(Slightly late) CW Awards for 13th-20th May

[Richard]

Well cliques in fact can be extremely damaging (in real life anyway).

All this using Zac and Gelman etc, don't like it. It's a method people use to establish some sort of hierachy, in that it can alienate people people who arent 'in there'...thats what I mean by cliquey.

I find that foolish, TBH. I refer to him by his name, not a random set of letters (which is what "pasag" is). I refer to everyone by name where I know theirs, even those few I don't get on with.

It's nothing at all to do with hierachies or anything of the sort.

And yes, I am sure 'Zac' is well respected, but it doesnt excuse random outbursts such as yesterdays

I think it does. The fact that he remains respected for things which, I repeat, are not random outbursts.

 

[Fiery]

drop it guys...for pity's sake

 

[Richard]

drop it guys...for pity's sake

FFS, what good will that do?

Didn't anyone ever tell you that sweeping things under the carpet gets you nowhere?

 

[Swervy]

I happen to think it's a positive reflection on him, that's why I mentioned it. He's not making-up his opinions based on that of others', he's putting-up and shutting-up unless he thinks there's a base of similar feeling.

What I mean by what I said about him being a Staff Member is not that him saying things like he does from time to time hold any more weight, simply that the fact that he has not been punished for saying them should tell you something. It's kind of tricky, because you don't have the context I do, and to you it may appear that he's just said this to you out of the blue. But that simply isn't the case.

Seriously, thats his problem, not mine. However, I don't like the implication that my posting style is being discussed behind my back and then the first thing I hear about it is some teenage rant with no examples to back up his arguement.There are right ways and wrong ways of dealing with things like this. He chose the wrong method.

To be honest, I really do feel like 'How the hell dare he speak to me like that, who the hell does he think he is', and this putting Sir Gelman on a pedestal isn't really tempering my feeling on that.

 

[Fiery]

FFS, what good will that do?

Didn't anyone ever tell you that sweeping things under the carpet gets you nowhere?

It's an Awards thread

 

[Richard]

Seriously, thats his problem, not mine. However, I don't like the implication that my posting style is being discussed behind my back and then the first thing I hear about it is some teenage rant with no examples to back up his arguement.There are right ways and wrong ways of dealing with things like this. He chose the wrong method.

To be honest, I really do feel like 'How the hell dare he speak to me like that, who the hell does he think he is', and this putting Sir Gelman on a pedestal isn't really tempering my feeling on that.

Quite simply, talking behind people's backs is another trait of humanity, like it or not. I'm well aware that it happens with me, and I just have to live with it. I've been given a snapshot or two of such a thing once or twice.

I don't feel it's a case of no examples, not at all. I myself have had the exact same perception a fair few times, as I mentioned earlier - and no, I haven't ever actually discussed it with him before, this thread was the first I knew of the fact that he felt this way.

I've experienced him speaking to people like that before, myself included, and as I say - the fact that he can do tells me a lot about him being a respected person, and that he maybe might not just be banging-on about nothing. I don't know how much of the rest of this site you read, but he is, quite simply, one of the most important cogs in the running of it. He wouldn't be if he wasn't well-respected. I might not have done anything in this paragraph but reinforce your "putting Sir Gelman on a pedestal" perception, but it's about all I've got to offer.

 

[pasag]

....

It's difficult to respond to all these points you raise and I have no intention of deconstructing every line of your posts especially when 1) An awards thread shouldn't have this stuff in it (which is why my OP was intentionally short) 2) as said in my original post, I just cbf anymore 3) a mod has asked for it to stop. So I'll address as many points as I can and leave it at that. You can have the last word or whatever, you obviously enjoy that.

