Another scandal on Mint Street???

[h0llywood]

6 minutes ago, pantherphan96 said:

this was my whole point. maybe in the future don't just throw in a jab on one small part of a bigger issue and then act surprised when you get called out on it. as for your last point, i agree and stated as much in my last reply.

So in the future, I shouldn't make a comment on a single topic of a broader conversation because I will be called out on it by you? 
There was a purpose in leaving all the other stuff out, because obviously, it was to point out the misinformation of your belief that cheerleaders are being mistreated because of the water issue. Believe me, I do not feel bad for you calling me out, because it just makes you look bad given you never addressed any of the facts that I pointed out but kept dancing around the whole water issue.

[countryboi]

These cheerleading issues are going to blow up in the NFL face, the best thing to do would be to get out ahead of these sexist policies and pay them a living wage. 

that said knowing the NFL they will do nothing till its way way too late

[mc52beast]

Pretty sure they aren’t being forced to cheer, it’s something they voluntarily do. And again I’m pretty sure they know going into it what the rules are... if they don’t like it they don’t have to do it.

[TheCasillas]

21 minutes ago, vorbis said:

so what you took from my post is that I believe the OP was unable to stay composed because she's female? really? 

the OP became hostile to the audience first, huh. let's see...

original post: I have a major problem with this situation

post #3: "who cares? gtfo"

post #4: post 3 QFT

post #5: surely you're joking

post #6: this is a non-issue

post #7: this is a non-issue

post #8: this is a non-issue

post #9: this is a non-issue (with bonus straw man)

post #11: this is a non-issue

 

and all within about 10 minutes from her original post. the thread was hopping. and it was a legit onslaught of people telling her that the thing she cares about is a non-issue and she should gtfo. let's not pretend she was the one who raised the temperature.

we are not talking on the same page. I'd be more than happy to take this off thread. However, I may have misread your previous post but this reply is not relative to my statements.

 

To be completely honest, I did not understand what you were trying to say in your post other than that you are trying to present a victim card. There is no victim, just an OP who should not of called a group of people idiots and maybe should of ignored the unreasonable posts and paid attention to those who presented value and wanted to more understanding. 

[MasterAwesome]

1 hour ago, Dex said:

Are you sure the Huddle is "largely hostile"? Or are they just yelling louder than everyone else. For the most part this thread has good points from both sides. Also OP while bringing up a good point has been the most hostile contributor in this thread. Not defending the jackasses just playing devil's advocate.

What good point? And what contribution has she made beyond initially copying/pasting an article? If you make a sensationalist post regarding what is already an inherently controversial article, you better be prepared for discussion and dissenting opinions and to be able to support your argument. She has not exhibited any of that nor shown even the desire to do that...but instead just calls people idiots and poops any post that quotes her in a rebuttal, the majority of which calmly and rationally present their alternative viewpoints...like those of TheCasillas. The best part is that she has the audacity to claim OTHER people have no desire to engage in a productive discussion...incredible. She is just sitting back and piggybacking off of other people with White Knight Syndrome who are rushing in to defend her...because apparently she’s unable to defend her own opinion.

 

I don’t sugarcoat my criticism and walk on eggshells like other people do on these boards to be non-confrontational and preserve the feelings of people who are undeserving, so I know I’ll get labeled a troll...because the cesspool known as The Huddle is just that predictable. Cookie’s debating skills make Saca and his one-word “Lmao” rebuttals look like Jordan Peterson. Ridiculous ...this was probably the biggest disaster of a thread I’ve ever read on The Huddle, and I read through “Pink Flaps”.

 

 

[stirs]

2 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

What good point? And what contribution has she made beyond initially copying/pasting an article? If you make a sensationalist post regarding what is already an inherently controversial article, you better be prepared for discussion and dissenting opinions and to be able to support your argument. She has not exhibited any of that nor shown even the desire to do that...but instead just calls people idiots and poops any post that quotes her in a rebuttal, the majority of which calmly and rationally present their alternative viewpoints...like those of TheCasillas. The best part is that she has the audacity to claim OTHER people have no desire to engage in a productive discussion...incredible. She is just sitting back and piggybacking off of other people with White Knight Syndrome who are rushing in to defend her...because apparently she’s unable to defend her own opinion.

 

I don’t sugarcoat my criticism and walk on eggshells like other people do on these boards to be non-confrontational and preserve the feelings of people who are undeserving, so I know I’ll get labeled a troll...because the cesspool known as The Huddle is just that predictable. Cookie’s debating skills make Saca and his one-word “Lmao” rebuttals look like Jordan Peterson. Ridiculous ...this was probably the biggest disaster of a thread I’ve ever read on The Huddle, and I read through “Pink Flaps”.

