Dear Greg Beaton,

[Jumbo]

Imagine if columnists debated with every group or person they offended with their viewpoints...

That's a straw man. We're talking about a group that was the focus of Beaton's column. He didn't even pick up a phone to interview someone from that group. It's one thing to debate everyone who disagrees with you. That's unreasonable. It's another to actually address the people you target. Again, avoiding the latter -- especially since it is simple and not time-consuming -- is cowardly. I say that as a journalist, not a Duke fan.

[Stray Gator]

Imagine if columnists debated with every group or person they offended with their viewpoints...

Then the readers would be able to hear both sides and, perhaps, be better equipped to distinguish the true facts from the baseless assumptions, and ultimately to formulate more reasoned, balanced judgments about their own beliefs. Of course, we don't have that luxury with every column or op-ed piece that gets published. But here's a rare chance for the "target" of this columnist's criticism--the DBR moderators--to defend themselves. Imagine anyone suggesting that fair debate and the search for truth should be suppressed so that a columnist can evade accountability for publishing an opinion critical of people who are guilty of providing a website for fans without charge on the condition that they adhere to certain standards of behavior?

[slower]

Good Lord, how many more days until the season starts?

[DukieGator]

And I am a journalist. You can be a journalist and still be a coward.

For someone that claims to be so virtuous for not publicly bashing 21 year old kids, I find your level of bullying against Greg to be downright hypocritical. I also think that you--and many others on this board--are way too harsh on Chronicle reporters and columnists. Again, allow me to reiterate that when you bash Chronicle staffers, you're bashing 18-22 year olds. Also, keep in mind that these 18-22 year olds toil well into every night of every day of every week--for not a penny, mind you--to make the Chronicle available to the Duke community. Get some perspective, and give them a break.

I'm not saying you shouldn't question their opinions and engage in lively, civil debate. But what I am saying is you shouldn't resort to insults like calling him a coward. That's just bullying against someone who doesn't deserve it.

[Troublemaker]

This suggestion came on the tail end of my assertion that he would be a fool to debate. I made it to hopefully prove how biased the-- "jury"/ posters who would inevitably comment on the debate-- would be. Even if you close the debate thread, people would comment on it and I feel that a poll would prove just how biased we all would be.

Uh huh. So when you said "I would love to know how us "non-lurkers" really feel," you actually meant "I already know." Anyway, this is getting too side-tracked. Three quick points: (1) I think there are people who like Beaton's column and would like to see him debate it, so I don't accept your assumption of the makeup of the audience, (2) maybe the column is just poor -- don't assume that people are biased if they happen to not like it, and (3) the strength of his viewpoints have nothing to do with the makeup of the audience, so he can, if he wishes, defend his viewpoints regardless of the alleged makeup, and if he defends them well enough, maybe he can change the minds of some of his audience.

[Jumbo]

For someone that claims to be so virtuous for not publicly bashing 21 year old kids, I find your level of bullying against Greg to be downright hypocritical. I also think that you--and many others on this board--are way too harsh on Chronicle reporters and columnists. Again, allow me to reiterate that when you bash Chronicle staffers, you're bashing 18-22 year olds. Also, keep in mind that these 18-22 year olds toil well into every night of every day of every week--for not a penny, mind you--to make the Chronicle available to the Duke community. Get some perspective, and give them a break.

I'm not saying you shouldn't question their opinions and engage in lively, civil debate. But what I am saying is you shouldn't resort to insults like calling him a coward. That's just bullying against someone who doesn't deserve it.

That is bunk [my edit -- based on user response]. You are attempting to draw a parallel between Chronicle staffers and Duke athletes. Here's the problem -- Duke athletes don't go out of their way to insult Chronicle staffers. The one big moment in Duke's history where this happened (K's locker room ambush following the infamous "report card") has drawn ire on this board almost two decades after the fact, led by ... me.

I'm well aware of the sacrifices that go into a college newspaper. But at a college newspaper, there are still standards that apply. You still have a choice of what to write. You have a voice that can offend others. You have a responsibility to behave in a respectable manner.

I haven't "bashed" this kid. Read my note again. I said he raised some interesting points, and that I want to debate him. The only thing remotely close to "bashing" would be calling him a coward if he refuses to actually engage in a healthy debate with the targets of his column. If you don't see how that's fair and not hypocritical then, well, you can lead a horse to water...

[Jumbo]

Then the readers would be able to hear both sides and, perhaps, be better equipped to distinguish the true facts from the baseless assumptions, and ultimately to formulate more reasoned, balanced judgments about their own beliefs. Of course, we don't have that luxury with every column or op-ed piece that gets published. But here's a rare chance for the "target" of this columnist's criticism--the DBR moderators--to defend themselves. Imagine anyone suggesting that fair debate and the search for truth should be suppressed so that a columnist can evade accountability for publishing an opinion critical of people who are guilty of providing a website for fans without charge on the condition that they adhere to certain standards of behavior?

You know, there's a reason why people tend to listen to you when you speak. Well put.

[Jumbo]

"As you know, our primary goals for these boards are to foster a sense of community among basketball fans, especially Duke fans, and to encourage intelligent discussion, debate, and commentary in a fun and civil atmosphere."

My bad. I will withdraw that comment and edit accordingly.

[SilkyJ]

No, I don't know it.

Yes you do. You're just being combative.

[DukieGator]

That is bunk [my edit -- based on user response]. You are attempting to draw a parallel between Chronicle staffers and Duke athletes. Here's the problem -- Duke athletes don't go out of their way to insult Chronicle staffers. The one big moment in Duke's history where this happened (K's locker room ambush following the infamous "report card") has drawn ire on this board almost two decades after the fact, led by ... me.

