A home for those who love almost everything about The Ticket (1310 AM, 96.7 FM, Dallas-Fort Worth), and who would like to discuss -- respectfully and fondly -- their thoughts on how (and whether) to eliminate the "almost."
Wednesday, August 6, 2025
On Further Review . . . .
REMINDER: I WILL DELETE "ANONYMOUS" COMMENTS AND THOSE I FIND GRATUITOUSLY VULGAR, INSULTING, INCOMPREHENSIBLE, OR JUST GENERALLY ANNOYING, IN MY SOLE AND UNREVIEWABLE DISCRETION. GRIPES ABOUT CONSISTENCY WILL NOT BE ENTERTAINED.
When this whole Reddit business started, I didn't pay much attention.
Then someone mentioned that TC had said that he had "asked for assistance" I thought that had to do with the current controversy, so I said no, no request for assistance. (That phrase was from a Confessor paraphrasing, not TC's own words.) I looked in my emails to see if I had missed something, but no. I mentioned that I saw that we had an exchange in 2017, but I couldn't imagine what that had to do with who moderates the Ticket subreddit, so I didn't review it.
Now I am told that TC likely WAS referring to that exchange 8 YEARS AGO. So here's the story about that.
I posted something unflattering to TC that I heard from a source to whom I promised anonymity, as I always do. It did not pass along any internal email. I acknowledged the unfairness of anonymous hearsay in the post.
TC wrote me a one-line email asking who my source was. I can't quote from it for a reason that will appear below. Was this the "request for assistance"? Must've been. If it was, then TC is telling the truth about asking for my "help" or "assistance." Again, men and women, bear in mind that this was 2017.
Here is my entire response:
"T.C.,
"Thanks for your note. Sorry my response has been delayed. I wanted to give myself time to compose a thoughtful response to a fair request.
"I agree that there is unfairness to you of relying on email sources that may or may not be genuine and not disclosing the claimed identity of those sources. When I do, as I did in the September 14 piece to which you're referring, I bend over backwards to remind readers that that's what I'm doing and to read with that in mind. I also paraphrase and describe communications I sometimes (rarely) receive from claimed insiders in a manner aimed at disguising their claimed identities. And I believe I acknowledged that it was not fair to you and invited you to respond. I repeat that invitation. I'll even run your thoughts anonymously, if you'd like.
"In the piece in question, I had speculated entirely on my own -- absolutely no source other than what I hear on the air -- that maybe your colleagues do not regard you as a desirable co-host. And, as you know, many of my readers and sometimes I myself would like to hear less popping-on, although the more I listen to BaD, the more I realize that those guys frequently invite your participation, so that's not on you. The piece started out with an email I got from a reader reporting on a contentious discussion you had with Bob on BaD one day as a springboard for wondering where you stood at the station these days.
"I did not contact anyone at the station about that piece before or after I wrote it. When it came out, however, I heard from multiple sources that I'd hit the nail on the head. I cannot tell you who I heard from, but suffice it to say that I had, and still have, a high degree of confidence that these communications were genuine and accurate. Would not have passed them along if I hadn't. Among the items conveyed was that you'd been spoken to about your recent BaD participation.
"(By the way -- my piece did not say, as your email states, that the station was "buzzing about an email regarding my participation in the shows [you] work on." The buzzing was about the news -- unrelated to any email -- that management had addressed your BaD participation.)
"You're an interesting figure at The Ticket. A lightning rod, like Corby. Me, I'm on the fence. We all have our favorites; you're not one of mine, but neither are you among my least-favorite. I was quite serious in that piece that I would absolutely be tuned in to a T.C. solo show. There are aspects of your performance that I admire quite a lot -- you've made huge strides with your on-air performance from the earliest days when you got regularly abused by Tier 1 (I like your Tickers), and I admire your moxie in paying your dues with Bob and Dan to get where you are. I believe that many of my readers are irrationally critical of you. I think part of it is that they haven't gotten over your remarks on your departure for Florida, and part of it is that they're jealous that you had the guts to do what they all wish they could do -- make the sacrifices necessary to become a notable figure at the nation's greatest radio station. That's admirable, as is your bounceback after your return. It's turned me around on you to a considerable degree.
