The Great Tea Makers Wish List
Editor, publisher, factual entertainer.
Published June 29, 2007 6:40 am
The Tea Makers
They offered me the office, offered me the shop. They said I'd better take anything they'd got. Do you wanna make tea at the CBC? Do you wanna be, do you really wanna be a cop?
-
Archives
- December 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
-
RSS Feeds
-
Meta
17 Comments
This might sound silly but I want to thank the people who took part in this poll, and to thank the people who offered encouragement and kind words here in the comments. It means a lot to me.
For the record, Allan is always welcome here and provides a lot more “spiritual guidance” than you see on the page. This site might not still exist if not for him.
I’ve also encouraged him to start his own blog, not to get rid of him, but because I’d love to read it.
I set the poll up so that people could vote more than once on purpose. It was part of the joke.
By the time I publish something on this blog, it no longer holds any surprise for me. But I never know what will happen in the comments afterwards and this is why I enjoy them immensely.
They are yours. Write what you want.
Allan,
I know I’™m about to open up a can of worms, but I feel compelled to comment on the exchange going on between you and ’œD’.
What I believe I’™m reading is someone giving you a taste of your own medicine. ’œD’ is doing to you, what you have done to others, including me: ’œD’ is defending his opinion
to the point of overkill and redundancy, with an element of bullying added to the mix. This is what’™s going on here right now, from both of you. Two wrongs don’™t make a right. Ironically, if you reread your last post, much of it could also be directed back at you.
Anyone who participates on a blog recognizes that posting a comment will result in readers either concurring or conflicting with any given opinion. It’™s the nature of the beast and it’™s what makes it work. Sadly, it can become personal and sometimes it turns ugly. So go ahead, prepare the weapon that is your keyboard. I know that there will be retaliation coming my way. God knows it wouldn’™t be the first time. I have no intentions of responding to it.
On a slightly different topic…Barbara’™s statement was directed to Ouimet, not you. It was not necessary for you to ask her that question. This is a prime example of the bullying tactics you engage in. We all know what happened with regard to THE interview. What’™s done is done…it cannot be changed…time to move on.
And finally…I grew up in Toronto (Swansea/Bloor West Village). You take interesting photos of the city. Out of curiosity, why don’™t you set up a new blog featuring your photography? I think people would enjoy viewing your camerawork.
I won’t be the one stopping you from being a pain, D.
It’s becoming harassment, and a needless distraction for others.
You’ve already had plenty of opportunity to make your statements, and no one has stopped you.
But as time goes on, you seem only to want to bait me, and start some kind of an endless loop.
It might have merit if you had a an actual argument, but if you’re trying to say that I’ve discouraged anyone from commenting, then ‘show me the money’.
You on the other hand have now suggested that I not talk to Barbara, so I get the impression that you’re not really being upfront about whatever it is you think you’re proving here.
You keep insisting on using my surname, while hiding your own identity.
So it’s rather obvious that I’m not dealing with a sincere person, but rather just a nutcase asshole.
Since you’ve seen the other blog, feel free to leave your comment there.
But I won’t be engaging with you any further on Ouimet’s blog.
However, you are free to continue on your quest to confirm that people who pass the bar are not necessarily in possession of good judgement, ethics, reasoning, or sanity.
’œPretentious lawyer’. I accept that label, especially coming from you Mr. Sorensen. You’™d know about being pretentious. Are you suggesting that I have a ’œpersonal agenda’? The same could be said of you.
Thank you for finally answering the question. Here’™s another one. As a supporter of free speech, am I to understand correctly Mr. Sorensen that you would agree that even an anonymous comment has merit and the author is entitled to be ’œheard’? You must, if, as you state, you believe in ’œfree for all’. Justify your negative comments regarding anonymous posters. You are quite contrary on this issue. Please provide clarification. Avoid prattle.
While on the topic of clarification, Sir, not all lawyers have ’œclients’, in the traditional sense. Perhaps you are not familiar with workings of the Canadian justice system. This surprises me Mr. Sorensen considering you give the impression that you know more than most.
Free for all, even pretentious lawyers who try to build a case, when there is none.
If it serves some personal agenda of yours to pursue me with some facile argument and repetition of my name, then your time is not as valuable as your imaginary clients would likely be told it is.
Mr. Sorensen,
Your response was as I expected from an egoist. Fascinating, only in your own mind.