Looking back over my posts from last night, I feel they were perfectly justified and a true reflection on what I feel goes on here. You say I should be an ambassador for the site, well I feel my speaking out on both issues is part of that. Obviously the method wouldn't be condoned from whoever you think I'm representing, but I feel what I said had the best intentions in relation to the two points I addressed earlier. Just to touch on the staff member issue for a second. It's an argument I've used before and feel rather guilty about it because it's rather flawed. Being a staff member means you write for the front page, nothing more. You get no extra privileges nor responsibilities. The forum is detached from that position and I think brining the staff member aspect of it in to this is a low blow. The moderation staff represent the forum and the front page staff represent the front page, when writing for it. However, as I've stated above, I don't feel anything I've said brings that into disrepute as all I've posted on is stuff I feel strongly about. It's not some random attack although I will admit it seems you have got caught in the middle of something that perhaps you weren't responsible for. You seem to have taken to defending the same people I have an issue with and in doing so, I may have directed some of the flak to you in a shooting the messenger type way. I don't apologize for that though for various reasons, although I do regret some of it.

With regards to your one line post, as I've said, it's been something that has bugging me for a while. I found it 'arsey', you deny that and have apologized for not making it clearer. Whilst I think it was 'arsey', I have no problem giving you the benefit of the doubt, none at all. My point still stands about hating them, but that's for another time. However I don't get your comment "I have apologised if my 'one-liner' was taken the wrong way. And yet all I get is a torrent of abuse from a CW Staff Member". Your apology came after my last post, however this comment made it seem like you apologised and then received a torrent of abuse, which didn't happen.

With regards to Richard, I think this is a case of either having diametrically opposed opinions on the issue or you just not seeing enough examples of him being targeted, for lack of a better word. You claim people just disagree with him, I don't. I think he gets 'bullied' tbh. Yeah he can handle it, he's a tough bloke, but should he have to? Should he have to put up with it? Should he have no one speaking up for him? As I said, I don't want to drag Richard through the mud here and discuss Richard for 10 pages, but my OP was voicing my displeasure at the way he gets treated. You seem to have taken a strong dislike to that post, well, that's your issue. I'm glad I said what I did and I'm glad I brought it up because quite frankly, I'm disgusted at some of the stuff that gets 'flung to his corner'. As you can see, it wasn't some random attack on my part, it is something that annoys me and something that happens quite often. More so since Richard has made a quite visible effort in trying to get along with everyone, to be more affable and less abrasive. Perhaps that's the crux of the issue, that Richard is putting in the effort, he's become an awesome (imo) member and still he gets this incredible amount of crap from many corners. And don't do yourself the disservice of thinking that it's only here. Here is the final straw really.

With regards to the cliquey atmosphere, to you wanting to leave the site or not till this blows over, with regards to any punishment that you may want me to receive, honestly, I don't care. I said what I felt had to be said and if there are any consequences or not, that doesn't bother me in the slightest. Whether that results in me being being vilified here (hasn't happened yet although I'd imagine many would get a laugh out of this), stripped of staff membership, warned or banned (going to extremes) or you leaving for a while, whilst it would be a pity, doesn't bother me because I said what I wanted to say and what I believed in. That will continue for my time here and if I get into further trouble for it, so be it. I've been ok till now, so I'm really not worried tbh.

I hope I have explained my position clearly. As I said I couldn't be bothered getting into this, but you've asked for some sort of clarification on my part so I'm happy to comply with that, but nothing more than that really. I never wanted to get into this stuff in a high level of detail, but for some reason you pushed for it and a one line post from me has eventuated into all of this. That is part of the reason I'm hesitant to apologise for any abuse thrown in your direction, even though as I said, it was more intended for others. I do regret it though, might even be sorry for it at a later date, who knows.

What I am sorry for is contributing to dragging this thread through the mud. I certainly didn't start any of the rubbish in here, not by a long shot, but I have contributed to the negative feelings over the past few pages in what is supposed to be a positive thread, celebrating quality posts on cricket and generating goodwill between members. I hope they can continue to thrive despite these recent setbacks. I only joined the panel to help out, I certainly don't see it as an honour or a privilege to be on the panel, more as a favour to the site and a way in which I was glad to help. It appears I may have done more damage than good and if Archie wants me off the team, I'd be happy to comply even though I certainly don't want to leave and feel I can still contribute. However that's his decision and one I'll accept gladly. Anyways, because of that, this will be my last post on the issue for now, even though the one in response to Sanz was supposed to be. Anything you respond, will be acknowledged and read, but not replied to, for the sake of the thread and because as I said all those pages ago, I just cbf anymore.

Lol at the melodrama!

