Friday, August 17, 2007

Questions from Readers....

1) A reader reminded FAUXRUMORS a few weeks back, it has been over 6 months since we last had a post devoted to publicly answering our voluminous reader e-mail. For those who aren't aware, we can be reached via Unfortunately the last post where we answered those questions did not survive the hostile computer hacking job that temporarily disabled our site for 2 weeks in early March. (About 2/3 of the original pre-March posts were saved, but that wasn't one of them.)

2) One of the most frequently asked question we get is "Why Don't You Just Use Your Real Names?" and " Why are all posts in the 'third' person? There are a few answers to that question(s), but first and foremost the answer is that it keeps things interesting. ; ) Many of our sources would be less likely to talk if we used our real names, since some of our real names could potentially link us to certain hockey people and perhaps make them a bit exposed. If we stay anonymous then they can talk to us under this extra layer of anonymity. WE write in the third person because this isn't a one man outfit. We ALL take the credit/blame for our posts, so we decided long ago to not only do that, but write the posts to reflect that philosophy.

3) Also, we think who we are is far more boring than what FAUXRUMORS has become. It is even more boring than when people say they have "figured out" who we are. A few bloggers who have claimed to be us, we have actually become friendly with. Believe us, they are even more interesting than we are. LOL On occasion we have considered dropping the anonymity bit, but then we think, “What fun would that be?”Our identities would be a big story were we Gary Bettman, Ted Saskin or Stan Fischler, and although we never confirm or deny anything, we will tell you all that we are not any of those folks!! LOL

4) We also get many questions are always about the rumors we put out there. A few words about rumors to clarify how we work here. How we do things is a tad differently than many other rumor sites and therefore is often misunderstood. There are the Several Rules of FAUXRUMORS and Hockey Rumors.

  • Rule #1. We report on what we hear from MANY NHL contacts at all levels. We spend way too much time on the phone and, quite often, we run over our allotted minutes per month. Which is very scary in of itself. LOL

  • Rule #2. We don't make things up. Quite often we put out something that may not make sense, but you never know. For instance: Clarke is no longer GM in Philly, Garth Snow is the GM in NY. The Fedorov and Thornton trades, etc. If had we had them and tried to put out those rumors, would have gotten ripped apart if they didn't happen.

  • Rule #3. Since we are writing almost everything we hear, most of what we write will NEVER happen. Many try to use this fact against us, but our loyal readers understand that this is how that part of the NHL works. Based on what we have learned, only 5%(or less) of what is discussed between GMs or GMs and agents ever amounts to anything. And yet ofcourse they are always talking. We know that we manage to dig up only a small percentage of that huge amount of discourse. So you do the math. If we nail ten things a year, we're very happy. We write this stuff, because who doesn't like to look at a trade possibility and think about whether or not they would do it? At least here you can be assured that it came from a source that is trusted. People used to try and trick us all the time, and this last year we fell for a few of them. Now we don't report a rumor unless the source has proven to be reliable, we have talked to them on the phone or they have confirmed they are on the inside through a mutual hockey friend that we trust.

  • Rule #4. We don't always get the complete deal correct. Often we get some of the names that are being discussed. This is something that we seem to have had to write a thousand times. Especially if the deal doesn't make "cap sense." What is fun for us is if we get a solid rumor that a deal doesn't make cap sense, because that leads us in the direction of what kind of deal will get made to clear up space.

  • Rule #5.(Most important!)It's only hockey, so try and have some fun here. We don't remove any comments even if they don't bring anything to the table or are just intended to rip us. Rip the trade if you think it is a bad move, but don't shoot the messenger. ; ) We enjoy the discussions that the rumor posts invariably evoke. That's why we're here; to discuss what we all love most, NHL hockey!

  • Rule #6. Don't believe everything you read about us on other blog sites. There is a TON of misinformation about us. There are also some really great writers and some really bad ones. Many of the good ones and some of the bad hold some sort of hatred for us that we have never fully understood. Many times the mere manner in which we write our posts(numbered) garners ire. We have repeatedly tried to reach out to them, as we did with Eklund last month. Like we said, It is only hockey, and in our opinion the more bloggers the better. We grew up in a time where the only hockey we read was in 'The Hockey News' once a week. We think this is much better! Don't you?

