oh cool! do the athletes get any of the money from this gear??

oh cool! do the athletes get any of the money from this gear??

this is good deadspin

if they were not, by [sic] and large, virulent racists.

23 was the most at bats in an inning as cited by Drew.

Yeah it does ask that but I think the more interesting part of the question whether a batter has ever gotten 3 outs in 3 at bats in an inning. The part about batting around three times is sort of an entirely different question and worth its own attention if it were to happen.

Drew (ya jamoke),

Just to nitpick, the secondary market will inform, inflate or deflate the primary market. By buying on the secondary market you are reinforcing the pricing of the primary market and marginally making future tickets Snydeyboy sells more expensive.

Two jokes to make.....WHICH TO CHOOOSE??? NYAAGGHHH!

Yeah I agree. Well I totally don’t mind someone using an ecig in place of a cigarette. However, when someone with an ecig the size of a blowtorch is ripping huge hits on a crowded side walk leaving huge plumes in his wake...fuck that guy.

Also, although I still think it is a generous act and worth praise—this was a wrong statement. It is not a charity. That does not necessarily negate its merit though.

:)

Starred before the edit. But still generally agree. Just a note, there are many ways to use $45 billion outside of spending it though: see Donald Trump.

I agree with that. I still think its fantastic. I also have serious reservations about the efficacy of traditional charities so I don’t really care that they are not going that route (entirely).

So I am using this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/tec…) as the source of my knowledge.

Interesting but ultimately I am not concerned with the mechanics of how they give the money—I imagine the daughter will be not be left out to dry with promised donations she cannot afford (if I am reading that right).

Im not sure anyone is measuring his action on how poor he is going to be afterwards. No one should be conflating nobleness with self-induced poverty.

Well to be fair, real charities raise $500 million and build 6 houses in Haiti. Its my understanding that the money going to non-charities are still going to charitable causes—not true?

Im not the most read up maybe. Even if its prorated over his life, am I missing something that makes it not an extremely generous charitable act?

uh, okay... any asshole who can cause large scale beneficial change in the world should maybe get a pass for being an asshole? maybe your standards are higher though.

Why are we talking shit about giving $45B (over a lifetime) and labelling it a “pseudo-charity”. It’s a lot of fucking money and almost definitely a “real” charity.