 

[Richard]

It's an Awards thread

Well... it was an Awards thread. I think it's fair to say that discussion of the awards is finished now. They will live on, of course. I sometimes feel people are a bit over-touchy about "this thread was started about a positive subject, what a terrible thing that it's ended-up having this discussed within".

 

[Fiery]

Well... it was an Awards thread. I think it's fair to say that discussion of the awards is finished now. They will live on, of course. I sometimes feel people are a bit over-touchy about "this thread was started about a positive subject, what a terrible thing that it's ended-up having this discussed within".

Not over-touchy. Everyone's probably just as tired as I am with the multitude of continuous arguments you are juggling over a number of threads tbh

 

[Richard]

Haha, WTF? A number of threads?

You referring to EXD in the other thread? There always has and always will be plenty of crap thrown between me and him, that's absolutely nothing to do with either of the two completely separate things that have happened in this thread.

 

[Swervy]

I find that foolish, TBH. I refer to him by his name, not a random set of letters (which is what "pasag" is). I refer to everyone by name where I know theirs, even those few I don't get on with.

It's nothing at all to do with hierachies or anything of the sort.

Ask yourself why people use nicknames. If you are in a group of people who are all using nicknames for each other and you don't really know those people that well, how do you feel about it?

How do new users of the forum feel when people are constantly being referred to by real names, when those names don't correspond to user names?

Its a way of a group of people forming a group, of which a by-product is that some people are left out and alienated. There is some element of real life reflected on forums such as this. You may find it foolish, I don't, I have some understanding of group dynamics through my work over the years. As a manager, I recognise certain behaviours, and I recognise that on this forum. It is a manifestation of clique forming. When other people who arent recognised as group members are involved, it isn't a healthy environment.
It was one reason I was happy that people called for the awards to be given in user name form not real name form, it meant everyone knew who you were talking about.

I think it does. The fact that he remains respected for things which, I repeat, are not random outbursts.

Ok, random was the wrong word to use.

But there is no way on earth that a Staff Member title (which really means zip in the whole scheme of things, in fact to me it means zip in the whole scheme of this forum TBH) allows anyone to have the right to throw abuse around anywhere.

 

[Fiery]

Haha, WTF? A number of threads?

You referring to EXD in the other thread? There always has and always will be plenty of crap thrown between me and him, that's absolutely nothing to do with either of the two completely separate things that have happened in this thread.

Think you all need to get over yourselves to be frank

 

[Richard]

Think you all need to get over yourselves to be frank

Nice easy way out, that, isn't it?

 

[nightprowler10]

Am I the only one who thinks EXD looks like a guy with a weird hat laughing his ass off?

 

[Richard]

Ask yourself why people use nicknames. If you are in a group of people who are all using nicknames for each other and you don't really know those people that well, how do you feel about it?

How do new users of the forum feel when people are constantly being referred to by real names, when those names don't correspond to user names?

Its a way of a group of people forming a group, of which a by-product is that some people are left out and alienated. There is some element of real life reflected on forums such as this. You may find it foolish, I don't, I have some understanding of group dynamics through my work over the years. As a manager, I recognise certain behaviours, and I recognise that on this forum. It is a manifestation of clique forming. When other people who arent recognised as group members are involved, it isn't a healthy environment.
It was one reason I was happy that people called for the awards to be given in user name form not real name form, it meant everyone knew who you were talking about.

As I say (and, indeed, as you say) - that happens in every aspect of life. There's no way of avoiding it. Nor, IMO, is there any need to. As I said in some thread some long, long time ago (exaggeration used) I'll try to put posting-IDs in brackets where I call people by their names. But I don't feel comfortable calling people "Prince EWS" or "vic_orthdox" when I know they're actually called Rob and Jack. That's just me, obviously different people feel different ways.

And in some examples, where (and it's not unusual) people use cricketers' names in posting-IDs, it's essential to use their real names. Otherwise complete confusion can insue.

 

[Fiery]

Nice easy way out, that, isn't it?

One of you needs to rise above it, that's all I'm saying. Never mind...you can carry on arguing about it faic but this one is not in the least bit as amusing as some of the arguments that go on

 

[Richard]

Am I the only one who thinks EXD looks like a guy with a weird hat laughing his ass off?

