XCgiant2 wrote:
The whole point ofMurphy’s argument has nothing to do with the site making you pay for everything or paying for meets or workouts or whatever. It’s the fact that they put negative poorly written articles behind the paywall and he felt like they could have helped the sport and university by writing a supportive article or informative.
Btw the central Michigan article is free to read. So they did listen
How can you decipher if the content is poorly written if you don't pay for the service? Who makes that determination of what is poorly written?