View Single Post
12-12-2012, 07:50 PM
A Pointed Stick
Can You Believe It?
A Pointed Stick's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 10,174
vCash: 250
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
That's fine. If it's what you'd like to do to give you peace of mind, it doesn't effect me a bit. If it's an attempt to send a message individually, it's pointless, but if you want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, that's fine too.

Boycotts, on the other hand, are a kind of political action that require discipline, canvassing, cajoling, protesting, and all sorts of similar stuff. It's like applying the worst-case scenario tactics of organized labor to consumers. It's effective, but it certainly involves getting in people's grills. Which is why it should be saved for very important issues. Heck, I think there's going to come a time where boycotting will become necessary to effect some real change on issues that we as a country are continuously failing to confront. I won't say what that is, because we don't need to get into politics. But hockey ain't it.

If I'm getting in people's grills for boycotting, it's because I know something about boycotts and what has to be done to make them effective. It turns sidewalks in front of Bob Evans into a picket line because they donate to Planned Parenthood. It turns sidewalks in front of Denny's into a picket line because they plan to charge an 'Obamacare Surcharge'. People shouldn't have to go through that before they eat such a crappy breakfast.

When there's a group that makes a slick video product selling the idea of a hockey-abstinence (as opposed to a boycott), one has got to wonder what's up. I believe that anyone sophisticated enough to produce a message like that has to know that individual hockey-abstinence, itself, is a pointless tactic. So, I think it much more likely that the video message itself (as opposed to people actually promising to abstain from hockey) is intended to put pressure on the league, the players, and the sponsors. My guess is that they're particularly aiming for sponsors.

And so, the more I think about it, I'm actually kind of happy that something like this is out there. Not because I take hockey abstinence seriously, but because I take the skill in messaging seriously, and so may the NHL's sponsors. And that may help to get a deal done.


I see your point about the term being applied loosely or incorrectly, but like many terms in the union and or legal realm which I have had to party in for a while there is the legal definition, and the webster dictionary definition. In this case, I think all parties are going with the last one. In the end I agree that this won't do much, in parallel with the way all of the bluster and storm from the Islander message boards did little to nothing to impact the Islander's lease, relocation, etc. It is better than crickets though, because silence sends the worst message of all. Three lockouts, and this one really was just a massive ego trip for both sides. We all deserve better.

A Pointed Stick is offline