Pricci must go - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

cj · 11-20-2010, 11:37 AM

See this thread if you are unaware of why.

JustRalph · 11-20-2010, 04:03 PM

Looks like he took the whole thing down........

cj · 11-20-2010, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Looks like he took the whole thing down........

Fine, he should have, but I won't be lining up to forgive him any time soon.

Saratoga_Mike · 11-20-2010, 07:11 PM

Has he ever had issues in past like this?

cj · 11-21-2010, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

Has he ever had issues in past like this?

Yes, it has been going on for a while, just not to this extent.

cj · 11-22-2010, 05:20 PM

Still nothing from Pricci...or HANA.

highnote · 11-23-2010, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj

Still nothing from Pricci...or HANA.

What would you like to see them do?

ihatenyra · 11-23-2010, 09:07 AM

HANA's goal is to give horse players collective powers against track management.

It is not their job to moderate fights between blowhard's in the media

andicap · 11-23-2010, 10:47 AM

I spent 20 mins last night reading that thread --as usual there were good points but it went on way too long with needless mini-spats and airing of personal antagonisms -- but that's the nature of the Internet: An unfortunate reminder of why the quality of debate of rational discourse has fallen on hard times.

I do understand Pricci he wrote what he did -- although I don't condone it by any means. As a former journalist (OK, he's more like a blogger than a journalist these days.), I know how sometimes there is a temptation to use whatever forum you have to unleash your frustrations.

I did that once -- I wrote a screed against sportswriters on a high-profile media bulletin board (Romenesko for those of u in the know)and got about 100 angry responses and just one supporter -- thanks mom!

I did feel a little better afterward (Don't get me started on them again -- I'm not talking racing, I mean mainstream writers) and today stand by my opinion, but I'm not sure it was worth all the hassle. And I didn't attack anyone personally.

I think Pricci expected that getting this off his back would make him feel better. And I think he felt truly betrayed by people he considered friends raining personal attacks on him because of his zealous Zenyatta stance. (I have no opinion on the whole media back story involving the personalities involved in the column. I could care less that Lenny Shulman is angry at Andy Serling. I just know Andy dropped by the PA tent this summer at Saratoga and was charming and gracious.)

But Pricci's arguments were weak, misdirected and in many cases, inaccurate or lacking in documentation. Plus his inexcusable failure to monitor the comments were worthy of censure.

Its up to HANA to decide if Pricci's presence on the advisory board adds or detracts from the group. He has a long and honorable career as a top-flight public handicapper for Newsday and a backer of fan-related causes marred by this awful misstep. How much do u publicly flog someone for one bad mistake? (Unless there are other ill-advised columns I have missed.) So I have no opinion on the HANA matter.

The only comment I'll make about the title of this thread is: Where should Pricci go? He writes a column for a low-profile blog -- he really can't get exiled much further than he is right now. Want him to go away? It's the Helen Keller principle: If no one sees or hears John Pricci writing on the Internet, is he really there?

'

andymays · 11-23-2010, 10:53 AM

Can anyone tell me what we do about all the good stuff Pricci has written over the years in support of Horseplayers?

Do we just forget about that?

He certainly should do a column explaining what happened and apologize to everyone involved. He should also upgrade the site. There is no excuse for what happened.

cj · 11-23-2010, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swetyejohn

What would you like to see them do?

Remove him as an advisor. How was that not clear?

cj · 11-23-2010, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymays

He certainly should do a column explaining what happened and apologize to everyone involved. He should also upgrade the site. There is no excuse for what happened.

Exactly, but he hasn't, and he won't. He actually claimed it was him that was attacked.

andymays · 11-23-2010, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj

Exactly, but he hasn't, and he won't. He actually claimed it was him that was attacked.

There is no excuse to not upgrade the site and do an article on what happened with an apology. I'll give him another week.

highnote · 11-23-2010, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj

Remove him as an advisor. How was that not clear?

That part is clear, but I was wondering if you wanted more than that -- like some kind of comment from HANA.

To be honest, I did NOT read all the comments on his blog that everyone else seems to have read. They were taken down by the time I heard about them. I did read his column on his blog and it didn't seem that bad. I don't see anything wrong with someone defending himself.

Now, maybe there was no need for him to write his column because he wasn't harmed. I don't know the whole truth. All I know is what I read here and on his blog. But I suspect there must be some truth to his column otherwise he wouldn't have written it.

So my questions now are what are the main reasons people think he should be removed?

Is it because he rightly or wrongly defended himself?

Is it because he didn't moderate the comments on his blog?

Is there some other reason I'm missing?

cj · 11-23-2010, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swetyejohn

That part is clear, but I was wondering if you wanted more than that -- like some kind of comment from HANA.

To be honest, I did NOT read all the comments on his blog that everyone else seems to have read. They were taken down by the time I heard about them. I did read his column on his blog and it didn't seem that bad. I don't see anything wrong with someone defending himself.

Now, maybe there was no need for him to write his column because he wasn't harmed. I don't know the whole truth. All I know is what I read here and on his blog. But I suspect there must be some truth to his column otherwise he wouldn't have written it.

So my questions now are what are the main reasons people think he should be removed?

Is it because he rightly or wrongly defended himself?

Is it because he didn't moderate the comments on his blog?

Is there some other reason I'm missing?

My thoughts aren't because of the content of the article itself. I thought it was poor in that he took second hand information as gospel without bothering to check it out, but again, that isn't the point.

It is because of what he allowed to happen on his blog. Not only did he not moderate the comments, he allowed it to happen AGAIN the very next day. It went on for several hours both days. He has offered no apology. His only "excuse" was that his site was being attacked. His site...not me, PA, TLG, Tom, OTM Al, Grits cjs dad, Just Ralph, andymays, and I'm sure some others I'm forgetting, but him.

Now, still no word. No apology, no recant, no nothing. Is this the kind of person you want advising HANA? If it is, I want nothing to do with the group and will tell others the same. Again, it has nothing to do with the content of the article. Actions, or lack thereof, speak louder than words.