  • Rule #7 We also put out personal rumors about players ONLY if we know them to be fact (Via multiple reliable sources). Our expose on the Pronger/Malkin situations and allegations are prime examples where we feel we did our best investigative work!
5) We also have subtly altered our blog over the past year or so. We started off this enterprise about a year ago this time. Like now, there was very little NHL news so that inspired some unscrupulous folks to start blogs and lie about who they were. One that we recall came from an individual who had folks believing he was a lawyer working for the Montreal Canadians: He had poor saps eager for news hanging on to his every word. Of course(as you can read on that now defunct blog) we at FAUXRUMORS knew early on he was a fraud. However, that inspired us to begin our own, factually based blog with our very own Faux sources.

6) Since we are a totally non-profit outfit(and always will be!) we don't always have rumors to share. We refuse to make up rumors out of thin air. Others are much more adept at this than us anyway. ; ) Therefore we altered our initial rumor site into a general hockey discussion site and since this change the number of regular readers has grown, even after the late February hijacking.

7) Our long and extensive road trip around the league last fall really opened our eyes to how many hard core fans the league has, and we thank everyone who has written us and ofcourse who we have met in our travels. We look forward to continuing this for many years to come; possibly adding additional writers and ofcourse sources. Thank you again to all of you. Without whom we wouldn't be writing this blog!


blaine said...

I don't always see eye to eye on things with the person or persons who write this blog but I have to admit its one of the more entertaining hockey blogs I visit.

Jibblescribbits said...

Faux maybe you should move to have to approve your comments like "Teebz" does over at Hockey Blog in Canada.

Hawk is slowly making your comments unreadable.

Otherwise good work I enjoy your takes and rumors.


1) Wow, we throw out an innocuous post and BOOM, we get our new/old irritant back.
2) Jintzie: Thanks for defending us, BUT old friend, please just ignore the poor guy. He obviously is just looking for attention
3) Jibble: Sorry things seem to be getting so difficult to read. Thanks for the kind words. We hate to have to put on the 'monitor comments' option or erase annoying comments, but if this continues we may have to consider allowing ONLY hockey related posts. We'll see how things go.


1) As many might notice we have deleted most of the offending non-hockey related posts(Sorry Jintzie)
2) We will try to avoid putting up comments monitoring' if possible BUT we will regularly delete non hockey related posts or posts that are deemed by us the blog administrators as disruptive
3) Sorry it had to get to this point. Lets get back to hockey!

The Dark Ranger said...

faux,....that loon was entertaining in the beginning, but it is overtaking. i'll keep reading though. best to not even address the 'secret monitoring devices' and comments.

The Dark Ranger will fly over Hawk and strike....


1) We agree, Dark. We at first were going the 'ignore mode. We have thick skin, etc., but the 'clutter' of the posts and our friends attepts(as honorable as they were) to defend us was getting to be too much.
2) Time to get back to hockey!

Sauce said...

Just a technical correction. Your blog posts aren't written in the "third-person". They're actually written in the first-person, plural. It's first-person because you are referring to your own opinions, not someone elses (e.g. "I think the Pens will win the cup"). By saying "we", you simply are making the first-person point of view plural.

Otherwise... I enjoy reading your posts and (most of) the comments.

Jibblescribbits said...

@faux,....that loon was entertaining in the beginning, but it is overtaking. i'll keep reading though. best to not even address the 'secret monitoring devices' and comments.

I never even found him all that entertaining. Pathetic...check. Sad...Check. Annoying...check. But never amusing.

I too will keep on reading, and continue to read the comments/make comments but sifting through loon....errrr..hawk's babble is irritating


1) Thanks Sauce for your interjection. Though we don't always agree on everything, your input is always welcome here and on other blogs.
2) Jibble: We agree and your note is what persuaded us to delete the annoying Hawk posts. We want to stay on message here. If one wants to disagree with us that fine, but a continual repeat of the same nonsense in both cluttering an annoying, Hawk.
3) Hawk you are welcome to stay/continue to disagree with us, but repeating the same note/theme over and over will NOT be tolerated.

Silas said...

Faux, what are you hearing about Forsberg. last week they said the Senators were talking with him, this week its vancouver. So whats the deal?


