how to get the last word no matter what

this was about you as well :)

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=152317

youll prolly close this one too but thats ok :)

Better yet, leave it but put it in ejections. Everyone needs to vent occasionally.
;)

tx dude - shoulda realized to just start it here :)

and i really think someone should reconsider his mod privs

Well, I don't think so, and apparently neither do Clay or Dee.

its just my subjective opinion, not necessarily correct.

A Duesenberg reference is "how to get the last word no matter what"? You're right! I should just be banished from these boards for that outrageous statement! :rolleyes:

dang it - now i gotta go google that duesenberg thang :(

:confused:

...you completely lost me with that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

:confused:

...you completely lost me with that one.

---

That's the last "word" in that thread. My Duesenberg reference to Michael's doosey post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robinhoodnik

That's the last "word" in that thread. My Duesenberg reference to Michael's doosey post.

---

The term "doosey" (also doozie) came from a slang reference to the Duesenberg automobile. It meant outstanding, top of the line, or any similar positive term.

I don't see how pointing out something I observed warrants a removal of my mod abilities. Just because you dislike me for whatever reason does not mean that I'm not worthy of being a moderator.

Being trusted with moderator status has nothing to do with "worthiness" anyway.

Don't let it get under your skin HGM. People seem to forget quickly, but gloom and doom was predicted and a bunch of bad words were spoken when Clay gave me moderator privileges as well. I'm sure you remember that.
The main complaint seems to be just what's in the thread title here anyway. People seem to feel that with your participation in some threads that you'll always try to get "the last word" in. That has nothing to do with being a moderator regardless. The more important point though, is that you're probably a bit too aggressive occasionally about making a point. You're hardly alone on this one, but MeetDaMets does have a bit of a point in that you do have a leadership position here now. The one thing that bugs me most about the way some threads go is when the same few people are repeating the same points at each other over and over again (and you all know who you are). As a leader, you should really be the one to take the high ground in those sorts of discussions, and allow others to have the last post/word.

last word. :D

Not!

;)

Nope, me! #1! #1! #1! :D

Not!

:)

not

Not!

This is going to take a while. :rolleyes:

Not!

(that's the general idea)
;)

Or... Is it? ;)

I think it is...

Ummmmm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

Being trusted with moderator status has nothing to do with "worthiness" anyway.


The main complaint seems to be just what's in the thread title here anyway. People seem to feel that with your participation in some threads that you'll always try to get "the last word" in. That has nothing to do with being a moderator regardless. The more important point though, is that you're probably a bit too aggressive occasionally about making a point. You're hardly alone on this one, but MeetDaMets does have a bit of a point in that you do have a leadership position here now. The one thing that bugs me most about the way some threads go is when the same few people are repeating the same points at each other over and over again (and you all know who you are). As a leader, you should really be the one to take the high ground in those sorts of discussions, and allow others to have the last post/word.

---

or let others argue while you watch from the sideline and MODERATE them.

thank you for understanding this aspect.
and for stating so eloquently what is at the core of recent events

In many of these threads someonne , or several someones, have asked him to just quit it already. leave them alone , whatever.
and yet he persists.

should i really have to refrain from posting about a cool player because i fear a mod might twist it into a flamewar ?
should i even be thinking that ?

a "moderator" by definition is a non participant in whatever the "fray" may be.

mediator diplomat negotiator referee are decent synonyms.

one simply cannot be boxer AND referee.

not in a fair fight at least :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeetDaMets

or let others argue while you watch from the sideline and MODERATE them.

---

If moderating entailed "watching from the sidelines" and not participating in discussions, I would not have accepted the position.

Quote:

---

should i really have to refrain from posting about a cool player because i fear a mod might twist it into a flamewar ?
should i even be thinking that ?

---

Don't even try to say that I twisted your thread into a flame war. ALL I did was make an observation and state that the screenshot showcased an issue with the game. Nor did I flame anybody. I have rarely flamed in debates, despite being the target of many flames. Arguing my position, however strongly I may, is not flaming. Nor is defending myself.

