Richard's domination of threads and wanting to have the last word

One poster, any one poster isn't that important but it is pretty annoying the way Richard keeps dominating threads. He has a belief to try and go on arguing. He believes, in his own words, that if some one stops arguing with him, that person has lost the debate. He hasn't heard of the notion of making his point and moving on.

This kills quality inputs and the threads are stunted as it is about Richard's view being argued on again and again. Pasag talked about this in one thread of his too.

How would the forum be if every one started making absurd points like "oooh, the sky is green, not blue." and then debating it to death. Ignoring him is not an option because it is spread all over the threads, not just one thread.

For instance:

Wasim Akram thread:

Richard 17
nightprowler10 6
Beleg 5
Sanz 4

Batting easier thread:

Richard 9
Manee 5
silentstriker 3

Md. Yousuf thread:

Richard 30
Perm 9
KaZoH0lic 8
Lillian Thomson 8

Cheers.

CW Rules said:

Forum atmosphere - Members causing detrimental effects to forum atmosphere are subject to bans.

Click to expand...

How this has never been applied to Richard I won't know.

I think a lot of threads go around in circles for this very reason. You're basically resigned to ignoring the thread eventually as there's no point continuing (and I've been guilty of continuing for too long ).

Controversial stuff.

I forsee a mod with a lock very soon...

BoyBrumby said:

Controversial stuff.

I forsee a mod with a lock very soon...

Click to expand...

Richard is the Bradman of Cricket Web.

Respect..

























Was this in jest? hmm..

Pratyush said:

He believes, in his own words, that if some one stops arguing with him, that person has lost the debate.

Click to expand...

I think in a lot of cases with other posters this is probably true, however I have had discussions with Richard in CC before where it's been going around in circles and eventually I've gotten bored.

Tom Halsey said:

I think in a lot of cases with other posters this is probably true, however I have had discussions with Richard in CC before where it's been going around in circles and eventually I've gotten bored.

Click to expand...

I'd say that happens to the majority of people who engage Richard in an argument.

BoyBrumby said:

Controversial stuff.

I forsee a mod with a lock very soon...

Click to expand...

I hope not, because this is a topic that needs to be addressed. IMO.

Perm said:

I'd say that happens to the majority of people who engage Richard in an argument.

Click to expand...

awta.

Pratyush said:

One poster, any one poster isn't that important but it is pretty annoying the way Richard keeps dominating threads. He has a belief to try and go on arguing. He believes, in his own words, that if some one stops arguing with him, that person has lost the debate. He hasn't heard of the notion of making his point and moving on.

This kills quality inputs and the threads are stunted as it is about Richard's view being argued on again and again. Pasag talked about this in one thread of his too.

How would the forum be if every one started making absurd points like "oooh, the sky is green, not blue." and then debating it to death. Ignoring him is not an option because it is spread all over the threads, not just one thread.

For instance:

Wasim Akram thread:

Richard 17
nightprowler10 6
Beleg 5
Sanz 4

Batting easier thread:

Richard 9
Manee 5
silentstriker 3

Md. Yousuf thread:

Richard 30
Perm 9
KaZoH0lic 8
Lillian Thomson 8

Cheers.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how it is fair to say I'm causing automatically detrimental effects purely by having a high number of posts. I take the point about repeatedly arguing the same stuff over and again with it coming-up ATT in many different threads and I recently specifically said I'd try to cut this out.

With regards to the latest case that appears to have triggered this particular reaction - I cannot see that the posts were doing any harm - they were even related to the original question. Eyesight, loss of or otherwise, is very important to the question of whether cricketers can keep playing cricket.

As I also said, in this case and the previous one when Gelman mentioned the same thing - when someone addresses you it's generally considered polite to reply to what they say. It's not always about I'm-right-no-I'm-right (though even when it is I fail to see why someone should be compelled to simply stop arguing after X number of posts - it's the same as what I said back in the day with tec).

I can understand to some extent if people feel I'm "dominating threads" but purely by looking at the fact I've more posts than most in a thread and saying this is wrong isn't fair. Most of the time, this is due to the fact that discussion evolves - it doesn't usually mean the result isn't interesting.

No thread will last more than a couple of pages if there are only 1 or 2 replies from a single poster. Are we really saying that CW would be best if no thread went beyond 60 or so replies?

Richard said:

I fail to see how it is fair to say I'm causing automatically detrimental effects purely by having a high number of posts. I take the point about repeatedly arguing the same stuff over and again with it coming-up ATT in many different threads and I recently specifically said I'd try to cut this out.

Click to expand...

More concerned with the over use of acronyms, which we already know to be pure evil.

Richard said:

No thread will last more than a couple of pages if there are only 1 or 2 replies from a single poster. Are we really saying that CW would be best if no thread went beyond 60 or so replies?

Click to expand...

I am talking of one poster going on and on and on and on and on about his point of view (regardless of whether right or wrong). Threads can go beyond 60 replies without some thing like that as a fair few Indian and Australia discussion threads where you haven't been that dominant have shown (they have produced some of best discussions and talk I think).

Going on and on and on and on is certainly regressive as people just run away from such threads where one particular point is being debated to death. I know I certainly have. It is pretty easy to figure out that such activity kills inputs, contributions and talk on threads.

I understand what you're saying there and as I said a couple of weeks ago - I'll make an effort to cut-out the first-chance\Hayden-is-crap\MacGill-is-crap\etc. stuff that crops-up so often.

What I don't feel is fair is saying I should never have more posts than anyone else on a thread, and that if I do it's automatically a problem. Read the posts, then decide.

Perm said:

How this has never been applied to Richard I won't know.

Click to expand...

The irony here is abit much, you're so similar to Richard in posting habits and so much more abusive than he'll ever be.

pasag said:

The irony here is abit much, you're so similar to Richard in posting habits and so much more abusive than he'll ever be.

Click to expand...

Never really considered myself as detrimental to forum atmosphere in the same way that Richard is, even if I tend to be angrier. Would be interested to hear other peoples opinions though.

Richard easily gets the most questions directed back to him and obviously there are times when he has gone on a bit too much, but there are many threads where he's actually been the best contributor even if I haven't agreed exactly with what he's said.

Richard said:

I understand what you're saying there and as I said a couple of weeks ago - I'll make an effort to cut-out the first-chance\Hayden-is-crap\MacGill-is-crap\etc. stuff that crops-up so often.

What I don't feel is fair is saying I should never have more posts than anyone else on a thread, and that if I do it's automatically a problem. Read the posts, then decide.

Click to expand...

Yeah, fair enough mate. You add a lot to a lot of threads. I don't particularly have a problem with you or any one having more posts than any one else on a particular thread. For instance, Arjun has most posts in the Indian domestic season thread. However, a lot of the times, the reason you have the most posts is because you want to have the last word. If I do that most of the times I post, I am sure I would have similarly most posts in a lot of threads too...

I am glad you will try to cut out the first-chance\Hayden-is-crap\MacGill-is-crap\etc. stuff that crops-up so often and you see where I am coming from...

HeathDavisSpeed said:

More concerned with the over use of acronyms, which we already know to be pure evil.

Click to expand...

Heath, I appreciate you trying to lighten the mood to an extent, but in my experience this sort of stuff is best said than unsaid. It's inevitable that controversies concerning myself are going to erupt from time to time - utterly inevitable.

(ATT = all the time ICYU, and ICYU means in case you're and yes I just made that one up now and... I'll leave the being-funny to you hey?)

The irony of Richard eventually having 45 posts in this thread will not be lost on me.