Marco, Marco, Marco
Dave Williams
You seem to pride yourself as being a straightforward guy. Well let me
be straightforward with you.
NATT is a company. They have a really simple plan. Invest time and
money into a sport they enjoy to provide playing experiences for table
tennis competitors in North America. There is no other such company.
They have now organized dozens of pro tournaments from coast to coast.
They have developed the best table tennis software around. They run on
time, they promote the hell out of the pro divisions and they provide
good value for their entry fees.
In the process of launching this service they have had to face, in no
particular order....
Kooks like you. A pressure filled rescue of the nation's biggest team
tournament when the original promoters cancelled it. A change in ball
size on the eve of a subsequent Teams. A change in the game length on
the eve of yet another Teams. Arranging venues and shipping equipment
across the country. Finding a major sponsor. Finding a second major
sponsor. Guaranteeing serious prize money and risking that guarantee
against entries at every tournament.
If you want to play in one of their tournaments, have at it. If you
want to gripe about what they do and make asinine suggestions like
cancel the doubles and move people up from round robins at the NA Teams,
which have neither, don't waste the space in my news reader. If you
want to get into pissing contests over phone calls, go find SJan.
Most interesting poster my foot. Use your energy for good, Marco. Feel
the force. Get off NATT's back, as they are one of the precious few
pieces of recent good news in a little game FULL of arm chair
quarterbacks and big egos
This may sound incredibly rude, my online friend, but shut up and
play....or at least talk about something you've done or seen, not air.
We're all fairly outgoing and willing to discourse here but there is a
time to get out of gear and IMO that time has arrived for you and the NATT.
Lefty
Larry Hodges
Before you hit that send button, consider this. Would you be willing to get
on a podium in front of a crowd of thousands of people, including your
friends and peers, and read your posting to them out loud as a speech? And
then allow others to get up on the podium and rebut anything you say? If
not, pull the hand away from that send button, and reconsider what you are
posting.
Because that is exactly what happens when you post here.
-Larry Hodges
watersl...@erols.com
Hmm.... I wonder if I should send this....
\
watersl...@erols.com
>
> LARRY, MIND YOU OWN GODDDAMMNN #*$($*%& BEESWAX!!!
>
> Hmm.... I wonder if I should send this....
Uhhhh....
Oops! Uhhhh Cool. Maybe he's right.
Uhhh... huh huh huuuh... hu hu... :-)
Caccobio
>
I thought I already said I was done with this. But lucky me you've decided to
add your enlightened thoughts.
>NATT is a company. They have a really simple plan. Invest time and
>money into a sport they enjoy to provide playing experiences for table
>tennis competitors in North America.
And what happens when there is a discrepancy regarding format. Do you answer
questions "only once." What if someone asks you a question twice. Do you then
mock and ridicule them? Even when the cause of that question was someone who
is fairly "high up" in the sport?
>Kooks like you.
Whatever. If you ask me this sport could use a few more "Kooks like me" and a
few less "arrogant cliquey old guard" like you. And we definately need less
"scared sheep" like most everyone else.
>and make asinine suggestions like
>cancel the doubles and move people up from round robins at the NA Teams,
Holy Shit. You guys must be brothers. (Actually I know you are). Didn't I
already explain 500 times that when I made this suggestion that I was under the
impression that Baltimore was a "normal" tournament with a team event? Didn't
I already explain that I was talking about removing the "U3500 doubles" etc.
etc. I wasn't talking about removing doubles from the team event.
Is there a gene in the williams family that causes inability to see through
when someone's got it wrong and then mock them repeatedly despite their
explanation?
I think you guys are the kooks. And I still maintain that if you treated
everyone the way you have treated me, you wouldn't have much of a business.
Despite how good your tournaments are.
marco
TTAmorak
>you answer questions "only once." What if someone asks you a
>question twice. Do you then mock and ridicule them? Even when the
>cause of that question was someone who is fairly "high up" in the
>sport?
You received the answer at least 2-4 or more times from NATT people.
