Comments on: But on a more positive note . . .

By: Katy Depoyster

Katy Depoyster — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 14:01:30 +0000

What i don’t understood is in reality how you are not really much more well-appreciated than you might be now. You’re so intelligent. You already know therefore significantly relating to this matter, made me for my part imagine it from so many numerous angles. Its like women and men aren’t fascinated until it¡¯s something to do with Girl gaga! Your own stuffs great. Always deal with it up!

By: ThirtyWhat

ThirtyWhat — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:07:00 +0000

I agree … the sentence was dismissive. Not a mind-blowing gaff … but hurtful, nonetheless.

By: Monkey Boy

Monkey Boy — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 06:14:00 +0000

Dave,

What the hell does it matter if Dan liked the rest of the coverage? Is there some kind of point you are trying to make? Was the article a Pulitzer Prize winner besides the fact that it was insensitive to two teenagers deaths?

By: BlogFreeSpringfield

BlogFreeSpringfield — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:11:00 +0000

Dave,

I thought that overall, it was an informative article and the type of local coverage that I like to see on the front page. I suppose I should have said that, but I've come to expect good coverage from the SJ-R so it doesn't seem noteworthy to mention it.

My quibble was with a single phrase that seemed to strike the wrong chord. Perhaps I'm delving deeply into the minutiae, but Anon 9:27 was also left with the same impression.

What did you think of the coverage?

Dan

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:14:00 +0000

But other than that, did you like the SJ-R’s coverage?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 03:27:00 +0000

I totally agree with you. Not a good choice of words. I work in the safety field and we try to save lives not dismiss them.