|
|
Post by Rich Wharton on Mar 18, 2007 13:09:47 GMT
Read the "Final Week Predictions" thread. It has now been locked for whatever reason, and I was in the middle of typing my response. Wouldn't want all that effort to go to waste, so I'll put it on here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Wharton on Mar 18, 2007 13:10:02 GMT
For anyone else who didn't get it.....
Ed suggests we just conform to what the committee says, with no debate, no conversation, no complaints, therefore no opinion.
I then call him a Conformist Totalitarian, which would suggest he is a mindless sheep. (Sheep as used in the context by Bern, ie, someone who follows as opposed to someone with a mind of their own.)
He then reinforces my point for me by describing what being in a Totalitarian society actually entails. To sum up his description, you have no opinion, no rights, no complaints procedure, and you live or die (literally or figuratively, your choice) by the decisions of a select few priveleged people. This select few is represented by 'Big Brother' and 'The Party' in George Orwell's 1984, and by the CAPL committee in the hierarchal setup that the not so well educated Mr Savory proposes for us.
1. By explaining what a Totalitarian society actually is, he shows his understanding of this kind of society.
2. By suggesting that we all conform to this way of thinking, he is in effect condoning the very political system that he has described, whilst showing his understanding of said horrific system.
Therefore, he becomes a Conformist Totalitarian, thereby justifying my first reply to him which was "Idiot, what is the point of having a 'Committee if we can't discuss things?', and proving that I was right to think of him as both an idiot and a Conformist Totalitarian.
Apparently that Oxford education your daddy paid for wasn't worth what you thought it was, Ed. (That one's for you, Mr Cork!)
Anyone going to type out a message saying, "Great post Rich!!!!!!!!!"? Thought not.
Ed, get back in your box.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Wharton on Mar 18, 2007 13:10:48 GMT
Cut and paste. Happy days! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Love ya work, Orrible!!  |
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 13:36:39 GMT
great post Rich!!  Now stop calling people Idiots  |
|
chronos
Won a few trophies
Posts: 124
|
Post by chronos on Mar 18, 2007 13:56:36 GMT
For anyone else who didn't get it..... Ed suggests we just conform to what the committee says, with no debate, no conversation, no complaints, therefore no opinion. I then call him a Conformist Totalitarian, which would suggest he is a mindless sheep. (Sheep as used in the context by Bern, ie, someone who follows as opposed to someone with a mind of their own.) He then reinforces my point for me by describing what being in a Totalitarian society actually entails. To sum up his description, you have no opinion, no rights, no complaints procedure, and you live or die (literally or figuratively, your choice) by the decisions of a select few priveleged people. This select few is represented by 'Big Brother' and 'The Party' in George Orwell's 1984, and by the CAPL committee in the hierarchal setup that the not so well educated Mr Savory proposes for us. 1. By explaining what a Totalitarian society actually is, he shows his understanding of this kind of society. 2. By suggesting that we all conform to this way of thinking, he is in effect condoning the very political system that he has described, whilst showing his understanding of said horrific system. Therefore, he becomes a Conformist Totalitarian, thereby justifying my first reply to him which was "Idiot, what is the point of having a 'Committee if we can't discuss things?', and proving that I was right to think of him as both an idiot and a Conformist Totalitarian. Apparently that Oxford education your daddy paid for wasn't worth what you thought it was, Ed. (That one's for you, Mr Cork!) Anyone going to type out a message saying, "Great post Rich!!!!!!!!!"? Thought not. Ed, get back in your box. OK Richard. For starters Ed is not suggesting a Conformist Totalitarian state. He is merely pointing out that the Committee (A DEMOCRATICALLY VOTED-FOR group of people!) have the final say in the issue at hand. This is true. If you, or anyone else, wishes to have a say in the running of the League, wishes to influence decisions on matters of ruling etc, I am sure you can put your name forward at the AGM (A DEMOCRATIC GATHERING OF CONCERNED INDIVIDUALS!) and you can be voted in. I believe that is Democracy in action??  Secondly, Richard, no-one will say 'Great Post Richard' because it wasn't. Over to you for the expected vitriolic name-calling...  |
|
|
|
Post by Craig Benstock on Mar 18, 2007 14:08:42 GMT
"To master a sword you must also master when to use it"
Quote - Craig Benstock - 2007
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Wharton on Mar 18, 2007 14:18:53 GMT
can I suggest that as there is a possibility (certainty?) that the play-off could go to 6-6, that the committee (minus any Run or Moon representatives) decide in Tuesday's meeting how we should decide the outcome. Can I also suggest that everone goes along with the committee's decision and that no-one bothers to put any suggestions / complaints on here?