I think the problem is that when you got different answers from different
people (who were NOT in the NATT), you made insinuations that the NATT was
being sneaky, devious, or somehow unethical.
The NATT can only answer your questions. They can't control what
other people say.
So I guess when you mocked and ridiculed the NATT, a great company that's done
a LOT to improve table tennis in this country, it wasn't appreciated.
Dave Williams
Caccobio wrote:
>
> Is there a gene in the williams family that causes inability to see through
> when someone's got it wrong and then mock them repeatedly despite their
> explanation?
>
> I think you guys are the kooks. And I still maintain that if you treated
> everyone the way you have treated me, you wouldn't have much of a business.
> Despite how good your tournaments are.
>
> marco
I fear you've got a goose and gander problem here. Even though I have no business
connection with Richard and Alan's effort (other than playing rather poorly in a
number of their events and doing some graphics for the Teams :) I've learned over
the year that all people, customers or not, generally get treated the way they
treat others.
I apologize for jumping on your case after you had issued a "no mas" in this
topic, which I didn't read until later. But I must hold the line, my friend, on
the thought that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" and that what
you may want to attribute to "old line cliques" are really just the natural
responses of people you've rubbed the wrong way. At least that's how I would
characterize my own reaction to your posting style. I do not know what kind of
guy you are live and in person but you've cut a wide swath through this
underbrush.
Lefty
Alan & Erin Williams
> Didn't I
> already explain 500 times that when I made this suggestion that I was under the
> impression that Baltimore was a "normal" tournament with a team event? Didn't
> I already explain that I was talking about removing the "U3500 doubles" etc.
> etc. I wasn't talking about removing doubles from the team event.
There *aren't any doubles* in the 'team event'. It's XYZ/ABC all singles, as 95%
of US tournament players know.
>
>
> Is there a gene in the williams family that causes inability to see through
> when someone's got it wrong and then mock them repeatedly despite their
> explanation?
Your explanation that you didn't know *anything* about the tournament you were
publically suggesting changes for is totally understood here.
>
>
> I think you guys are the kooks. And I still maintain that if you treated
> everyone the way you have treated me, you wouldn't have much of a business.
I'm frankly concerned about they way *you* treat our paid entrants, threatening to
punch them out and then inviting one to see you in San Diego for a 'talk'.
You're expected to behave like an adult, Marco. As are all our entrants. We've
never had a player-to-player or player-to-staff conflict that wasn't resolved
without threats of violence.
>
> Despite how good your tournaments are.
Dave is not associated with NATT. NATT's tournaments are good, IMO, and I hope to
see you at the Western Open (the first NATT event you have entered) so you can see
for yourself.
Alan
Caccobio
>done
>a LOT to improve table tennis in this country, it wasn't appreciated
See now this is what I don't FUCKING understand! When did I mock them? When
did I ridicule them? All I said was that we should follow the ITTF's rule and
make the games 11up and 4/7. I was mistaken about the ITTF rule. So my
suggestion was moot. But I never "accused" or "mocked" anyone.
But if I did why don't you copy this mystery thread and post it for everyone to
see.
marco
Caccobio
>guy you are live and in person but you've cut a wide swath through this
>underbrush.
>
>Lefty
yeah well I'm on a "vietnamese" diet so maybe my "swath" will be getting less
wide soon. (Italian diet tends to give people quite a large "swath.")
Jennifer Lopez also has a nice "swath".
marco
Chris Andrews
>Before you hit that send button, consider this. Would you be willing to get
>on a podium in front of a crowd of thousands of people, including your
>friends and peers, and read your posting to them out loud as a speech?
This in my view is not a good example of what a newsgroup is about.
For a start the poster does not see the crowd. As well as the this the
crowd do not see the poster. The poster can also chose to be anonymous,
which is rather different than if the poster was standing in front of
thousands of people.
Also you seem to forget that the poster could not create such a crowd to
listen to them in any way shape or form other than through this channel.
These thousands of people should be posting instead of reading information
which maybe not show what the Table Tennis population thinks as a whole.
Table Tennis only has one english speaking newsgroup. When English football
has over 40 newsgroups on its own. Football of the soccer type has way over
50 english speaking newsgroups.