A clown?

 

[Richard]

One of you needs to rise above it, that's all I'm saying. Never mind...you can carry on arguing about it faic but this one is not in the least bit as amusing as some of the arguments that go on

It's not supposed to be amusing, it's supposed to be about stuff being said that needs saying.

 

[Fiery]

It's not supposed to be amusing, it's supposed to be about stuff being said that needs saying.

It's very debatable that stuff needs to be said imo

 

[Swervy]

It's difficult to respond to all these points you raise and I have no intention of deconstructing every line of your posts especially when 1) An awards thread shouldn't have this stuff in it (which is why my OP was intentionally short) 2) as said in my original post, I just cbf anymore 3) a mod has asked for it to stop. So I'll address as many points as I can and leave it at that. You can have the last word or whatever, you obviously enjoy that.

hey look, its cool you have replied...I appreciate it. I am not after the last word on this.

Looking back over my posts from last night, I feel they were perfectly justified and a true reflection on what I feel goes on here. You say I should be an ambassador for the site, well I feel my speaking out on both issues is part of that. Obviously the method wouldn't be condoned from whoever you think I'm representing, but I feel what I said had the best intentions in relation to the two points I addressed earlier. Just to touch on the staff member issue for a second. It's an argument I've used before and feel rather guilty about it because it's rather flawed. Being a staff member means you write for the front page, nothing more. You get no extra privileges nor responsibilities. The forum is detached from that position and I think brining the staff member aspect of it in to this is a low blow. The moderation staff represent the forum and the front page staff represent the front page, when writing for it. However, as I've stated above, I don't feel anything I've said brings that into disrepute as all I've posted on is stuff I feel strongly about. It's not some random attack although I will admit it seems you have got caught in the middle of something that perhaps you weren't responsible for. You seem to have taken to defending the same people I have an issue with and in doing so, I may have directed some of the flak to you in a shooting the messenger type way. I don't apologize for that though for various reasons, although I do regret some of it.

OK , I see your point regarding the Staff Member title. But you have to admit there is someone on this forum who does seem to be generating a them and us mentality, even in the last hour on this thread. I am glad you don't subscribe to that line of thought, and to be honest, I didn't think you did

With regards to your one line post, as I've said, it's been something that has bugging me for a while. I found it 'arsey', you deny that and have apologized for not making it clearer. Whilst I think it was 'arsey', I have no problem giving you the benefit of the doubt, none at all. My point still stands about hating them, but that's for another time. However I don't get your comment "I have apologised if my 'one-liner' was taken the wrong way. And yet all I get is a torrent of abuse from a CW Staff Member". Your apology came after my last post, however this comment made it seem like you apologised and then received a torrent of abuse, which didn't happen.

Unfortunately, it is doubtful I will stop with the odd cheeky one liner. I am a smart arse sometimes, in real life, it translates well, maybe it doesnt so well on here. Just to reiterate, what I said in that 'one liner' really was not intended to make you look like a gimp (as PY called it), and as I said yesterday, I apologise if you felt that was its intention.

Yeah I see I have got the order of events mixed up.

With regards to Richard, I think this is a case of either having diametrically opposed opinions on the issue or you just not seeing enough examples of him being targeted, for lack of a better word. You claim people just disagree with him, I don't. I think he gets 'bullied' tbh. Yeah he can handle it, he's a tough bloke, but should he have to? Should he have to put up with it? Should he have no one speaking up for him? As I said, I don't want to drag Richard through the mud here and discuss Richard for 10 pages, but my OP was voicing my displeasure at the way he gets treated. You seem to have taken a strong dislike to that post, well, that's your issue. I'm glad I said what I did and I'm glad I brought it up because quite frankly, I'm disgusted at some of the stuff that gets 'flung to his corner'. As you can see, it wasn't some random attack on my part, it is something that annoys me and something that happens quite often. More so since Richard has made a quite visible effort in trying to get along with everyone, to be more affable and less abrasive. Perhaps that's the crux of the issue, that Richard is putting in the effort, he's become an awesome (imo) member and still he gets this incredible amount of crap from many corners. And don't do yourself the disservice of thinking that it's only here. Here is the final straw really.

