.
There are many types of satire. The most common now is onion style comedy where it should be beyond obvious to anyone, but then there is satire like A Modest Proposal which reads like a straight story at first. The fact that Lynch is an idiot doesn’t make a piece libelous.
by Michael Rome on Dec 19, 2008 1:11 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
I’d say this all worked out rather well. WAMMA managed to get a large number of people to hate them and Matt got compared to Swift.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, I knew as soon as I typed that it would seem like I was comparing them. No offense Mattman, but that’s not what I was going for.
by Michael Rome on Dec 19, 2008 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No offense taken.
I know I be an idiot.
by mattman73 on Dec 19, 2008 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“So, basically, you’re about 2,000 shares short of being the majority stockholders. Now, unfortunately, it’s a private stock, so you cannot just buy up the shares unless someone is willing to sell.”
“Are you sure?”
“That’s what it said on ask Jeeves”
by Michael Rome on Dec 19, 2008 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bandwidth thief.
Bolts from the Blue // "It is what it is." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Dec 19, 2008 6:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope you are talking about Barry Zuckerkorn and not the awesome...
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I read his Law Blog every day!
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Dec 19, 2008 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Bob Loblaw Law Blog. Pure awesomeness.
Another big thanks to HDNet for rerunning one of the most overlooked series ever.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
by BJJDenver on Dec 19, 2008 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
mattman73 needs the legal expertise of Larry “The Sledge” Rosen.
Were you just sexually harassed by me in this ad? Then I will sue me on behalf of you and win! I don’t stand a chance against me.
by Ubernoober on Dec 19, 2008 7:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