On a newsgroup the more posts the better it is upto the lurkers (crowd) to
sort out what posts they want to read. If they spend their time reading
rubbish, then it is their fault as they should have used their filters
better and they should have gained a better knowledge of which posters post
stuff they what to read and which posters post stuff they do not wish to
read.
Lynne Hong
How does it feel to go from those radical idea Western Marylanders of 2
years ago to the "old guard" today? Time sure flies:)
JTY
"Caccobio" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010815141919...@ng-cc1.aol.com...
Snippage
Alan & Erin Williams
> Dear Williams Bros,
> How does it feel to go from those radical idea Western Marylanders of 2
> years ago to the "old guard" today? Time sure flies:)
> JTY
LOL! I wondered if anyone else was going to catch that.
Alan
'the arrogant old offensive tackle'
Larry Hodges
news:cQBe7.3216$gF5.7...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
> >Before you hit that send button, consider this. Would you be willing to
get
> >on a podium in front of a crowd of thousands of people, including your
> >friends and peers, and read your posting to them out loud as a speech?
>
> This in my view is not a good example of what a newsgroup is about.
>
> For a start the poster does not see the crowd.
Why should that make a difference? Out of sight, out of mind works for
ostriches, but not for intelligent people.
> As well as the this the
> crowd do not see the poster. The poster can also chose to be anonymous,
> which is rather different than if the poster was standing in front of
> thousands of people.
Putting aside the fact that most of the posters on this newsgroup are not
anonymous - including Marco, who many of us know - I have nothing but
contempt for anyone who hides behind anonymity to post things that he
doesn't have the courage to post under his own name. I guess that would
equate with standing in front of a crowd of thousands wearing a mask. It's
one thing to post innocent questions or carry on a conversation under
anonymity. But it's another to post attacks, crude language, etc., while
hiding behind anonymity.
> Also you seem to forget that the poster could not create such a crowd to
> listen to them in any way shape or form other than through this channel.
Exactly - which is why I'm reminding people of the consequences of their
postings, i.e. they are "standing in front of thousands of people" when they
post here.
> These thousands of people should be posting instead of reading information
> which maybe not show what the Table Tennis population thinks as a whole.
Why? I read several newsgroups, but rarely post except on this one. Just
because there's a crowd around doesn't mean everyone should jump on a podium
and give a speech.
> On a newsgroup the more posts the better it is upto the lurkers (crowd) to
> sort out what posts they want to read. If they spend their time reading
> rubbish, then it is their fault as they should have used their filters
> better and they should have gained a better knowledge of which posters
post
> stuff they what to read and which posters post stuff they do not wish to
> read.
You are referring to the readers. I was writing to the posters. It's a free
newsgroup, but that doesn't mean we can't urge people to practice proper
restraint.
-Larry Hodges
Jonathan O'Donnell
If you guys need another tackle for your "old gaurd" call on me:)
Jonathan O'Donnell
"Alan & Erin Williams" <will...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3B7AEFF1...@mindspring.com...
Dave Williams
>
> Dear Williams Bros,
> How does it feel to go from those radical idea Western Marylanders of 2
> years ago to the "old guard" today? Time sure flies:)
> JTY
>
Lefty the antique
ZeroEffect25
The only thing that pissed me off about the NA Teams were the crappy trophies.
In 1999 they gave out cheap glass like garbage. In 2000 they gave out crappy
wooden plaques. Finally in 2001 they gave out these bullshit 50 cent trophies.
I remember in 1996 I played the teams and made the final of the B division. I
had to play really hard but, it was worth it, I got a really cool silver medal.
Other than the prizes being pure crap at the teams, the tournment was very
very well run. No other problems with the tournemnt. I did talk to Richard
Lee about the prizes and he told me that this year they are going to try and
give medals. If that happens, I'll have to play division "H" so I can win
something.
Garbage.....
Chris Andrews
This in my view is not a good example of what a newsgroup is about.
extremely quick and give lots of data. Checking posts greatly reduces the
speed and you also wish to reduce the amount of data.
