Master Index of Archived Threads


Proposed Middle Ground

Centerfield Apr 28 2006 12:23 PM

To be honest, today was the first day I took the time to read about the Sal-Edgy-KC dispute, so I apologize if I oversimply things. That being said, I see essentially two major complaints that Sal has here: 1. The Piazza Debate: And the fallout from same. Sal seems to be saying that he was painted in a bad light during some debates Edgy and Sal were having in 2004. (I admit having skipped nearly the entire debate). And that since then, Piazza's production has vindicated his position. Is there a way we can get a resolution on this? I'm guessing that Sal thought Piazza was done and should be traded, and Edgy thought he had something left. Is there a way this can be addressed? I think it's clear now, looking back, that Piazza was in decline and perhaps the best thing would have been to trade him while he still had value. And I can understand how fans would have blinders to this considering how attached we had become to Piazza throughout the years. (I remember thinking to myself last year that Piazza suddenly looks terrible, then looking at the numbers for the past few years and wondering how I didn't see this coming). Anyway, perhaps we can put some closure on this debate, admit who was right about what, (keeping in mind "right" can be shades of gray and not black and white) and finally put that behind us. 2. The Double Standard: At least from the looks of it, Edgy's policy seems to be even-handed. But if I'm understanding Sal correctly, he feels that it will be, and it has been for some time, not applied fairly. Specifically, attacks by Sal will be chastised and moved, whereas attacks against Sal were written off, ignored, or downplayed as casual ribbing. I think the solution to this can be simple enough. Now that Sal has brought this to the board's attention, we'll simply be on the lookout for it. We'll see how the admins enforce this policy. Sal, if you feel certain threads should have been moved and weren't, cut and paste them here. Demand answers as to why specific attacks on you have been ignored. If Sal is being treated unfairly, it should be easy to see now that this dispute can be streamlined into one forum. That being said, I have no desire to get in the middle of this thing, and if it were up to me, my involvement would end here. So I'll just throw this out there, and if it helps to lead to a resolution, great. If not, and you guys want to ignore it, feel free. I do want to say that I like all three of you guys. And I don't even care if you guys get along, just so long as you guys find a way to co-exist.

Willets Point Apr 28 2006 01:13 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2006 03:23 PM

Edgy's catching a lot of flak for this, but the majority of threads and partial threads moved here the past couple of days were moved by me. I figured since I was going through my usual archival sweep that I'd just add on moving threads with ad hominen attacks, nasty arguments and flame wars in lieu of the announcement. I tried to use my best judgement and when possible seperate good baseball discussions from the nasty parts while doing best to preserve the context. Yes, Bret is in the majority of the threads moved but so are other forumites. It's a two-way street Bret being nasty and people being nasty to Bret. I do recall KC & others saying some nasty things in the past as well as folks being deliberately provocative to Bret in the past but I did not go through the whole forum and archives to find them. I just looked through what was active on the first couple of pages and what I was archiving anyway on the last couple of pages. I will keep my eye out in the future and again use my best judgement to move out threads or posts that involve name-calling or personal atttacks in order to keep the Baseball Forum focused on baseball discussion as many CPF'ers have expresssed their desire to see. I think I can be pretty objective in that I'm on good terms with and admire greatly all three principals in this battle - Bret, Edgy, & KC - and hope this helps them resolve their differences or at least keep it out of the rest of our faces. That being said, my judgement far from perfect so I welcome critcism and suggestions. For example, I moved the "David Wright for Miguel Cabrera & Dontrelle Willis!" thread here in it's entirety but I plan to move it back. If you think I've goofed elsewhere let me know.

Edgy DC Apr 28 2006 01:28 PM

1) Any and all Mets debate is welcome within the parameters of generally civil and decent discourse, including revisiting past debates 2) Anybody who feels they are being abused with no consequence to the abuser (or is enduring consequences nobody else has to from an overzealous admin) is welcome to appeal to any the five admins (myself, Giant Squidlike Creature, KC, Yancy, and Frayed Knot [who doesn't have moderator privileges, but remains part of the administrative discussions]). We can huddle and debate calls among ourselves while organ music plays. If such appeals still don’t satisfy the appealer, they can further appeal to their sister and brother posters who will or won’t join in the lobbying, leaving the admins with a potential populist movement to contend with, and to ither satisfy the complainant or get a civil disruption among sympathetic posters on the board. I doubt that’d be necessary.

old original jb Apr 28 2006 04:49 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2006 05:03 PM

I like the proposed middle ground. I'd just like a forum that is less vituperative. I agree with putting as little into the Red Light Forum as possible. I'd only request that you leave in the RLF, the parts where I have been called meddling, officious, a twit, a lightweight, obnoxious, smug, shrill, and --oh yeah--the parts where I get compared to a Gulag psychiatrist and (my personal favorite given my family's history) a Nazi concentration camp doctor. I'm sorry for not appreciating Bret/Sal's passion about baseball debate more and for telling him to cut it out already (twice, I think.). I'll try to do better next time. Yeah.

KC Apr 28 2006 05:00 PM

I just wanted to say I'm not disinterested or ignoring the issues, I just feel I've said enough on the subject for one week publically.

ScarletKnight41 Apr 28 2006 05:10 PM

]vituperative One entry found for vituperative. Main Entry: vi·tu·per·a·tive Pronunciation: vI-'tü-p(&-)r&-tiv, -p&-"rA- Function: adjective : uttering or given to censure : containing or characterized by verbal abuse - vi·tu·per·a·tive·ly adverb It's rare when I have to look up a word around here.