This is a direct quote from the other thread. Note the use of the word 'suggestions' in the last sentence. If we aren't 'bother'ing to put any suggestions to OUR DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED COMMITTEE, Mayes, it ceases to be democratic. Therefore, Ed is suggesting a totalitarian society where we all do as the committee says and don't have opinions that differ from theirs. I wish you had the mental capacity to deal with the fact that your twin brother was wrong and therefore, God Forbid, that makes me right. Read the posts again Mayes. You may yet find enlightenment, although I doubt it.
|
|
chronos
Won a few trophies
Posts: 124
|
Post by chronos on Mar 18, 2007 15:05:35 GMT
I wish you had the mental capacity to deal with the fact that your twin brother was wrong and therefore, God Forbid, that makes me right. Read the posts again Mayes. You may yet find enlightenment, although I doubt it. As expected... Seeing as you are absolutely determined to keep quoting that dictionary you appear to have found, perhaps you should lookup the meaning of the word 'Committee'. Then look up the meaning of the phrase 'Democratically elected body' and then research what one of those actually does. Oh, as a matter of interest, Eds qualfication is in Chemistry, not Political Comment, but saying that, I know who my money would be on in a debating contest between the 2 of you. pause for more name-calling...... |
|
ed
County Player
Posts: 452
|
Post by ed on Mar 18, 2007 15:27:20 GMT
hmmm ...
firstly, the only reason i suggested that we take the committee's decision on this is that otherwise we would get endless (very boring!) debate on this, and ultimately the committee would have to make a decision anyway. For example, we'd prefer a best of 3, the moon would probably prefer a best of one (Simon) etc etc. So I thought it best to avoid a load of s**t... Basically this forum has got very boring recently with people going on and on about the same thing again and again.
secondly, by defining totalitarianism, i was explaining to you what your long word meant. Don't see much in the way of secret police, state controlled media and mass surveillance in the CAPL! The committee is democratically elected and has been trusted by its electorate to be fair and impartial. So it is wholly democratic that it be left to decide on this matter. In fact by suggesting that the committe decide this, I was being pro-democratic and avoiding the who shouts loudest mentality so often seen on this forum. I fully expected them to decide on something that we (the Run) would not see as our preferred solution, but one that in the wider scheme of things would be fairer.
thirdly, my daddy didn't buy me my education, I worked my arse off for it.
How well educated would you say you are?
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig Benstock on Mar 18, 2007 15:59:41 GMT
"Apparently that Oxford education your daddy paid for wasn't worth what you thought it was, Ed. (That one's for you, Mr Cork!)"
Totally unnecessary & just plain rude.
|
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 16:41:12 GMT
the play off is on thursday about 8.30 after the mens doubles Since when? I put in a tender for the Match to be played at The Rathmore  No decisions are to be made on this match until the Committee meet to discuss the matter.  Either that or a decision was made before this meeting takes place. Or, no-one bothered to tell me! This only enhances Richards comments. Andy and I had a discussion on this. Here it is: Andy:As most people involved in making the decision on the date/venue for the playoff will be at the tour on Saturday, I'm going to suggest we all have a discussion and decide then rather than do it via phone or on here Ian has suggested Rathmore as a possible venue, but if that were the case then Wednesday would be the only viable night and I'm not sure all off the KSR players can make it then. Ian: Maybe we should find out? Andy: KSR have matches on Sunday, Monday Committee meeting on Tuesday (me and Martin) Ian: Meeting could happen before natch or after, or on another day! Andy: Simon/Sean playing in the Doubles final on Thursday at CSC Ian:I understand the Doubles Final might not take place. Even if it did, there is no reason not to play The play-off and Doubles at The Rathmore Andy:Friday is Friday and probably too late anyway. Ian:Agreed Andy:It seems like the most sensible solution would be Thursday at CSC after the doubles final (which we could maybe start at 7pm if the Uni guys are ok with that). Ian:
I feel that KSR would prefer to play at CSC as a possible biase/preference. So I hope your decisions are made with all factors being considered?