 

 

Disastrous threads on the Huddle could fill the Pacific.

I doubt this one was the biggest.  Not a huge fan of this one, but doubt the biggest

[Asurfaholic]

Serious question- if the pay was really an issue, why are people lining up for the opportunity to be a cheerleader? 

What incentive does a business have to pay more than what suitable people are willing to work for? 

There are no cookies in business. Karma is a false religion. 

[BAMFpanther]

All the entertainment have to arrive at 7 or 8 for 1 o’clock games. They fed the drum line breakfast before we ran through the pregame and in game stuff for an hour before we broke for lunch. We then went around to gates and parking lots for a few hours before game time. Nothing unusual about it and we all signed on for it. It’s not like they have to do it.  

[TheCasillas]

43 minutes ago, AggieLean said:

Why are you trying to minimize these issues? This is the type of jabs that occur in everyone of these types of threads, yet it’s always these that are ignored largely on the board.

In fact, I pretty much know everyone who had a problem with Cookie and let her know she was being “hostile” won’t say a word about this. And this is how it goes in all these types of threads, and you wonder why people are “hostile.” You know what to expect here.

Two options:

1. The cheerleaders get paid more in the same condition

or

2. No more cheerleader jobs

 

Which would you select? You have expressed your opinion avidly, and I am curious which of these seem to be more acceptable in your eyes?

[Cookie Lyon]

3 minutes ago, BAMFpanther said:

All the entertainment have to arrive at 7 or 8 for 1 o’clock games. They fed the drum line breakfast before we ran through the pregame and in game stuff for an hour before we broke for lunch. We then went around to gates and parking lots for a few hours before game time. Nothing unusual about it and we all signed on for it. It’s not like they have to do it.  

I have no issue with the cheerleaders being told to arrive hours early before a game starts. It's the other things stated in the article that I'm concerned about.

[pantherphan96]

51 minutes ago, h0llywood said:

So in the future, I shouldn't make a comment on a single topic of a broader conversation because I will be called out on it by you? 
There was a purpose in leaving all the other stuff out, because obviously, it was to point out the misinformation of your belief that cheerleaders are being mistreated because of the water issue. Believe me, I do not feel bad for you calling me out, because it just makes you look bad given you never addressed any of the facts that I pointed out but kept dancing around the whole water issue.

In the future maybe dont try to leave a dismissive comment on a single topic of a broader conversation because it makes you look like an asshole.

my belief as i stated multiple times before is that the water issue is just a smaller part of a series of conditions that make it a bad working environment.

i know you dont feel bad as you keeping harping on the one point you can actually defend while claiming i haven't addressed the issue despite listing out all of the conditions that the OP was mentioning.

[h0llywood]

Just now, pantherphan96 said:

In the future maybe dont try to leave a dismissive comment on a single topic of a broader conversation because it makes you look like an asshole.

my belief as i stated multiple times before is that the water issue is just a smaller part of a series of conditions that make it a bad working environment.

i know you dont feel bad as you keeping harping on the one point you can actually defend while claiming i haven't addressed the issue despite listing out all of the conditions that the OP was mentioning.

I look like an asshole because I don't agree with one part of the topic? Damn you are triggered aren't you. 

I keep posting about that one point because that is the ONLY point i've made. Yet you cannot and therefore refuse to counter my point. 

Enjoy your ban!

[pantherphan96]

4 minutes ago, h0llywood said:

I look like an asshole because I don't agree with one part of the topic? Damn you are triggered aren't you. 

I keep posting about that one point because that is the ONLY point i've made. Yet you cannot and therefore refuse to counter my point. 

Enjoy your ban!

no because your whole point is to negate OP's whole argument based on you disagreeing with a tiny part of their greater complaint with workplace treatment. i've refuted your point by pointing out the multiple factors that OP finds ridiculous with the NFL cheerleading environment. keep grasping at those straws though.

[h0llywood]

1 minute ago, pantherphan96 said:

no because your whole point is to negate OP's whole argument based on you disagreeing with a tiny part of their greater complaint with workplace treatment. i've refuted your point by pointing out the multiple factors that OP finds ridiculous with the NFL cheerleading environment. keep grasping at those straws though.

I made one point, and one point about water. You keep talking about everything but water.

I'm guessing you don't do well with logic.