The crowd does not have to listen to the poster in any way shape or form.
>> Also you seem to forget that the poster could not create such a crowd to
>> listen to them in any way shape or form other than through this channel.
>Exactly - which is why I'm reminding people of the consequences of >their
postings, i.e. they are "standing in front of thousands of >people" when
they post here.
Most posters already realise lots of people lurk here.
>Why? I read several newsgroups, but rarely post except on this one.
Just because this is your personal usenet habitat doesn't need that it has
to be everyone elses. Certain people here will only lurk on this newsgroup
and you seem to be acting in a way to scare them off postings as opposed to
actively encouaging them to post thereby allowing them to gain more
knowledge and expertise on the sport, which they like best.
>Just
>because there's a crowd around doesn't mean everyone should jump on a
podium
>and give a speech.
The idea of a newsgroup is that people find the answers to their questions
about a particular subject. However because they havn't a right to post
(cos Larry says so) they will never find out the answers to their questions.
These questions being the ones that brought them to the newsgroup in the
first place.
>
>> On a newsgroup the more posts the better it is
>It's a free
>newsgroup, but that doesn't mean we can't urge people to practice proper
>restraint.
Someone such as Marco is unlikely to practice restraint just because you
asked him. Yet you can be sure more people will have been put of posting to
RSTT.
This newsgroup needs double the posts and not half the posts it presently
has. When a lurk asks a question they learn far more than just reading
information about question, which they were not really interested in the
answer of anyway.
To keep people looking at a newsgroup occasionally it does increase the
volume of people if they are being entertained in some light heart way.
This would therefore keep table tennis in the mind of someone who is a two
sport person and table tennis may become the top sport of this person in
this way.
Just talking about equipment is very boring and is very likely to sent
people away from RSTT.
Larry Hodges
>
> This in my view is not a good example of what a newsgroup is about.
> The internet, usenet and e-mails all have things in common they are
> extremely quick and give lots of data. Checking posts greatly reduces
the
> speed and you also wish to reduce the amount of data.
Agreed. But this has nothing to do with what I posted about. I posted a note
reminding ***posters*** that what they post here is read by thousands. This
does not affect readers, who will read what they choose to, as they should.
> >Why? I read several newsgroups, but rarely post except on this one.
> Just because this is your personal usenet habitat doesn't need that it has
> to be everyone elses. Certain people here will only lurk on this
newsgroup
> and you seem to be acting in a way to scare them off postings as opposed
to
> actively encouaging them to post thereby allowing them to gain more
> knowledge and expertise on the sport, which they like best.
I'm not discouraging them from posting. I'm discouraging them from posting
attacks on others that they would normally not do, except for the psychology
of the Internet, where people feel they can post things they would never say
in public.
> The idea of a newsgroup is that people find the answers to their questions
> about a particular subject.
Completely agree. There's no reason why a person shouldn't post questions
here. My posting did not refer to them.
> However because they havn't a right to post
> (cos Larry says so)
At no time did I say that - if you are going to respond to me, please
respond to what I actually wrote, not to stuff I didn't. I wrote the exact
opposite in the very note you are responding to:
"It's a free newsgroup, but that doesn't mean we can't urge people to
practice proper restraint."
Urging people to practice self-restraint is completely different than saying
they don't have a right to post, as you say I wrote.
> they will never find out the answers to their questions.
> These questions being the ones that brought them to the newsgroup in the
> first place.
And how many are driven away by the low level of many of the exchanges here?
Currently, the exchanges here are far better than they have been most of the
past five years, with the absence of Sjan and Canup. But it won't take much
for the level to drop back down again. It's a voluntary thing, but that
doesn't mean we can't urge restraint upon those who abuse the newsgroup.
> Someone such as Marco is unlikely to practice restraint just because you
> asked him.
I don't know. Marco, what do you think?
Marco did stop posting certain "implied" threats after it was pointed out
that everything posted here is on permanant record.
> This newsgroup needs double the posts and not half the posts it presently
> has. When a lurk asks a question they learn far more than just reading
> information about question, which they were not really interested in the
> answer of anyway.
