I don't think there's anything wrong with asking this question - there's a major difference between the types and significant degrees of seriousness.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
I don't think there's anything wrong with asking this question - there's a major difference between the types and significant degrees of seriousness.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
Of course it's natural for a fan to be curious ... but that doesn't make it any of the fan's business nor is there any moral, business, ethical or any other obligation on Gettleman's part to satisfy your, my, or anyone else's curiosity.
Of course it's natural for a fan to be curious ... but that doesn't make it any of the fan's business nor is there any moral, business, ethical or any other obligation on Gettleman's part to satisfy your, my, or anyone else's curiosity.
Did you really think there was anyone on BBI who felt Gettleman was obliged to satisfy our curiosity? Was there someone complaining about not being informed enough? Was there someone demanding an answer? Or was it just a case of someone asking a legitimate question that may or may not have been answered by the beat writers in a follow-up to the story?
p.s.-- I realize you are under no moral, business, or ethical obligation to answer my questions (so don't feel pressured!), I'm just curious. Ain't Nobody's Business - ( New Window )
I don't think there's anything wrong with asking this question - there's a major difference between the types and significant degrees of seriousness.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
Of course it's natural for a fan to be curious ... but that doesn't make it any of the fan's business nor is there any moral, business, ethical or any other obligation on Gettleman's part to satisfy your, my, or anyone else's curiosity.
Wonderful, no one said it was their obligation. The poster isn't exactly demanding Gettleman's social security number here. He's simply curious about his prognosis.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
Of course it's natural for a fan to be curious ... but that doesn't make it any of the fan's business nor is there any moral, business, ethical or any other obligation on Gettleman's part to satisfy your, my, or anyone else's curiosity.
p.s.-- I realize you are under no moral, business, or ethical obligation to answer my questions (so don't feel pressured!), I'm just curious.
Ain't Nobody's Business - ( New Window )
Quote:
I don't think there's anything wrong with asking this question - there's a major difference between the types and significant degrees of seriousness.
His private medical info doesn't need to be public, but he's running the Giants right now and I think it's fair for a fan to be curious about his prognosis.
Of course it's natural for a fan to be curious ... but that doesn't make it any of the fan's business nor is there any moral, business, ethical or any other obligation on Gettleman's part to satisfy your, my, or anyone else's curiosity.
Wonderful, no one said it was their obligation. The poster isn't exactly demanding Gettleman's social security number here. He's simply curious about his prognosis.
If DG has a more aggressive form, we will know soon enough because he will have to step down. I take his continuing as GM as a good sign