"But what comes through the earbuds suggests there is friction between you and some of your colleagues in various of Junior's Tiers. And, frankly, the likely reasons for it. The beauty of The Ticket is that it invites listeners in as friends, and when you do that you risk revealing the negative as well as the positive aspects of professional interactions. Whatever anyone thinks of you, man, you've made your mark at a place where it's almost impossible for newcomers to do so, and that's something.
"So: really sorry I can't comply with your request. I repeat that I will give you equal time, either attributable or anonymous, subject to my customary editorial discretion.
"Hey, Cat's obviously still tinkering with Sunday mornings. Why don't you make him a proposal"
TC responded obscenely, but I can't reproduce it here because his final sentence forbade me from publishing any of his remarks.
What any of this has to do with the current back-and-forth, I don't know or care.
And now you know . . . .
I'm wearying of this controversy and am close to deleting emails about it. The Ticket must be the only subject that is not subject to the jet-speed news cycle these days. Let's move on.
An increasing number of posters are recommending putting this site out of its misery. I'm thinking about it.
Jesus Christ. TC sent you a one line email asking you a question and you respond with an essay about why you think he sucks. He wasn’t asking you for your opinion on his on air performance. I would have responded obscenely too.
Ooooooo. What a burn! Now with your fingers, show the class how old you are.
Gotta be at least 5'2' to ride the ride, bub. Mini coaster for you. Buck up. You'll have a growth spurt soon enough. Well, if you stop eating all that cake.
The Musers the Podcast kinda sucks. It’s boring and vanilla and I find myself not even finishing most of the episodes. There, I said it and it feels good!
Appreciate the candor and disclosure, Plainsman. Still have no idea what to make of this bizarre turn of events. I keep going back to evidence. None has yet to be produced. The closest thing is the above email, which has no bearing on the accusations, and frankly is a total nothing burger. Relatedly, I'm also at a loss as to why Jake, TC, Sirois, and Danny would step their collective foot into it. There's nothing to be gained, other than to show anyone who cares that they, despite leaving TT on their own accord and going on to do their own thing, they seem incapable of moving on -- again, moving in from something they chose to leave.
I hope Cat sues Jake, TC, Dan, Sirois, Danny, Julie, Sam and all the other losers that jumped ship for Defamation! They should have known their place in realized they were as talented as they believe they were! You know who is talented? Sean Bass, Mino, Killer, Matt McClarin ect because they know their place and are loyal to Cat and the station. I hope those other talentless losers have fun cleaning toilets at McDonald’s. I hope we never hear from those ungrateful toddlers ever again.
"mobe dick" huh. Where does Plainsman say much less insinuate he thinks such a thing about TC? What a weird takeaway. Weirder still is why you would feel the need to make the comment. Dude was asked ad nauseam to show the correspondence between he and TC, he does and gets some ding dong like you beefing him. And for what? Because you prefer the written expression of a 7 year old (which is how you always come off). By the by, you used a comma. Thought you never used commas. Can't even get that right, can we.
I have a long comment to post. It will come in multiple parts. However they appear here, please read them in sequence; Part 1, Part 2, etc.
ReplyDeletePlease refrain from posting until I can get the whole thing up. Thanks
PART 1:
ReplyDeleteWhen this whole Reddit business started, I didn't pay much attention.
Then someone mentioned that TC had said that he had "asked for assistance" I thought that had to do with the current controversy, so I said no, no request for assistance. (That phrase was from a Confessor paraphrasing, not TC's own words.) I looked in my emails to see if I had missed something, but no. I mentioned that I saw that we had an exchange in 2017, but I couldn't imagine what that had to do with who moderates the Ticket subreddit, so I didn't review it.
