Dark Knight Please Explain

Again, the key point here is that this was not a single incursion by the Newcastle guerrilla band, but part of a consistent pattern that began with the loan. The fact that someone responded to their assertion about the defense is neither here nor there with respect to the point I made. Another question--to what extent have YAs insisted on bogarding every Newcastle game commentary thread since Onyewu's arrival?

One sided criticism? You are so hell-bent on typifying The American Soccer Fan as a slap-happy buffoon that you're incapable of making a logical argument about anything remotely close to the subject. It's astonishing to me how somebody who is as capable of intelligence as you seem to be elsewhere derives any enjoyment whatsoever from the exercise. Even if you're right and we ARE all slap-happy buffoons, one would think you'd find the whole thing beneath your efforts.

[/quote] I presume those two don't have the critical mass of fanboys that the likes of Howard, Onyewu do. Yes, many posters were capable of a rational discussion of Howard; too bad so many weren't and reacted so poorly to any and all criticism of his abilities.[/QUOTE]
Beasley, at least, was at one time regarded by very many as the vanguard of US soccer because of his apparent success in Holland. And yes, it was too bad that the discussion of Howard at Man U was carried more by emotion that thought.

 

Jaypro - you don't seem interested in reading anything that I (or bungadiri more eloquently) have written on this topic, so I'm not sure what else new I can tell you that will change your mind from thinking we are unfair and biased. For instance, this has nothing to do with being an MLS apologist. I have no idea how you feel about MLS and Gooch never played in MLS. An extremely prolific poster who thought very little of MLS was never contacted by me for any reason, even though I strongly disagreed with his point of view.

Honestly - if you took a second to cool off and read what we've been saying, you might realize that this really isn't worth getting that worked up about. Perhaps your brief ban was too harsh if you weren't involved that much in some of the lead up to the latest thread, but I just wanted to get y'all's attention that it's time to let some of that stuff die out and to try to nip the YA vs. Newcastle feud in the bud. Read the latest Gooch thread - there is a Toon fan posting who is placing blame on the goal on Gooch and it's totally fine what he's saying - it's possible to disagree and not be disruptive/confrontational. He also acknowledges and seems respectful of the fact that there might be some sensitivity if folks feel like Gooch is being attacked there. (I'm not saying you attacked Gooch! Sigh.)

 

Can you be more specific about which problems and what you mean by one-sided? For example, I've asked YA regulars to stop engaging these debates with Newcastle fans - one of whom was warned of a possible forum ban if he didn't stop - and I asked a YA regular to stop posting in a Gooch thread because of this sort of thing. The YA poster I cautioned said - "OK".

 

Yeah - I might have worded that a little better, but Toon fans seemed to either get the point or not take me too literally as they are still posting in the thread and I'm not trying to stop them.

 

For starters, there's nothing particularly derogatory about "Newcastle guerrilla band" (as a matter of fact the guerrillas were the good guys during the Napoleonic wars, at least in my opinion). I think it's pretty apt in its suggestion of a small band making forays against a larger force. Secondly, if you want to convince anyone beyond yourself that I'm biased--not, incidentally, that doing so would constitute a rebuttal to the point you're avoiding so assiduously--you would need to find a pattern in my comments beyond this thread suggesting I have a general objection to Newcastle or even English posters. I'll save you the trouble--you won't find it.

Nonsense. It's not a non-sequitur at all. It follows directly from your charge that I'm merely exercising a bias. I'm astonished that you have so little self-awareness as to make such an accusation. The only time I ever encounter you outside of your persistent abode in the WR DPT--where you spend your time complaining about American posters--is when you're in a thread like this, complaining about American posters.

And what leads to problems in the YA forum is not the moderating. I think it's a particularly well moderated forum. The trouble comes from the nature of the forum itself, as it's situated on an intersection of different interest groups: YA posters (who are for reasons that grow directly from the history of soccer in the US interested first and foremost in YA) and posters from the clubs in which YA play (who are for perfectly understandable reasons interested first and foremost in the clubs themselves). In the vast majority of cases, common courtesy and club-specific forums prevent trouble from happening. This was an instance where both both barriers failed consistently enough to require an intervention.

 

I may very well need to get out more, but I come by my current perception of your posting honestly and not without some regret. And no, my responding to your charge of bias in me by saying, in a roundabout way "Biased? You wouldn't know bias if it bit you on your keister because it does so daily and you haven't noticed it yet" is not a non-sequitur.

I post in the YA forum frequently, because a) I'm interested in YA, b) I like in-game threads best and there are a lot of them there, and c) precisely because I found out early that as long as you mind your manners you're less likely to get the "you ain't from around here are you, son" [cue the squinty-eyed, shotgun cleaning hillbilly surrounded by snarling hound dogs] response than you are in other forums, especially the club-specific ones. In other words, my personal experience with YA is very nearly exactly the opposite of what you assert here.

And, to return to the beginning of this thread, the case of the Newcastle posters was not one of a well-intentioned group with a different perspective being run off; it's a case of a group who came to the forum and very quickly and persistently presented their own perspective as uniquely privileged and valid (also, check your pms). It's not surprising they were required to put a sock in it. As for the pattern of moderation, it's no different from any other forum (and it's not nearly as pronounced as you make it out to be). The ethos of the locals is protected most and it's up to newcomers to adjust.