I'm not going to sit back here and take insults. I'm not going to let myself be baselessly attacked, sorry. If defending myself against attacks is wrong, than I'm guilty. I'm not going to give up any debate if I am not confronted with a strong enough case against my position. There aren't many people that would.

Frankly, I'm sick of the notion that I'm the only person that "never gives up". I argue my stance, and if somebody argues against it, I refute their arguments, if possible. That is how a debate works. Nearly everybody that participates in a debate "never gives up" unless they are a) tired of the debate or b) change their opinion due to the argument against them.

Quote:

---

a "moderator" by definition is a non participant in whatever the "fray" may be.

mediator diplomat negotiator referee are decent synonyms.

one simply cannot be boxer AND referee.

---

A forum moderator is not a non-participant in the forums. A forum moderator is a poster. I've never been on a forum where this wasn't the case (outside of Wizards of the Coast, where the moderators are actual employees of the company). As I said above, if moderating entailed not participating in forum discussions, I would not have accepted the position.

In support of HGM here, he's hardly the only guilty party. Indeed, I'd say that he's most often baited into the problem threads, and go so far as to say that there are people who do the baiting intentionally and with malice.

As for the thread that started this, I'd classify that as "baiting". I don't believe that you did it intentionally by any means, but there was really no reason for that thread to turn in the direction that it did beyond "I don't like HGM".

To HGM (and several others as well) it's not the debate itself that people become upset about. It's the restating of points, over and over again, that creates the problems. Yes, others do bring this on. Yes, it's acceptable to defend yourself. However, for one thing there are others around who will defend you. For another, simply rephrasing statements to restate your arguments doesn't move the debate forward at all, and frustration is why people tend to become upset more than anything else. What's worse though is that, aside from those of you who end up being directly involved in the debates, no one is really paying attention to the conversations after a certain point. They end up becoming a waste of space, but what's worse is that the bad feelings develop between everyone and there are long term consequences to that (this thread is a good example of that).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robinhoodnik

A Duesenberg reference is "how to get the last word no matter what"? You're right! I should just be banished from these boards for that outrageous statement! :rolleyes:

---

Banishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?):D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

To HGM (and several others as well) it's not the debate itself that people become upset about. It's the restating of points, over and over again, that creates the problems. Yes, others do bring this on. Yes, it's acceptable to defend yourself. However, for one thing there are others around who will defend you. For another, simply rephrasing statements to restate your arguments doesn't move the debate forward at all, and frustration is why people tend to become upset more than anything else. What's worse though is that, aside from those of you who end up being directly involved in the debates, no one is really paying attention to the conversations after a certain point. They end up becoming a waste of space, but what's worse is that the bad feelings develop between everyone and there are long term consequences to that (this thread is a good example of that).

---

I often times find myself having to repeat my point because others continually ignore the points I make, or selectively ignore certain parts of my argument, or attempt to state my position and do so wrongly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

Banishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?):D

---

They still using the guillotine for it in Paris? ;)

Quote:

---

Banishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?)

---

Vick might have some ideas that he practiced on those dogs

Is "having the last word" what we should be aiming for, in these forums?
Shouldn't we be trying to post helpful; stimulating; informative; or other positive stuff?

sorry hgm

ive seen you say at least twice that such back and forths would simply end if the other person stopped replying.

its time to for you to realize and accept that you could stop replying as well.

its extremely hypocritical.

and lest you forget ,

since i dont actually care to converse with you
continually hammering away does nothing but reinforce
that speaking with you is always going to be circular.
and therefore pointless

{ Don't even try to say that I twisted your thread into a flame war }

exsqueeze me - notice the link i post .

that guy posted somehting about hi rookie of the year....
which turned into
SIXTEEN FRICKING PAGES of

is too
is not

and speaking of altering words, funny how you changed my sentence from
"fray" "argument" to discussion.

also kinda funny how you dont notice at the people in your closer topic who disagree , cuz they are as plain as day , and its also funny how the initial post and several replies have vanished. i recall that thread started with you giving a specific example with mariano and torre, thats magically vanished.

so if youre going to say something like "show me where"

dont edit the threads beforehand.

very convenient !

so now im going to outright challenge you.

