Strat and TSN

Secondly-

I dont read your posts to parse out specific words which may or may not imply exactly what you deem them to imply or not.

Thats a job for a lawyer,

No worries...I have no desire to continue this debate.

I dont understand why there is even a debate to begin with-
this is straightforward-

The company took action or lack of action which resulted in alienating a lot of the players;

If you want things to be better, get that very same company to do a better job of communicating and responding to the needs of the community.

What is the debate????

Okay- I despise doing this because its out of context:

1.There were more than 50 censored threads that were in response to something posted about coaches and abuse. It was a discussion within the community.

2. There were censored threads relating to many many things which people pointed out that SoM was doing wrong; these were often things that went unanswered via email to the company- such as not fixing things etc.

3. There were a number of threads censored by SoM simply because the did not like the fact that people mounted a protest by using one sentence threads relating to baseball that were meaningless.

4. There were a number of people, myself included who were censored because they spoke TRUTHFULLY about was going on with SoM- some of which was Bernies fault- why? because of the transition- I can go into it more.

I can go on...yeah- I think its lawyer mode because now we have to define what we see as 'abuse'.

Although the example Nev gave was an example of abuse that no member of the community or employee of SOM should tolerate, these examples you give do not seem abusive and probably did not merit censorship.

As to numbers 1 and 3: SOM has set forum rules forbidding discussions irrelevant to SOM and the community. I'm not defending that policy or saying that coaching forum was such an irrelevant one, but I could see how SOM could make that argument. Also, a long thread of nonsense would also constitute such irrelevant material, and I could also see why SOM would remove it.

2 and 4 do describe the types of legitimate complaints that SOM should not censor, and--as I have said before many times--I agree that SOM needs to improve its communication and relations with the community.


...Now can we ever discuss what we can do to make the community better for ourselves instead of continuing to "debate" over what we clearly agree on?

Sorry, I just don't remembe3r you.Small World was this game.. The Sporting News bought out Small World before they were later not interested in our game and even thought of shutting it down.Then with great pressure from the people playing hereThat was Bernie was seeming to running things here and we had a pretty good complained and we kept it alive.That's before the biange over and mess up.That was when Bernie was pretty well running things here.We had a pretty good thing going and Bernie kept us advised on what was happening and what changes would be coming.I think it fell apart when Stat was shut down and the new game came about.There were to many bugs in the system and the new management seemed not to really care about us.That was also when Bernie was no longer around and we haven't heard from him since.It's to bad because Bernie with help from many here revised the game many times over.Bernie gone with really no explanation.Since the we have had nobody to represent us with SOM.I've seen the ups and downs but I will always support this game as I like the game but mostly the friends I've made here.Alot of my friends are no longer playing here and we've lost some great people.But now I have a lot of new friends now playing here.I think the grou;p that is now here will keep our game alive and hopefully with some new ideas to make our game better.

What is the debate????

As I said above, Salty, I don't know either...I've acknowledged that SOM needs to improve things and that people have legitimate complaints about that from the beginning.

If you want things to be better, get that very same company to do a better job of communicating and responding to the needs of the community.

This is also true, but as I've said before, and you and others have acknowledged, we too as community members need to do what we can to attract and keep newer members to our forum and community. Waiting for SOM to improve before we do so, particularly when you doubt they will, will not accomplish that.

This has quickly become a waste of time-
if you want a prize for proving your debating prowess then you can pick one up at the candy store, or Ill be happy to make one for you.

In the meantime understand that in order to improve the forum, SoM will need to make some drastic changes.

If you want to make an effort to that end, then post it up- write a letter that makes sense and I will try and support it.

This has quickly become a waste of time-
if you want a prize for proving your debating prowess then you can pick one up at the candy store, or Ill be happy to make one for you.

In the meantime understand that in order to improve the forum, SoM will need to make some drastic changes.

If you want to make an effort to that end, then post it up- write a letter that makes sense and I will try and support it.

I had no idea I was displaying any "debating prowess," nor was I aware candy stores rewarded it, but thanks for both the accolade and the information...I do love jelly bellies.

And I already wrote an extremely sensible letter about what we can do to improve the forum, which you apparently won't support...which is fine. And I think you should be the one who should write such a letter about what SOM should do. You are clearly passionate about the matter, and you truly believe that SOM is the one who needs to make changes...I'm sure you would write an excellent letter.

And I think you should be the one who should write such a letter about what SOM should do. You are clearly passionate about the matter, and you truly believe that SOM is the one who needs to make changes...I'm sure you would write an excellent letter.

I think you need to read more carefully.

I already wrote multiple letters of this nature.

Secondly, no, your letter was not addressed either in the literal or figuartive sense to the people that both make and enforce forum policy.

"Salty"

I think you need to read more carefully.

I already wrote multiple letters of this nature.

No, I don't, because I never said you didn't write multiple letters. If you actually think SOM, not we community members, are the ones who make changes and will actually do so, then you should write another letter.

Secondly, no, your letter was not addressed either in the literal or figuartive sense to the people that both make and enforce forum policy.

I never said it was addressed to those people, either literally or figuratively. I addressed it to the SOM community, and I have always claimed I did so.


P.s. Considering you previously claimed this "debate" "had become a waste of time," I'm surprised and a bit bewildered by your continuing it...particularly since we're not in substantial disagreement.