Now I am told that TC likely WAS referring to that exchange 8 YEARS AGO. So here's the story about that.
I posted something unflattering to TC that I heard from a source to whom I promised anonymity, as I always do. It did not pass along any internal email. I acknowledged the unfairness of anonymous hearsay in the post.
TC wrote me a one-line email asking who my source was. I can't quote from it for a reason that will appear below. Was this the "request for assistance"? Must've been. If it was, then TC is telling the truth about asking for my "help" or "assistance." Again, men and women, bear in mind that this was 2017.
Here is my entire response:
"T.C.,
"Thanks for your note. Sorry my response has been delayed. I wanted to give myself time to compose a thoughtful response to a fair request.
"I agree that there is unfairness to you of relying on email sources that may or may not be genuine and not disclosing the claimed identity of those sources. When I do, as I did in the September 14 piece to which you're referring, I bend over backwards to remind readers that that's what I'm doing and to read with that in mind. I also paraphrase and describe communications I sometimes (rarely) receive from claimed insiders in a manner aimed at disguising their claimed identities. And I believe I acknowledged that it was not fair to you and invited you to respond. I repeat that invitation. I'll even run your thoughts anonymously, if you'd like.
"In the piece in question, I had speculated entirely on my own -- absolutely no source other than what I hear on the air -- that maybe your colleagues do not regard you as a desirable co-host. And, as you know, many of my readers and sometimes I myself would like to hear less popping-on, although the more I listen to BaD, the more I realize that those guys frequently invite your participation, so that's not on you. The piece started out with an email I got from a reader reporting on a contentious discussion you had with Bob on BaD one day as a springboard for wondering where you stood at the station these days.
"I did not contact anyone at the station about that piece before or after I wrote it. When it came out, however, I heard from multiple sources that I'd hit the nail on the head. I cannot tell you who I heard from, but suffice it to say that I had, and still have, a high degree of confidence that these communications were genuine and accurate. Would not have passed them along if I hadn't. Among the items conveyed was that you'd been spoken to about your recent BaD participation.
"(By the way -- my piece did not say, as your email states, that the station was "buzzing about an email regarding my participation in the shows [you] work on." The buzzing was about the news -- unrelated to any email -- that management had addressed your BaD participation.)
PART 2:
ReplyDelete[Continuation of my 2017 email to TC.]
"You're an interesting figure at The Ticket. A lightning rod, like Corby. Me, I'm on the fence. We all have our favorites; you're not one of mine, but neither are you among my least-favorite. I was quite serious in that piece that I would absolutely be tuned in to a T.C. solo show. There are aspects of your performance that I admire quite a lot -- you've made huge strides with your on-air performance from the earliest days when you got regularly abused by Tier 1 (I like your Tickers), and I admire your moxie in paying your dues with Bob and Dan to get where you are. I believe that many of my readers are irrationally critical of you. I think part of it is that they haven't gotten over your remarks on your departure for Florida, and part of it is that they're jealous that you had the guts to do what they all wish they could do -- make the sacrifices necessary to become a notable figure at the nation's greatest radio station. That's admirable, as is your bounceback after your return. It's turned me around on you to a considerable degree.
"But what comes through the earbuds suggests there is friction between you and some of your colleagues in various of Junior's Tiers. And, frankly, the likely reasons for it. The beauty of The Ticket is that it invites listeners in as friends, and when you do that you risk revealing the negative as well as the positive aspects of professional interactions. Whatever anyone thinks of you, man, you've made your mark at a place where it's almost impossible for newcomers to do so, and that's something.
"So: really sorry I can't comply with your request. I repeat that I will give you equal time, either attributable or anonymous, subject to my customary editorial discretion.
"Hey, Cat's obviously still tinkering with Sunday mornings. Why don't you make him a proposal"
TC responded obscenely, but I can't reproduce it here because his final sentence forbade me from publishing any of his remarks.