And when has anyone (other than the usual loonies, which is who my posting
was to) jumped on a lurker who asked a question? Remember, I've said that
(in my opinion) it's OK to be anonymous until you start to attack others.
That's where I draw the line. I don't think that scares lurkers from asking
questions. In fact, it should encourage them that we have a civilized
newsgroup.
-Larry Hodges
Caccobio
I have already received emails from various forum-masters requesting that I
visit their sites more often.
It appears that my ranting and raving, joke telling, and personal life-issues
opinions have caused the volume of "hits" on both rstt and Sean's website to
increase 300%.
We are currently working out a system whereby I get a percentage of the profits
of the increased hits as a direct result of when I started logging on.
Thank you, all flamers, scammers, anal-retentive types, rebels, rabble, and
old-guard who helped me find this new source of income.
marco
Alan & Erin Williams
Since no one pays for 'hits' at r.s.t-t, I trust this means we'll be seeing you
less as you concentrate on your new career.
Alan
Larry Hodges
> >I don't know. Marco, what do you think?
>
> I have already received emails from various forum-masters requesting that
I
> visit their sites more often.
>
> It appears that my ranting and raving, joke telling, and personal
life-issues
> opinions have caused the volume of "hits" on both rstt and Sean's website
to
> increase 300%.
If we want hits, all we have to do is invite Sjan back. He and his sock
puppets broke 100 postings in a day a couple of times, and often would
average 30/day for weeks. I wonder what percentage he got?
> We are currently working out a system whereby I get a percentage of the
profits
> of the increased hits as a direct result of when I started logging on.
For the slow on the uptake, Marco's joking, but he will no doubt deny it.
It'll add more controversy, and more hits, and thereby more money in his
pocket, right? Jingle jingle. :)
-Larry Hodges
Caccobio
>less as you concentrate on your new career.
>
>Alan
>
yes alan, I'm sure you'll miss me. But luckily the rest of the forum will have
you to keep things entertaining and exciting. I'm sure you are up to it.
marco
Caccobio
>puppets broke 100 postings in a day a couple of times
Larry, what is a "sock puppet." I've seen this term a few times on the
newsgroup but I never got the meaning.
I used to read a lot of sjan posts but back then I never felt like replying.
The few I read were very entertaining, stuff about robot nazis and what
not...very entertaining. He had a good imagination. I also saw the
accusations that he's into child porn and stuff but I'm not sure where any of
that came from. I never saw a post from him that implied it. I also noticed
that the same people that loved to criticize him were some of the same names
that made a big noise but little sense against me.
Anyway, I think he had a good point about keeping young kids away from glue.
Last year in vegas everyone was using illegal glue except for me. It really
smells horrible. Now Waiquidi or whoever can post all he wants that smell
doesn't mean anything but if you were ever in a room with Yasaka Black Label
speed glue (which is legal!) then you know that S-Jan had a point. That stuff
will make your nose bleed. I'd hate to see 12 year old kids losing brain cells
by regluing both sheets every day. Especially the ones who train twice a day.
S-jan, as far as the posts that I have read, was fun and entertaining. People
tell me that he made bomb threats and did some bad shit but I never saw it.
And I don't feel like doing google searches about it either.
marco
Larry Hodges
> >If we want hits, all we have to do is invite Sjan back. He and his sock
> >puppets broke 100 postings in a day a couple of times
>
> Larry, what is a "sock puppet." I've seen this term a few times on the
> newsgroup but I never got the meaning.
Multiple postings from the same person, but under different aliases. He'd
carry on whole conversations with himself that way.
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
"Larry Hodges" <ttw...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9liqhg$ld6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
"He'd" meaning "Sjan'd."
-Larry Hodges
Caccobio
>Multiple postings from the same person, but under different aliases.
Ohhhhh! Kinda like Chip.
marco
Robert Trudell
Marco,
Larry is afraid to tell you all he knows about sock puppets.