Yeah, well sometimes I think some people do overstep the mark, and I did actually state in my first post of the thread (the second one was the 'one liner', so my first was my only up to that point) that I didnt think Richard really meant what it looked like he was meaning. All I did was (again) stress to Richard that if he took time to just look at what he is about to post, then maybe the misunderstandings that appear to follow him around might not occur. Yes, some people might get on his back for the sake of doing it, but he has to take some responsibility for people actually looking out for those types of comments from him. He has set his stall out to be a certain type of forum member, and there are a lot of positives involved in that, but there are a lot of downsides as well. He has to take the rough with the smooth. And he is more than capable of giving it as much as he takes it

He is a great contributor to the site, no doubt about it, but he can, with his style, really rub people up the wrong way. And my impression is (rightly or wrongly) that he doesn't actually mind it to much because he does give the impression that he enjoys the attention he gets.

Talking about me personally, well Richard and I have had our moments, but that is mostly because either I don't agree with what he has said, or he doesn't agree with what I have said. I find it frustrating that he will try to make out he has proved a point when infact he has used some sort of crazy logic....and I will vent that frustration in some form or another, however, I don't think I have ever insulted him in a personal way, and I don't think I have disagreed with him just for the sake of disagreeing with him.

I do find it a bit off the way he deals with Scaly, as I say, he can dish it out as much as he takes it, but hey, it's one of the little things which makes a forum like this interesting. If it was all plain sailing, it would be pretty dull around here!!!!

With regards to the cliquey atmosphere, to you wanting to leave the site or not till this blows over, with regards to any punishment that you may want me to receive, honestly, I don't care. I said what I felt had to be said and if there are any consequences or not, that doesn't bother me in the slightest. Whether that results in me being being vilified here (hasn't happened yet although I'd imagine many would get a laugh out of this), stripped of staff powers, warned or banned (going to extremes) or you leaving for a while, whilst it would be a pity, doesn't bother me because I said what I wanted to say and what I believed in. That will continue for my time here and if I get into further trouble for it, so be it. I've been ok till now, so I'm really not worried tbh.

Look, I am not looking for any kind of pay back on this issue. I found it frustrating that I was being cast as the villain of the piece, when IMO it was you who flew off the handle. I never had a problem with you expressing your opinion, I just didn't appreciate the way you did it.
I wouldn't want to see any action being taken, I just wanted to see someone like PY maybe make a stronger comment than that he agreed with what you said, if not the way you said it. It was a bit disappointing. The feeling was that he was saying that people were making pointless arguements etc, and my impression was that he did not have you in that line up, which I felt was unfair

I hope I have explained my position clearly. As I said I couldn't be bothered getting into this, but you've asked for some sort of clarification on my part so I'm happy to comply with that, but nothing more than that really. I never wanted to get into this stuff in a high level of detail, but for some reason you pushed for it and a one line post from me has eventuated into all of this. That is part of the reason I'm hesitant to apologise for any abuse thrown in your direction, even though as I said, it was more intended for others. I do regret it though, might even be sorry for it at a later date, who knows.

No worries, maybe lessons learnt by everyone.

What I am sorry for is contributing to dragging this thread through the mud. I certainly didn't start any of the rubbish in here, not by a long shot, but I have contributed to the negative feelings over the past few pages in what is supposed to be a positive thread, celebrating quality posts on cricket and generating goodwill between members. I hope they can continue to thrive despite these recent setbacks. I only joined the panel to help out, I certainly don't see it as an honour or a privilege to be on the panel, more as a favour to the site and a way in which I was glad to help. It appears I may have done more damage than good and if Archie wants me off the team, I'd be happy to comply even though I certainly don't want to leave and feel I can still contribute. However that's his decision and one I'll accept gladly. Anyways, because of that, this will be my last post on the issue for now, even though the one in response to Sanz was supposed to be. Anything you respond, will be acknowledged and read, but not replied to, for the sake of the thread and because as I said all those pages ago, I just cbf anymore.

Lol at the melodrama!

Mate, thats cool, nice reply.

Anyway, this thread might in itself win some sort of award next week, so thats something