1) Silas: We can't say more on Forsberg than what we have written here previously. Our sources tell us/ and we believe that the recent spat of Forsberg rumors are total crap fictional stories produced by a bored Canadian media
2) There is simply "NOTHING to any of them" one asst. GM told us over the weekend. Peter is as close to signing/playing today as he was 2 months ago. The only thing that's changed is that there is no other news right now
3) Hawk: We accept your mea culpa and your apology. We will though continue comment moderation for a while longer just in case
4) Hope everyone is having a great weekend. Still working on our off season report cards. As always, keep it here for the latest!

Victor said...

I have to wonder like some have suggested how you could earlier poun don Eklund for having such a bad track record, then basicly say your is no better? You have to admit its a legitamite question, right?


1) We agree Victor that on the surface your statement may have some validity, but if one digs deeper an better answer lies.
2) While we have in the not so distant past taken Eklund to task for his track record, it has to be noted that there are some huge differences between them and us.
3) Most important among them is the fact that we accept NO MONEY!! This is a totally free site. We don't even accept advertising dollars. As much as we have been asked, we have always refused to, and always will!
4) When we put out a rumor its strait from a sources(s) to you, our loyal readers, We do NOT have to make stuff up to keep the paying customers happy.
5) Recently Eklund got caught(again) taking 'bait' from a unreliable sources when he mentioned a likely Islander-Bruin trade. Only curser background would have proven it a ruse, but Eklund, needing something to publish on a slow day ran with it without properly checking the source.
6) While we no longer are at war with he and his people, neither are we going to shy away from mentioning the differences between our sites. Thanks again for the query Victor! Keep on reading/asking whatever is on your mind! All opinions even if they differ from own own are welcomed!

Shuck-A-Luck said...

Welcome back to me, welcome back to me, welcome to me, I had a fun Holiday!

Ok, that sounded way cooler in my head!

Looks like things got a bit crazy around here while I was gone. Lies, scandals, comment moderation, and ek bashing. I thought you and he kissed and made up?

I am not much of an ek fan, but must say he has delivered this off season much more in the way of rumors then this 'rumor' site has.

But your team analysis was great. Maybe time to become fauxhockey?


1) Welcome back Shuck. Nothing really new here. Yes comment moderation has (hopefully) Temporarily been implemented, but otherwise its business as usual here
2) We agree that Ek 'produces' MUCH more in the way of rumors than we do. As we mentioned in our previous note, we don't HAVE to write a rumor to keep paying customers/advertisers happy
3) Thanks for the props on our franchise review. It was fun to assemble. The off season report card should be out sometime this week. Again, welcome back!

Shuck-A-Luck said...

I don't know if we would ever agree with each other on ek, but I think his site provides much more then just rumors for hockey fans.

His regurgitating everything he hears results in some humorous situations but the other bloggers on the site give a great view of the nhl landscape around the league.

There is much more to hockeybuzz then just rumors.

Wow, I never thought I would defend the guy. Ok enough of that, I feel nauseated!


1) We don't disagree that the Buzz site has evolved over the past couple of years. They have hired a bunch of decent writers over there to augment what Ek and staff had been producing alone
2) The main source of traffic to the site though remains the rumors, and there doesn't to ever be a dearth of them to relay to the hungry masses. LOL

Sauce said...

I think it's probably important for all to understand the nature of the stuff Eklund posts in his blog. It's not really 'rumors', per se. It's chatter on the discussions that may be taking place between GMs. The 'rumors' are what Eklund and his readers decide to speculate from those reported discussions. I, for one, tend to think that the info on who is talking to who is quite interesting because it gives additional insight on what a GM might be willing to consider in the future and what directions he's willing to allow his 'strategy' to take. Bottom line... Eklund is worth reading as long as one understands exactly what is really being communicated.

As far as the other bloggers on the hockeybuzz site... Dany Tolensky is probably one of the best I've read on any site so far.


1) We guess its a difference of semantics of what constitutes a 'rumor', but agree that the interest that the discussion draws from fans is what made his, and like sites popular.
2) We no longer dissuade readers from reading their daily offerings, but to use them as you mentioned; as a way to discuss 'possible' deals. Our issue is when they write a (rumor) from a reliable source that is later found out to merely be their own conjecture or from an unreliable (connected) source. Such as what happened in the Isles-Bruin rumor last week.

Contact the Media