View Single Post
Old
06-17-2011, 09:56 PM
  #44
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
Until we ever see him make posts to backup his rumors imo that's his sad way of getting mommy and daddy to stop the kids in the neighborhood from calling him that kid who lies about everything.

I don't see why as a result of this the guy can't be called what he is, a fraud who is using people like us to make money. It hasn't been proven otherwise so I just don't see why we're allowing him to basically use his HF account as a loophole. Whenever one of the french media people post something stupid we're pretty much allowed to dedicate entire threads to the fact that this person is an idiot. Even when an HF green poster posts a bad article they're allowed to get ripped for it, but because Eklund makes an account on HF that he never uses we aren't allowed to form an opinion about him and his so-called "articles" anymore?

I just don't see why having an account on HF all of the sudden gives media people carte blanche to write the stupidest most made up stories and not get slammed for it by HF members.

See Bertrand Raymond, are you honestly telling me all he has to do to stop threads like this http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=925978 from appearing he just has to make an HFBoards account?

A line needs to be drawn between member and actual media person regardless of whether or not the person is a member. This person Eklund puts articles that are pretty well entirely fabricated just like any other site like that *********** a while back, but because he has a cult following even though less than 0.5% of his rumors are true all of the sudden we can't voice our opinion about him and his ******** articles?

I just find it very backwards and silly. You're a media person, you put your reputation on the line. You shouldn't be able to use some loophole on the biggest hockey discussion forum on the internet just to get people to stop discrediting your work. The way I see it you put it out there it's out there for people to form their opinion on not only you but whether or not your work is legitimate. What makes Eklund so special when I see tons of other threads closed because they're from bad sources? The guy has a less than 1% success rate, I think it's safe to say he isn't a legitimate source.

So basically you're giving anyone on HF carte blanche to make a site filled with fabricated lies, keep total anonymity and just say "I have sources, that makes me a legit source, I'm a member so... nobody can call me a fraud and threads using me as a source shouldn't be locked".

I just don't see how you differentiate between Eklund and all those other people, heck even some of them are members of the media who aren't considered legit sources due to their track record, but somehow this guy is????
While I agree entirely with you, Neo. You can some solace is most comments are relatively borderline on the harsh category and only the extremely vulgar or blatant flames at him specifically tend to be deleted.

Nicely said though.

In regards to the article. Yes, Eklund we know we are a front runner for Jagr. Every creditable source in the Country is reporting this. Markov to the Leafs? I believe Bender says it best...


Bourne Endeavor is offline