I'm well aware of the sacrifices that go into a college newspaper. But at a college newspaper, there are still standards that apply. You still have a choice of what to write. You have a voice that can offend others. You have a responsibility to behave in a respectable manner.

I haven't "bashed" this kid. Read my note again. I said he raised some interesting points, and that I want to debate him. The only thing remotely close to "bashing" would be calling him a coward if he refuses to actually engage in a healthy debate with the targets of his column. If you don't see how that's fair and not hypocritical then, well, you can lead a horse to water...

Read my post again. I never took issue with your original post in this thread, which asked Greg to engage in a debate with you. In fact, I thought it was a great idea, and was looking forward to where this thread was headed.

What I do take issue with, however, is your calling Greg a coward. As far as I can understand, you think he's a coward for two reasons: (1) for not immediately showing up here to debate you; and (2) for not doing some investigative reporting into all facets of the board shut-down a couple of weeks ago.

Your first count of cowardice is a bit unreasonable, in my opinion. Maybe he's in class? Maybe he's otherwise occupied? Whatever the case may be, it's harsh to call him a coward for not immediately taking up this debate. Maybe he'll get around to it later.

Your second count of cowardice seems decently reasonable to me. I agree that he should have investigated his points of criticism a bit further before tearing into DBR. But I don't think that warrants calling him a coward. You can make the point without resorting to insults.

My last point: you're totally distorting the issue that I brought up at the beginning of my original post. It is well within your right to harbor resentment for the Chronicle because of the report card incident. But to take that resentment out on someone who (1) took no part in the report card incident, because it was 20 years ago; and (2) hasn't bashed any Duke basketball players, isn't right. This is the point I was trying to originally make: parallels can be drawn between Duke basketball players and Chronicle staffers because they are: (1) young and inexperienced; (2) here to entertain you, as well as get experience in their fields; and (3) hard working, well-meaning people.

[grc5]

For goodness sakes this is the dumbest arguement I've ever seen on DBR. I'll be back in September we have some basketball to talk about, because apparently everyone is too easily offended in the offseason.

Beaton's right or Beaton's wrong--who the heck cares. He's just one columnist at The Chronicle. As a former Chronicle sports columnist, please take my word when I say people usually quickly forget what you've written.

[bfree]

Oops, wrong thread.

[CDu]

Many, many, MANY members of this website don't have a Duke diploma.


Ah, so Greybeard, for instance, who went to Cornell, might be stupid because he doesn't have a "Duke diploma." Got it. And people wonder where that whole elitist rep comes from.


"The leadership?" Who is that? The moderators? There's no environment hostile to his view. If he's man enough to write what he did, he should be man enough to actually discuss it with the people he ripped.



I would be happy to write a point-counterpoint with the Beaton in the Chronicle. More than happy. Thrilled. Problem is, it's kind of hard to debate back and forth because the paper is published, you know, once a day. I'm just asking for a nice constructive debate in this thread. Beaton can say what he wants. Why hide?

This is some pretty poor logic, Jumbo. First, it is true that not everyone here has a Duke diploma. But what does that really matter to the validity of the poster's overall point? It's completely irrelevant. The point was that Beaton has a Duke degree, and thus is smart. Second, you make a fallacious jump to say that "if you don't have a Duke degree, you're dumb." The poster implied "if you have a Duke degree, you're smart." A implies B. The negative of A does not, however, imply the negative of B. Nowhere did the poster say "if you didn't go to Duke, you're dumb." The poster didn't even imply it. You should know that (and I'm sure you actually do know that).

FYI - this has nothing to do with the overall issue. But if you're going to disagree with the poster's argument that it is easy to debate in your own backyard (I may or may not agree with your stance on that regard), at least do it with strong logic.

[Jumbo]

Your first count of cowardice is a bit unreasonable, in my opinion. Maybe he's in class? Maybe he's otherwise occupied? Whatever the case may be, it's harsh to call him a coward for not immediately taking up this debate. Maybe he'll get around to it later.

Totally fair points. I agree.

My last point: you're totally distorting the issue that I brought up at the beginning of my original post. It is well within your right to harbor resentment for the Chronicle because of the report card incident. But to take that resentment out on someone who (1) took no part in the report card incident, because it was 20 years ago; and (2) hasn't bashed any Duke basketball players, isn't right. This is the point I was trying to originally make: parallels can be drawn between Duke basketball players and Chronicle staffers because they are: (1) young and inexperienced; (2) here to entertain you, as well as get experience in their fields; and (3) hard working, well-meaning people.

You mis-read what I wrote. I have no resentment toward the Chronicle for the "report card" incident. I think it was one of K's worst moments.

[dyedwab]

and there is ample precedent for such debate in world where opinions are significantly more contentious and people are less willing to give each other the benefit of the doubt...politics

Over the past few years, The New Republic (general considered a flagship liberal publication) and The National Review (the same on the conservative side) have had occasion to cross post debates on various topics and writers for both publication responded to each other

If TNR and NR can do it, certainly the Chronicle and DBR can...Lions lying down with the lambs and all that...

[Jumbo]

Guys,
This thread didn't go close to how I intended. And that's my fault. I'm going to lock it, post a standing invitation for Beaton to participate in a far-more-friendly debate, and then lock that. If Beaton wants to participate, he can PM me. If he doesn't, no harm, no foul.

Thanks for the various points expressed here.