What any of this has to do with the current back-and-forth, I don't know or care.
And now you know . . . .
I'm wearying of this controversy and am close to deleting emails about it. The Ticket must be the only subject that is not subject to the jet-speed news cycle these days. Let's move on.
An increasing number of posters are recommending putting this site out of its misery. I'm thinking about it.
Jesus Christ. TC sent you a one line email asking you a question and you respond with an essay about why you think he sucks. He wasn’t asking you for your opinion on his on air performance. I would have responded obscenely too.
Delete@Jimbo Exactly!
DeletePretty clear the inside source here for years is Jeff Catlin and/or his lackey, Peter Welpton
ReplyDeleteAlso pretty shitty to protect a boss that has engaged in illegal behaviour from a potential HR violation against a minimum wage worker.
ReplyDeleteSo you are helping a boss fuck with a part time employee. Very compassionate of you Mr. plainsman. This really shows your character.
ReplyDeleteYou three are morons. Actually, you're all the same person. Pathetic. The hard on for Peter is the chef's kiss.
DeleteSam?
The only person for a hard on here is The Plainsman for Cat!
DeleteOoooooo. What a burn! Now with your fingers, show the class how old you are.
DeleteGotta be at least 5'2' to ride the ride, bub. Mini coaster for you. Buck up. You'll have a growth spurt soon enough. Well, if you stop eating all that cake.
L8R
Interesting how this suddenly died on the vine on reddit. Gee. Can't begin to fathom why.
ReplyDeleteThe Musers the Podcast kinda sucks. It’s boring and vanilla and I find myself not even finishing most of the episodes. There, I said it and it feels good!
ReplyDeleteOK.
DeleteAppreciate the candor and disclosure, Plainsman. Still have no idea what to make of this bizarre turn of events. I keep going back to evidence. None has yet to be produced. The closest thing is the above email, which has no bearing on the accusations, and frankly is a total nothing burger. Relatedly, I'm also at a loss as to why Jake, TC, Sirois, and Danny would step their collective foot into it. There's nothing to be gained, other than to show anyone who cares that they, despite leaving TT on their own accord and going on to do their own thing, they seem incapable of moving on -- again, moving in from something they chose to leave.
ReplyDeleteAll a big head scratcher to me.
I hope Cat sues Jake, TC, Dan, Sirois, Danny, Julie, Sam and all the other losers that jumped ship for Defamation! They should have known their place in realized they were as talented as they believe they were! You know who is talented? Sean Bass, Mino, Killer, Matt McClarin ect because they know their place and are loyal to Cat and the station. I hope those other talentless losers have fun cleaning toilets at McDonald’s. I hope we never hear from those ungrateful toddlers ever again.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not defamation when it’s all true.
DeleteGlad you're not my lawyer, Phil. Show the proof. Don't have any, do ya. Chump. Call daddy.
DeleteYou're bad at this, Fisty.
DeleteIt's absolutely defamation, regardless of the verity of the claim, if no compelling evidence is given. Truly hope you aren't an actual lawyer.
Deleteplainsman, you rewrote mobe dick to a one line email from the ticket employee you think is retarded?
ReplyDeleteI now see that Jimbo posted a similar sentiment.
Delete"mobe dick" huh. Where does Plainsman say much less insinuate he thinks such a thing about TC? What a weird takeaway. Weirder still is why you would feel the need to make the comment. Dude was asked ad nauseam to show the correspondence between he and TC, he does and gets some ding dong like you beefing him. And for what? Because you prefer the written expression of a 7 year old (which is how you always come off). By the by, you used a comma. Thought you never used commas. Can't even get that right, can we.
DeleteSorry people. I did it again. Popped off without thinking things through. My apologies to Plainsman and to all Confessors.
DeleteJimbo is as dumb as I am!
Delete