IF you can manage to simply not hit reply ,

i wont see any need to further share my actual opinion of you or the situation.

JUST to be fair to HGM,

i think maybe i am just confused and it is this closed thread about basically the same thing that i was thinking of when referring to editing.

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=157502

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I often times find myself having to repeat my point because others continually ignore the points I make, or selectively ignore certain parts of my argument, or attempt to state my position and do so wrongly.

---

You don't have to repeat yourself. Those of us reading know what you said, even if some others who are replying (seemingly intentionally) do not. If their selectively ignoring things, there's no doubt that it's intentional. Regardless, the repetition pisses people off because they want to be pissed off, and it's easy to get pissed about that. You're being baited, and you walk right into it every single time.

Perfect example:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

Quote:

---

Good points.

Personally, I would not have fired Joe Torre because I do think he's a great fit for the Yankees. But also, I don't praise him because he won 4 World Series. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.

---

He was not fired - he did NOT accept the offer made - it was his choice.;)

Quote:

---

But also, I don't praise him because he won 4 World Series. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.

---

It will be interesting to see next year the "minimalist" impact of managers on baseball though,unlike you I believe that managers' have a large impact on the results of a game & thus the season.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

He was not fired - he did NOT accept the offer made - it was his choice.;)

---

I would have not lowballed him for the sole purpose of making him seem like the guy at fault. I would have resigned him. Whatever. You get the point.

Quote:

---

It will be interesting to see next year the "minimalist" impact of managers on baseball though,unlike you I believe that managers' have a large impact on the results of a game & thus the season.

---

Unfortunately, if Rivera, Pettite, Posada, and A-Rod all leave, the Yankees are going to do worse, and than everybody's going to say "See! Joe Torre should've stayed! The Yankees suck without him!" - completely ignoring the fact that the Yankees no longer have the best player in the league, a great catcher, the greatest closer of all time, and a good pitcher.

If the Yankees undergo significant roster changes, there's no way to at all tell what Joe Torre's impact on winning/losing was. Even if they stay relatively the same, comparing win-loss record after next season to Torre's reign still says nothing. Jorge Posada is unlikely to repeat his career year. Other players will outperform expectations. Others will play worse than they did this year. All things unrelated to the manager.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

Quote:

---

I would have not lowballed him for the sole purpose of making him seem like the guy at fault. I would have resigned him. Whatever. You get the point.

---

Yes I did get the point (that is why I ;) -ed,btw) but the facts are 1) he was given an offer of 5 million for 1 year * & 2) he REFUSED ipso facto/thus he was not fired.

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, if Rivera, Pettite, Posada, and A-Rod all leave, the Yankees are going to do worse, and than everybody's going to say "See! Joe Torre should've stayed! The Yankees suck without him!" - completely ignoring the fact that the Yankees no longer have the best player in the league, a great catcher, the greatest closer of all time, and a good pitcher.

If the Yankees undergo significant roster changes, there's no way to at all tell what Joe Torre's impact on winning/losing was. Even if they stay relatively the same, comparing win-loss record after next season to Torre's reign still says nothing. Jorge Posada is unlikely to repeat his career year. Other players will outperform expectations. Others will play worse than they did this year. All things unrelated to the manager.

---

This is all hypothetical & totally subjective AS OF TODAY.The point I made was in reply to the "minimalistic" view of the role of the manager made here:

Quote:

---

. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.

---

my reply:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

It will be interesting to see next year the "minimalist" impact of managers on baseball though,unlike you I believe that managers' have a large impact on the results of a game & thus the season.

---

* & he would still have been the HIGHEST paid manager in Baseball

---

That's baiting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongar

Shouldn't we be trying to post helpful; stimulating; informative; or other positive stuff?

---

Yes that should be aim (except perhaps in certain Ejection's threads) but also the information has to be correct.;)

"the information has to be correct" is such a perfect excuse for you, isn't it?