META - MGoBlog rights a wrong, teams up with Hope for Pahokee Charity!

Submitted by Butterfield on August 27th, 2012 at 7:27 PM

EDIT:  See Brian's comments at end of OP.  As is the usual around here, the finest blog in the blogiverse, great good will come of what, just yesterday, seemed an unfortunate situation.  Great job, MGoBlog. 


A week ago, Six Zero unveiled the 2012 MGoShirts.  Included amongst them was this one: 

Well, as many of you know, Hope for Pahokee, a charity started by Martavious Odoms (amongst others) to help impoverished Pahokee, Florida, has been selling #Eatin t-shirts for some time now, with 100 percent of the proceeds being directed to fighting hunger in Pahokee.

#EATING shirt

A great deal of posters came forward in the comments section of the unveiling post to show their disdain for what is basically stealing.  ( Unless MGoBlog has some sort of agreement with Hope for Pahokee to give 100 percent of the proceeds of the MGoBlog "Eatin'" shirt to the charity, selling this "rip-off" is absolutely shameful and all involved should be embarassed regarding their decision making.  Unfortunately, no representatives of MGoBlog have come forward to publicly address this issue, to remove the shirt from the store, to say there is a partnership with HfP, or in any way aleviate the concerns of the many posters regarding this product in the last 6 days since it was listed for sale.  As of 4:23 PST, the shirt is still for sale with no indication that proceeds benefit Hope for Pahokee.  

Come on, MGoBlog - you're better than this.

[ED: Hi. It's Brian. We're donating all proceeds from the shirt to Hope For Pahokee. I personally had missed the original Odoms shirt, and I'm sure Six did as well. You may resume panicking about the defensive line.]







August 27th, 2012 at 9:56 PM ^

Not trying to be a asshole... But I read at least 3 or 4 comments referencing the Hope for Pahokee shirt in the first 20 or 30 responses to the shirts release. Six Zero was asking for feed back about the shirts but then didn't read the comments? Not trying to defend the jackassery of the op but if Six Zero responds in some way this thread is probably not on the board.


August 27th, 2012 at 10:04 PM ^

You didn't read the comments. They had to be a third of them. And the point is you don't need to notify Six Zero...not only was there a lot of it in his thread, he's been asked elsewhere. Either every time he's come on to post he's ignored old posts, or just ignored the question.


August 27th, 2012 at 10:11 PM ^

Though in fairness I tend to read comments differently than other people (looking for flamebait, trolling, etc.). My point is largely that unless someone replies to your comments, it's impossible to know whether someone actually read the comments in a thread, so if you think information NEEDS to get to someone, going the mod/Brian route is the only way to be sure the info got through.


August 27th, 2012 at 9:58 PM ^

see OP. 

[ED: Hi. It's Brian. We're donating all proceeds from the shirt to Hope For Pahokee. I personally had missed the original Odoms shirt, and I'm sure Six did as well. You may resume panicking about the defensive line.]


August 27th, 2012 at 9:59 PM ^

Shirt is ugly as f anyway. The blue looks more like a dark grey material, they yellow is not maize, and it just looks bad. It in no way resembles anything Michigan and also looks like something you'd buy at Wal-Mart. You couldn't pay me to where that shirt!


August 27th, 2012 at 10:02 PM ^

I doubt the shirt was intentionally "stolen" from the Pahokee charity. That said, given that this concerned has been raised several times (ie, one ofmthe players who brought the sign to the team is trying to use it charitably), and no action has been taken, it's too bad it hasn't been addressed. I think continuing to sell the shirtmis bad form. Hopefully it is addressed.

Gulo Blue

August 27th, 2012 at 10:55 PM ^

Glad to see the issue resolved. A couple lines of explanation on the MGoStore description for the people that don't see this thread might be a good idea too.

Six Zero

August 27th, 2012 at 11:20 PM ^

Now that the issue has been resolved, I'd like to make a brief statement. While I am a contracted designer for the MGoStore and help promote it within this site and beyond, I am not its proprietor, business manager or owner. As far as this issue was concerned, it was not my call, and i refrained to comment out of respect for those who have indeed made the appropriate decision for everyone.

Secondly, when I did create the design, I was not aware of the Tae Odoms design. All apologies to him and his charity... I give my word that there was no intent to steal on anyone else's endeavors let alone a charitable pursuit.

Finally, I'd like to address Turd Ferguson's animosity towards me, presumably the result of his thinking I was refusing to acknowledge him. I apologize if you felt slighted or ignored, but I had no intent to betray any business partners or partnerships just because you'd called me out. And as for the avatar thing, I took that stance (and defend it) because I created that artwork specifically to be my signature image. Plenty of other readers use my work as their avatar and I have no issues with this at all, but I'd like to reserve rights to the little #60 Lego guy b/c I'll likely go back to it someday. I hope that provides some understanding to my reasoning there.


August 27th, 2012 at 11:39 PM ^

But I don't think saying "Wow, I wasn't aware of that or totally forgot it. I'll bring it to Brian's attention and see what he wants to do" is violating any fiduciary relationships. I'll repeat it's like HTTV- ignoring it publically is never a good solution, because then it goes from looking like an honest mistake everyone is willing to believe from trusted sources to willful ignorance, or if someone really doesn't know better, "nefarious looking." Don't let a one day story become a two day story. PR 101.


August 27th, 2012 at 11:47 PM ^

And I obviously do not know all of the details behind your legal and professional relationship with MGoBlog.

But, what was preventing you from posting something along the lines of, "Guys - I understand your concern.  I did not steal this.  This is not my call, but I have brought it to Brian's attention."?

Obviously, some people are wound a little tight 'round these parts, but that simple acknowledgement that you witnessed the complaints about the shirt and were going to try to discuss with Brian about it would have saved a hell a lot of unnecessary hand-wringing around here, and it would have been much preferable to dead silence about the issue, in my opinion.


August 28th, 2012 at 12:31 AM ^

While I appreciate the apology, Ithe angry mob has already made arrangements to cast you into the fires of Centralia, PA and I'm informed that deposit is non-refundable.  So sorry man.  For what it is worth, I was trying for the reactor core at TMI but it was all booked up, so the flaming coal mine was a backup.  

Seriousily though I'm glad this is all resolved and I don't think anyone thought you were ripping off Hope for Pahokee, it was more of just wondering why the shirt was still in the store without some kind of announcement.  

turd ferguson

August 28th, 2012 at 5:50 PM ^

Thanks for the response.  I agree with M-Wolverine's and Keith's comments above - and still don't think your tone in chastising the guy who used your work in his avatar was necessary - but I appreciate that you responded.

Also, for the record, I couldn't care less whether you responded to me.  I did think that you needed to say something about this, though.


August 28th, 2012 at 1:47 AM ^

until we finalize everything with HfP. We have sold three shirts to date, and we will be donating all proceeds to them regardless of whether the shirt stays up as a charity shirt or they want us to take down for good. Apologies to all for the lack of communication on this. 


August 28th, 2012 at 8:14 AM ^


My reaction? Good Job, Brian. You guys know how to run a blog here! Now if only I could find a blog as informative about economics, or even a half-way decent Medieval history blog, that'd be something.