You failed to answer my question. Are you a supporter of free speech as it relates to ALL members of society? A simple yes or no is all that is required. Answer the question as it has been posed. There is no need for you to prattle.
And Mr. Sorensen, I will call you by whatever name I see fit. Where I am concerned you do not call the shots.
Yes, please make me famous. I crave famosity, and want to be stared at and whispered about everywhere I go, hearing my name uttered from every direction.
Research me.
Quote me.
Still, you’re not even close to scratching the surface of what a fascinating person I am.
Cast the first stone, baby!
I believe passionately in everything I say at that moment.
And I’ll change my mind if it suits me.
Or if it’s clear that I’m wrong yet there’s still time to save face.
What-ev-er.
I don’t remember what I said on June 29th.
Was it something important?
Please don’t call me mister or sir. It reminds me that you think I’m older.
But thanks for spelling my name right.
Allan Sorensen, the following comments (posted on the Toronto Star blog ’˜06) can be attributed to you:
’œWe do have freedom of speech in Canada’
’œI’m an ardent, fervent, and passionate supporter of free speech’.
Comments left on blogs (anonymous or otherwise) ARE a form of the free speech which you claim to so passionately support. However, your comments of June 29th indicate something different. So which is it? Either you support free speech OR you do not.
Perhaps THIS comment better explains your position: ’œYou want people to exercise free speech, so long as they say what you want to hear’. Those are your words, directed at someone else. I feel that this is a better representation of what you actually believe. Free speech is fine, as long as everyone agrees with YOU. Review what you have written here (and elsewhere) and you will find that my assessment is quite accurate.
Mr. Sorensen, if you want to sit in judgment of others, then you too can expect to be judged.
And “Anonymous” is forced upon us because we don’t got no Google/Blogger ID.
Choices are :
Choose an identity
1 Google/Blogger
2 Other
3 Anonymous
(Sign in with your Google Account
Username Password )
and 98 percent don’t have go google, so anonymous it is.
[There there is the Opera browser can’t see the Capcha code problem preventing any comment at all]
One day CBC will have a way around this and release it to the general public as a Free Open Source Software.
2 more from “Other:”
* It is astounding how CBC insiders complain and whine. Less negativity, geezuz!
* keep going
Allan,
Your offensive drivel pulls down what could be, and has been, intriguing peeks at the inner workings and ever mysterious methods of our public broadcaster. I think if anything, your writings would be best suited for your own blog. That way people won’t have to endlessly scroll through your waste of pixel space here.
Question: What sort of manager sets up a poll where you’™re able to vote more than once?
Answer: Not a very smart one!
less allan, more ouimet.
the “ownership” people feel for this blog has to do with whether or not they wish to read it. i wish to read ouimet’s teamakers; or in any case, good, interesting teamakers. if i don’t get good, interesting teamakers, I won’t read, and no one will have to worry about my legitimate or illegitimate feelings of ownership.
Here’s what people submitted in the “Other” category:
* Less Sue Gardner News
* more stursburg fashion
* Unmoderated comments, y’all.
* more sex
* the ouiment and alan show
* less Allan, less Allan, less Allan
* Keep up the incisive commentary.
This blog is most interesting when it provides an insightful b-side to the CBC events we hear of through the corporate-speak all-staff emails. It is priceless. Also of interest is what is happening with other broadcasters.
I don’t care for the troll-like behaviour of some of the posters. It detracts from this most excellent blog.
Refunds at the box office, jerk-offs.
Even though you are canceling your subscription, we are sending you a dunce cap as our gift to you.
More less Allan!
Oddly amusing that a few people actually think they have some form of ownership of this blog.
Mildly irritating that so many people are called anonymous, and that sometimes it seems to be the same one, who just thought of yet another insult.
And it is mostly insults, and rarely pointed criticism.
By all means, try and keep away.
And spend more time at the other exciting blogs filled with variety and an endless stream of “god, I’m smart”.
You’d be so much happier at insidecbc, where people have respect for rules!
Or sit at the feet of John Doyle where you never know what he’s going to say next!
I’m certain that one persistent critic of mine is from the Strombo group, and won’t rest until she draws blood, or sees me humiliated worse than George.
I write for the one intelligent person who gets it – Ouimet.
But onlookers are always welcome.
Hopefully Ouimet is picking up on the idea that most people are sick of Allan’s bullshit.