Sometimes people are sacrificed (killed) in order to maintain the
rules of table tennis. The ITTF rules are actually written and
changed based on what goes on here at rec.sport.table-tennis and it's
underworld. To keep Larry inline a few people at his club were given
something that caused them to collapse and die of an apparent heart
attack, right in front of him. The latest was Carlos Ebron. The same
thing happened in Phoenix to Ken Hoover when I stumbled onto the real
truth about sock puppets. I wasn't actually there, but a few
table-tennis operatives, Kristin Kuchenbecker and Stan Robens informed
me of his demise.
There is an international consortium that monitors this newsgroup that
includes some companies such as Boeing, NASA, Motorola, and Brown and
Williamson along with many talented individuals, marketers, TV, Radio
and Movie industries. One of the projects they work on is creating an
artificial intelligence that responds to others, asks questions and
comments in this forum as well as others. They basically profile the
personality type of actual posters and separate their character into
several different sock puppets that mimic the real person in one way
or another. You might notice that the sock puppets think (Scott
Burson), babble (Sjan), judge (Arno Steinen), brag (Shay Torchner),
humor (Jim Short), promote (John Starr), or something else like you.
The names in parentheses are just 6 of my 7 puppets.
Every year the marketing people like to have a tournament to test the
posters along with their puppets to determine which is the fastest,
who provides the best answers, and who draws the biggest crowds of
interested readers. I happened to be in one of these tournaments as a
finalist along with Tong Lee back in 98. The winners of these and past
tournaments can actually dictate ITTF rules based on some table-tennis
metaphor of how their characters act. ITTF's metaphor for long pips
is an artificially created sock puppet. I guess they use that metaphor
since long pips give you your own spin back. Long pips were banned
when realized I didn't want sock puppets to be used in the tournament.
They often don't get your actual meaning straight all the time. The
big ball rule was established because even though I was threatened
with death to stop the tournament, I continued and won. The hidden
service rule was created to keep me from saying something to Larry and
this group before I let Sean know. I guess I'll never reveal what I
was going to say with my service (a posting) to Larry now.
--Rob
Alan & Erin Williams
RE: Security Leak
ID: Trudell/AZ/ operative
Recommended action: terminate with predjudice
Method: Cardiac Occlusion at Keyboard
SS.
Caccobio
certifiable as I am.
marco
ps...when the service rule changes go into effect, you'll be my bitch.
TTAmorak
>them? When did I ridicule them? All I said was that we should follow
>the ITTF's rule and make the games 11up and 4/7. I was mistaken
>about the ITTF rule. So my suggestion was moot. But I never
>"accused" or "mocked" anyone.
>
>But if I did why don't you copy this mystery thread and post it for
>everyone to see.
I tried to explain things as nicely as possible, so you could understand why
you were having these differences. What do you do? You throw around profanity
and give me another one of those, "Go back and
prove it" statements. I don't make stuff up, but I'm getting tired of
"going back" and proving things. Maybe you should make more of an effort to
remember how you've acted and what you've said?
To me, this just wastes bandwith and repeats stuff that YOU could actually
remember or go back and check for yourself. But here you go:
>Date: 2001-08-09 00:11:09 PST
>O.k., 3 days ago I called the North American Teams people and a lady
>said that San Diego Sept. 1&2 will be best of 11, 4 out of 7.
>But now I'm hearing rumors that it will be 3 out of 5.
>I've asked Dave to respond, he hasn't or he hasn't seen my post.
>We've got only a few weeks left, is it too much to ask to post in a clear
>manner what will be the format?
What does Dave have to do with this? But in any event, you're saying here that
you just want a "clear" answer when one has already been given to you at the
NATT office. You're "hearing rumors" as if something isn't right. And you're
basically implying here that the NATT office didn't give you a straight an
honest answer.
Alan responds by saying that the two events are different and that you got the
correct answer from the NATT office. I thought that was pretty clear.
But you reply with:
>Thankyou mr. williams for that concise and clear answer. Of course I'm
>now going to enjoy reading your entire website to find out what is the
>format. I guess it was too much trouble for you to just answer my
>question.
