Radical opinion on Barry Bonds,the new HR King

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:29 am

Yes, um, Mr. Simpson...that is in fact who I was alluding to with the Vegas motto...musta put a little too much 'knuckle' on that one.

That 'O.J. and J. Edgar' photo would look great on the wall of my rumpus room...right next to the one of 'Elvis and Dick'. Wonder if there's one of Barry Bonds and Karl Rove floating around to complete the collection?

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:37 pm

"I must admit, though, this latest round of social observation has convinced me. Let's all berate that cheating no-talent bum Bonds and glorify Ecko. Now here's a genuinely honest fellow."

I knew you'd come around Dr. Bob, haha! and thank you for your congratulations on my 8000 inane posts. I didn't even notice which one it was, although I had noticed it was coming.

mgauction · Post by **mgauction** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:09 am

The final decision is to label the 565 HR ball with a red "X" and send it to the Hall of Fame.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:58 am

On September 15th, 2007, Marc Ecko bought Barry Bonds' 756th homerun ball at auction. For the next eight days, Marc engaged the country in a public debate over the ball's fate. At www.vote756.com the public was invited to choose to: (a) Bestow it intact to Cooperstown, (b) Permanently brand the ball with an asterisk before sending it to Cooperstown, or (c) launch it into space forever

With over 10 million votes recorded and tabulated, the results were clear:
A) BESTOW IT - 34% B) BRAND IT - 47% C) BANISH IT - 19%

The public chose to send the ball to the Hall of Fame with an asterisk, as a constant reminder of this unforgettable moment in sports history and popular culture.

In the end, 80 percent of voters believed the ball should go to Cooperstown (47% opting to mark the ball; 34% without), and two thirds felt that doubts surrounding the record needed to be recognized (47% for the asterisk; 19% for space)

brammy · Post by **brammy** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:10 am

and when displayed in Cooperstown, they will mount the ball so that the X cant be seen.

I'd have voted for "C".

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:37 am

You may have a point there although I doubt they could do that. It also may depend on who works on any given day which way the ball is oriented.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:37 am

You may have a point there although I doubt they could do that. It also may depend on who works on any given day which way the ball is oriented.

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:07 am

You may have one or two points there yourself, Bob...

By the way, don't you mean "orientated"?

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:22 am

I liked it so much I put it in twice.

WordReference.com English Dictionary

oriented, orientated

adjusted or located in relation to surroundings or circumstances; sometimes used in combination; "the house had its large windows oriented toward the ocean view"; "helping freshmen become oriented to college life"; "the book is value-oriented throughout"

I have always though that orientated was an incorrect form of the word and was surprised to find that it is the preferred form in Britain.

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:56 am

Well, if you think of the word 'Orient' meaning that part of the world considered 'the East' by post-medieval Europeans, 'orienting' one's self would constitute 'verbising (or 'verbizing') a noun', something up with which we are not supposed to put. Therefore, 'orientate' would constitute a correctly constructed verb, one which lends itself to conversion back to a noun with the word 'orientation' (vs. 'oriention').

However, we Yanks do things the way we want (in case anyone hasn't noticed), and we get 'oriented', baby...

To our ears, 'orientated' sounds like it has one too many syllables, like 'sophistimacated"...

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:20 pm

Dane, don't you mean verbatimising?

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:48 pm

Can we now let this one die its well-deserved death?!

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:39 pm

Some of these go on for ever you know. It's certainly more interesting than tail lift thread #367.

dr_bob · Post by **dr_bob** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:00 pm

Okay -- I'll extend it a bit longer.

Although "orientated" technically is a word, the use of "oriented" is correct and, in fact, preferred.

Also, the statement "and two thirds felt that doubts surrounding the record needed to be recognized (47% for the asterisk; 19% for space)" is an assumption. All we know is that those are the percentages of votes cast.

1) We do not know what the voters' motivations or reasons were. That's the problem with this type of survey data -- we don't know the reasons why people respond the way they do. They could be voting a certain way because they think the outcome would be funny. They could hate baseball and want to express in their vote their disdain for sport. They could be semi-literate and not understand for what they were voting (please refer to several recent elections for evidence).

2) We don't know if the same person or people voted multiple times.

Finally there is considerable research that says that people who are against an issue or who hold a negative opinion are more likely to respond to such polls than people who hold a favorable opinion.

Really finally -- who cares about Barry Bonds anyway? I'm going to kick back tonight and watch as many of the baseball games that I can. Seven National League teams still have a shot at the four playoff spots and no one in the NL has clinched the division.

dr_bob · Post by **dr_bob** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:04 pm

Preferred in the US that is. Now to the games.