![]() 09/15/2016 at 01:48 • Filed to: What the fuck | ![]() | ![]() |
![]() 09/15/2016 at 01:53 |
|
Gawkspin.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 01:53 |
|
Deadshit
![]() 09/15/2016 at 01:54 |
|
To be fair, The Concourse isn’t sports, it’s “Culture, food, whatever”.
Still, no. Just no.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 01:57 |
|
We’re all bloody doomed.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 02:51 |
|
Ugh didnt need to see that. Deadspin has been this way for a good while mind. Always been off topic at times.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 03:20 |
|
also “Sports”
![]() 09/15/2016 at 04:20 |
|
Sorry. You may not get the old British TV series, Dad’s Army, Private Frazer reference.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 07:49 |
|
You realize that yelling ”sports!” at the Concourse is the same as people yelling “I didn’t come to have your military agenda shoved down my throat” when jalopnic cross posts foxtrot alpha articles?
![]() 09/15/2016 at 08:26 |
|
iOS 10 is so awful, even the stories about it are pure cancer.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 09:07 |
|
Did you buy an old Toyota yet?
![]() 09/15/2016 at 09:16 |
|
Sure didn't!
![]() 09/15/2016 at 09:20 |
|
Oh shit. Looked at front page of Deadspin. Immediate regret.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 09:38 |
|
I don’t care what the crap they put on The Concourse, as long as they keep it off my Jalopnik. Freaking ridiculous.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 09:57 |
|
Also note that it’s a sub-blog of Deadspin, which is “Sports News without Access, Favor, or Discretion ”
“Whatever, without discretion”? Sounds about right.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 10:02 |
|
I don’t think that articles covering military vehicles and other forms of transportation (Planelopnik, Trainlopnik) are too far off-topic.
Jalopnik’s doing a pretty good job of keeping things relevant.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 10:22 |
|
Yeah, I agree, and I don’t have a problem with either foxtrot alpha or the Concourse. I was just pointing out the equal absurdity of telling deadspin’s off topic section to stay on topic.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 10:41 |
|
I’m not a big sports guy, so I don’t visit Deadspin (or its sub-blogs) unless there’s a shared article.
But it’s not the article itself that bothers me. It’s the way things are (dis)organized. All of Jalopnik’s sub-blogs are car-related; why aren’t all Deadspin sub-blogs required to be sports-related? The article is about iOS 10, so why wasn’t it published on Gizmodo (with a SFW lead image)?
I guess I understand that not all authors have permission to post on sister sites, but how hard is it to get permission (or just publish something more blog-appropriate instead)? I’m sure the Jalopnik authors have other non-automotive interests; they just don’t go posting articles about it on Jalopnik, and I appreciate that. Stef has some off-topic posts every once in a while, and those go straight to Oppositelock.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 10:50 |
|
The Concourse needs its own home, not as a sub blog.
That would fix the issue right away. HamLoaf, Feinberg, and a few others seem to have very little interest in being associated with sports at all.
![]() 09/15/2016 at 11:24 |
|
Valid points, all of em.
![]() 09/18/2016 at 03:23 |
|
I forgot about this reply.
That’s where I picked that line up.
I love old “British” TV. Last of the Summer Wine and Keeping up appearances? Are you being served? All classics.
![]() 09/18/2016 at 03:53 |
|
The old ones are the best.
Though there’s been some really good comedy come out over the last few years to.
![]() 09/24/2016 at 05:31 |
|
Because the Gawker cancer was allowed to metastasize at Deadspin. Univision apparently pledged not to fire any writers, but they had to stick worthless assholes like Nolan and Hongo somewhere.
![]() 09/24/2016 at 05:34 |
|
Then it would just be Gawker 2.0. Univision should have fired all of the gawker.com staff. Let them go try to be real journalists where they can’t just be disgusting pieces of shit.
![]() 09/24/2016 at 10:19 |
|
That’s very kind of Univision to let them keep their jobs.
But this is kinda like closing all Taco Bells, and having the Taco Bell employees go make tacos at KFC instead of learning how to cook chicken.
![]() 09/24/2016 at 10:25 |
|
that is a surprisingly good analogy.
![]() 09/24/2016 at 10:39 |
|
I had a longer rant typed up to support the analogy, but I deleted it to keep the comment short. I guess it didn’t need any explanation.
I wish I’d have thought of it last week when this post was more active.