The committee must be seen to be fair.
Having finals night at CSC every time angers The Rathmore. Jim tells me that they used to hold it there with no problems. It is big enough after all.
It would be easy to play at CSC on Thursday. Of course it is. Because there are less re-shuffling issues. However that is not the job of a committee. Ask yourselves this: A Pool league is about Pubs and clubs competing, not about the abundance of teams playing from one venue (which is a danger). Having nearly all events at CSC is killing the foundation of this Pool league and annoying more than a few Landlords and this is grossly unfair. If it can be done elsewhere then I believe adjustments should be made and not to simply take the easy option. |
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 16:44:54 GMT
hmmm ... firstly, the onlywe'd prefer a best of 3, the moon would probably prefer a best of one (Simon) etc etc. So I thought it best to avoid a load of Simon does lose you know Also, how do you know he would prefer one frame? |
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 16:46:22 GMT
I know we live in the intellectual Capital of the world (eh Baz ;D) but can you put your dictionaries and encyclopedias down now? |
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 16:48:37 GMT
Oh, as a matter of interest, Eds qualfication is in Chemistry, not Political Comment, but saying that, I know who my money would be on in a debating contest between the 2 of you. They will be comparing D*ck sizes next ;D  |
|
ed
County Player
Posts: 452
|
Post by ed on Mar 18, 2007 16:54:56 GMT
I don't (he only lost one to you though!)
The point is I'd rather we just took the commitee's decision and got on with it rather than have a really tedious debate about it. I didn't want it to get to 6-6 on Thursday night and us then have an argument about what to do ... i.e. I didn't want to spoil Thursday night.
We've been banging on about the points system for weeks now, and some of the arguments have been repeated many times ... its boring!
|
|
chris
Should take up another sport!
Posts: 6
|
Post by chris on Mar 18, 2007 17:00:46 GMT
it hasn't been decided that why i said it has to be put to the committee on tuesday but i would like it held at csc because the mens doubles are held there and its easier for simon and sean to play there than travel around cambridge but as i said it's not settled and i didn't mention csc or the rathmore about where the playoff is being held only that it would be after the doubles on thursday and if you tendered for it where's my letter,as overall league sec i would have thought i should have got a letter and not posted on this forum
|
|
|
|
Post by orrible on Mar 18, 2007 18:37:33 GMT
I e-mailed it to Andy.
The doubles could be moved?
Why does CSC get nearly everything?
|
|
chris
Should take up another sport!
Posts: 6
|
Post by chris on Mar 18, 2007 18:44:29 GMT
just got it from andy i'll put it to the committee on tuesday and see wot they say
|
|
|
|
Post by stelmagic on Mar 18, 2007 23:58:21 GMT
I e-mailed it to Andy. The doubles could be moved? Why does CSC get nearly everything? Yeah I agree this is a good chance to give something to somewhere else could easily play a couple of finals at the rathmore. the Rathmore is easily big enough for the first finals night I was down csc for it last summer and there was probably only 30 people there for the pool, my only experience of saturday finals night is last summer and I think that many people would have been extremely tight at the Rathmore, they may have held them in the past but surely the league is bigger now? |
|
millerman
International Player
Ex League Chairman!
Posts: 692
|
Post by millerman on Mar 19, 2007 0:41:06 GMT
I e-mailed it to Andy. The doubles could be moved? Why does CSC get nearly everything? Ian, the reason that they get nearly everything is because they are the only venue that sponsors the League? Personally I would have no problem with playing the Play off down the Rathmore, but because it has to be played this week and and it has been agreed that the competitions be played on Thursday at CSC it could be very difficult to fit in. |
|