As I've stated and YOU can go back and check, he told you that the
office gave you the correct answer. What did the office say? Well,
there's your answer.
>Wayne Johnson said to me tonight that San Diego tournament would
>be 3 out of 5. That's a pretty good source, since he usually knows what
>he's talking about.
>Now, I'm gonna ask you politely to give me a break and just answer my
>question. I'm not the only one going you know. There's a lot of people
>here who want to know.
You act as if he's holding back information or up to something by
not answering your question. He did. He told you that the NATT
office gave you the right answer. Do you remember what they said?
Once again, that's your answer.
>In the future, if you want to be rude to me why don't you email me your
>rude answers so that others don't have to read this crap.
Maybe the implications shouldn't have been made in the first place?
Then after that you post:
>Please let me know an official answer once and for all what the format
>will be.
>I'd appreciate that without any of your magnificent writing ability, if you
>don't mind.
So then he replies in e-mail....
Now, I can't speak for Alan, but I suspect that he was irritated by the
your implication that the NATT was keeping this information from you
and other players.
I think you may carried more implications about the NATT into other threads as
well, but I'm not going to check.
For the record Marco... You've made accusations that this "old guard" keeps
people from posting and they scare people away. On the contrary, I've never had
a conflict with the "old guard." But I suspect that when YOU jump all over
people for posting their opinions or their stories and what not, this may scare
people away more than the "old guard" ever has. Of course, I don't have this
scientifically documented. It's just how I feel and I think others may feel the
same.
Maybe we should all try to be a little more patient with each other.
Caccobio
>
dude, your entire post didn't prove your point. All it proved is exactly what
I said happened. Of course you left out some details.
I called the office and got an answer. 3 days later an important person said
that the format had changed. I wrote a post asking for some clarity. I
received a post back saying something like "go check our website." I went to
check the website. Nowhere in the website was there format info. Only hotel
and an entryform info. I went back to the forum. I received an imail that
said "the answer that you got is correct."
I'm leaving out about 4 steps in this saga. By the way, with each step I had
to endure ridicule and unneccesary comments.
The whole thing really sucked, as anyone who was reading would have seen.
Now it's like a week later. The original info is pretty much gone, unless you
set like to read threads that are weeks old. Yet you still say that I
"blasted" NATT etc.
Here's how I would have handled it. Let's say I'm running a tournament and
someone asks what's the format. I'd respond answering the question. No
"sighs," no comments. Just straightforward. Now let's say 3 days later the
same person writes that he heard something changed. I'd write back "your
friend must have this confused with another tournament. I assure you the
format hasn't changed."
That's it. Done. No one has to read unneccesary garbage.
Maybe you prefer the way Alan handled it?
This is stupid.
On this one I was right, Alan was wrong. It's now over. Let's let this go
now.
marco
Kagin
Alan & Erin Williams
Anyway you want to remember is fine with me, Marco. But you've said you're done
with the topic over and over. At some point, will you be done with it?
Alan
TTAmorak
>what I said happened. Of course you left out some details.
Then you should have went back and quoted it yourself.
>I wrote a post asking for some clarity. I
>received a post back saying something like "go check our website."
He also said that the NATT office gave you the right answer.
>I'm leaving out about 4 steps in this saga. By the way, with each step I
>had to endure ridicule and unneccesary comments.
Other people had to endure ridicule and unnecessary comments, as well.
>The whole thing really sucked, as anyone who was reading would have
> seen.
Agreed. I shouldn't speak for Alan, but I was just mentioning what I
thought might have irked him because it probably would have irked me.
However, before I shut up, I'd like to suggest you go back and read his post.
He did pretty much tell you that the office gave you the right answer, so I
don't know why it continued past that.
In any event, it doesn't really matter to me who's right or wrong. I was just
trying to explain something. If my explanation doesn't make sense to you, then
oh well... :)
Take care.
Robert Trudell
> RE: Security Leak
> ID: Trudell/AZ/ operative
> Recommended action: terminate with predjudice
> Method: Cardiac Occlusion at Keyboard
>
> SS.
Uh oh! It's death by computer -- Intelinside.
--Rob