was to imply that derogatory comments led somehow to Kennedy's untimely demise.
Nor did I note at any point that either of us said that commentary should be "tempered or filtered just on the off-chance that said individual might die some day."

Actually, the point of what SportySpice said, as I read it anyway, was that anybody feeling bad about things they said about Kennedy prior to his passing might want to take this as an opportunity to reflect upon how much "vitriol and contempt" (to quote SportySpice's terms) they choose to inject into their observations and commentary on players, and perhaps sports figures/public figures in general, going forward from here.

There wasn't anything about "don't say that! they might die..." or "don't say that, you might feel bad when they're dead..."

It was more like, and this is my take on it:

"Hey, in the grand scheme of life baseball, however passionate we are about it, is a game, a pastime, a diversion- and the players, managers, etc. involved are real human beings like us that deserve as much respect as we would afford anybody else we don't know personally."

I guess maybe the dividing line on how each of us chooses to conduct himself/herself in baseball discussion then is born of how we conduct ourselves with strangers in general. I suppose I'm old-fashioned in leaning on the simple concept of the "golden rule" I was taught as a kid, which is to try to always treat others as you would prefer to be treated yourself. Sure, you won't always manage it, but if you start with that idea in mind you'll probably do ok.

To go back to your own statements, you seem in my view to also be contradicting yourself a bit when you say "baseball discussion is about baseball. If it gets personal, so be it..."

So which is it? Is baseball discussion just about baseball? Or does baseball discussion also involve directing "vitriol and contempt" at players as human beings instead of just as baseball players? If baseball discussion was always about baseball, then I don't see where it would ever get personal; but you seem to be saying that it's a possibility.

My own answer to all of this, because I don't believe there is just one universal answer, is that each of us has to make up his/her own mind on that one and act accordingly.

I'm sure as heck not here to tell you or anyone else how you should feel about it or think about it.

I was just echoing somebody else's view that instead of feeling regret today over things once said, and again in the future for things one says now, it might be a better idea to consider what one says on an ongoing basis. What each person is at peace with in terms of their conduct is completely up to them to decide.

So if you feel like "anything is fair game in baseball discussion" and you're at peace with yourself on that and don't regret anything personal you may have said about Kennedy or any other player for that matter, then honestly... I don't think anything SportySpice or I said was even directed at you. :)

This poster.

That's what comes with holiday posting absences, I guess.

to hear of your "-1" reaction to my previous comment. You are a valued member of AN and a friend to everyone in the AN community. On behalf of the entire AN organization, we extend our regret to you and your entire family.

And that comes spontaneously from the heart.

...that it sounds canned and generic, and it's pretty much word-for-word what every organization says in times like this, but...

...I also agree with you... what can they say, really?

"Our hearts go out to his family and friends. 28 is too young," or something like that. Honest, fair.

In addition to the fact that Kennedy's DFA wasn't prompted by an actual fight with Bob Geren, those teams you mentioned are way further removed from those respective players than the A's were from Kennedy; they wouldn't be expected to issue any sort of statements.  Guillen hasn't played with the Angels since 2004, and has played for two different teams since; Hillenbrand played for the Jays in 2006, but is three teams removed from them (SF and both LAs...judging by the California pattern, he's due for a signing with the A's, apparently).  I don't think anyone's asking the Devil Rays for their take on Kennedy's passing; why would one ask for those teams' opinions if those guys were to die?  

Even if they did, I trust the organizations in question would be classy enough to say something that overlooked the disagreements that are dwarfed by death.  The Angels' offense has never really recovered since losing Guillen and Glaus post-2004; I know that for a fact as an A's fan.  As for Hillenbrand, it would be likely that a teammate who was a holdover from 2006 would be sought for comment, most likely a friend from the team.  You see Haren's quotes here because he was a friend of Kennedy's; the equivalent is what you would likely get if the Angels/Blue Jays were for some reason pressed for comment about a hypothetical death to a former metaphorical cancer.  That last sentence illustrates how far the issue is being stretched here....