Comments on: Quick procedural question

By: Speed Ranger

Speed Ranger — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:43:54 +0000

At the bottom please. Having the best stuff at the top spoils the rest of the read.

By: Tucson Ken

Tucson Ken — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:02:43 +0000

Bottom, Please. Love your Blog & your wise-ass humor as well. Great job. Thanks

By: NYRich82

NYRich82 — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 12:20:05 +0000

Top, and I only say top because I’m treating this like a goal review. Top or bottom, it’s all the same, but since the original “ruling” was on the top review of this decision is not conclusive either way and therefore it should remain top. Make sense?

By: Sect340

Sect340 — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 03:43:48 +0000

Bottom

By: mg

mg — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 00:16:06 +0000

updates on the bottom so it reads in order. abraham is a tool.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 20:16:34 +0000

Thanks for the blog, it is a daily read for me. My opinion is that it simply makes sense to post like we read – first item first, latest item last, so that we can intuitively follow the posts rather than have to jump around looking for the beginning…

By: Scott Smith

Scott Smith — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:10:47 +0000

I like to read the updates last…whenever it is on top it spoils whats under it

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:21:12 +0000

It is a good watch without Joe.

What a save!!!!

By: graves9

graves9 — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:21:01 +0000

The Prucha-Korpikoski-Callahan line looks really good. Nice speed and pretty gritty line. The Redden-Rozsival and Kalinin-Girardi pairings look terrible. I’m not sure why Staal’s on the third d pairing. Lundqvist looks sharp.

By: Staal Wart

Staal Wart — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:47:51 +0000

Lets Go Boys!!!
12 minutes and counting!!!