Discussing Infractions

[Blocky]

If you were infracted for that Jimmy post then that is rough. I love Jimmy but he clearly would be the worst seamer to 500. Not exactly an insult.

That was the "Trolling/Baiting" infraction I received; as I pointed out in an email to James, it's not exactly a controversial opinion.

The ***ual Harassment one: Laura Guptill, I'll take that on the chin, I personally don't differentiate her from any other public personality and don't really consider it different to say the "Taylor Swift is a slut" mantra that you see on the internet but that's fine, that's not how the mods see it, I won't post about her.

The repetitive posting one; taken out of context if you see someone posting about events in a cricket match as they occur and you come back to them 12 hours later, it might look repetitive, but in that case, state that threads aren't for "live" reaction to the game. In this case I was talking about the English vs India test when the ball started shooting through the surface and caused three wickets in short order, apparently that's repetitive posting.

Moderators wouldn't have such a hard job if they actually followed their T&C, didn't play favoritism (imagine the response if I posted what ***** posts about me) and were consistent in how they infracted people.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

2. Making the comment "Mr Insulin" about Ross Taylor

i.e. racial-normative stereotyping

 

[Daemon]

Here we go again. The forum was pretty nice in the last week or so.

 

[Blocky]

i.e. racial-normative stereotyping

Things we know about Ross Taylor

1. Lazy approach to training
2. Eats a lot of KFC
3. Poor eyesight

Things we know about diabetes

1. Lazy approach to exercise
2. Eat a lot of fatty food.
3. Poor eyesight

!= Racism.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Things we know about Ross Taylor

1. Lazy approach to training
2. Eats a lot of KFC
3. Poor eyesight

Things we know about diabetes

1. Lazy approach to exercise
2. Eat a lot of fatty food.
3. Poor eyesight

!= Racism.

Rumour and innuendo with no evidence to support these character assassinations. I'm just glad you haven't mentioned again how hated he is in the NZ dressing room. And these rumours all seem to confirm to the worst stereotypes of Pacific Island communities.

I'll tell you something, Blocky, and it's NZ's shame that more Maori and Pacifica haven't played for New Zealand. There's views like yours endemic through NZ club cricket in my opinion - I've seen them. And it's a disgrace. It's even more disgraceful that you'd perpetuate such character assassination against one of the greatest NZ Pacifica sportsmen. Nearly as big a disgrace as it is that despite James' awareness of these issues, he still allows you to post your bile on here.

You're a ****, an irredeemable ****. Which is a shame, as unlike some here I enjoy reading your opinions on cricket itself, but the way you seem to think you have carte blanche to cast aspersions on individuals who are clearly superior to the rest of us - well it beggars belief.

**** off.

 

[Burgey]

Well then.

 

[Ausage]

The cricketing version of jungle ball. Maybe Blocky is short for Blocker.

 

[Blocky]

Rumour and innuendo with no evidence to support these character assassinations. I'm just glad you haven't mentioned again how hated he is in the NZ dressing room. And these rumours all seem to confirm to the worst stereotypes of Pacific Island communities.

I'll tell you something, Blocky, and it's NZ's shame that more Maori and Pacifica haven't played for New Zealand. There's views like yours endemic through NZ club cricket in my opinion - I've seen them. And it's a disgrace. It's even more disgraceful that you'd perpetuate such character assassination against one of the greatest NZ Pacifica sportsmen. Nearly as big a disgrace as it is that despite James' awareness of these issues, he still allows you to post your bile on here.

You're a ****, an irredeemable ****. Which is a shame, as unlike some here I enjoy reading your opinions on cricket itself, but the way you seem to think you have carte blanche to cast aspersions on individuals who are clearly superior to the rest of us - well it beggars belief.

**** off.

You mean like when Brendon McCullum's book stated how hated he was in the dressing room while being captain, and that it took many years for him to reintegrate into the team post 2014 ( when I made the statement that Taylor was the most disliked person in the dressing room ) - that you dislike what I write, I don't really care. The fact remains I'm more often right than I'm wrong and unlike you, where you're just posting vile crap because you don't like the things I write (regardless of them being true) - you write crap posts like this and then claim forum atmosphere is going to crap. You're the worst kind of human because ultimately you take no personal accountability or responsibility for the crap you do.

Racism != talking the truth. If you happen to have bad eyesight, eat a ton of KFC and don't train your body, I'll call you Mr Insulin too.

You're entirely far too sensitive, and also far too wrong about things to post in this way. I hope you get banned.

"I enjoy reading your opinions on cricket itself, but not when they go against my opinions or views" - typical.

 

[Athlai]

You mean like when Brendon McCullum's book stated how hated he was in the dressing room while being captain, and that it took many years for him to reintegrate into the team post 2014 ( when I made the statement that Taylor was the most disliked person in the dressing room ) - that you dislike what I write, I don't really care. The fact remains I'm more often right than I'm wrong and unlike you, where you're just posting vile crap because you don't like the things I write (regardless of them being true) - you write crap posts like this and then claim forum atmosphere is going to crap. You're the worst kind of human because ultimately you take no personal accountability or responsibility for the crap you do.

Racism != talking the truth. If you happen to have bad eyesight, eat a ton of KFC and don't train your body, I'll call you Mr Insulin too.

You're entirely far too sensitive, and also far too wrong about things to post in this way. I hope you get banned.

"I enjoy reading your opinions on cricket itself, but not when they go against my opinions or views" - typical.

How does that even remotely relate to Heef?

 

[Blocky]

This, case and point, is a typical interaction that ends up in me getting infracted.

Someone, in this case, HeathDavisSpeed takes issue when I make a statement such as "Ross Taylor is not a well liked person in the change sheds" - and somehow attempts to state racism is involved in that view, clings on to it for over two years to bring it up when another view of Taylor being lazy with his training and reckless with his intake is brought up to bring it up again, regardless of the fact that someone inside the dressing room wrote a tell all book that perfectly documented exactly what I said was happening during the time it happened.

I don't get emotional, so simply deadbat the response and point out the failings in the post, but I get the infraction because apparently, despite me taking endless crap from people like this without ever writing a "You're a **** because you have these opinions" post about them, people don't like that I'm happy to talk about the trash as well as the good.

I was the first to indicate Taylor played a blinding knock against Pakistan in the second test, and the first to admit he's one of the most naturally talented guys we have in the side. Just because I don't put these guys on a pedestal (partially because I know a lot of them) like you do, and am happy to talk about their bad points as well as their good shouldn't be an issue, especially when it's proven right.

 

[Blocky]

How does that even remotely relate to Heef?

He takes issue with the fact that two or so years ago, I said Taylor was one of the most hated players in the dressing room due to his behavior and that he had closed himself off from the team.

Two years later, the subsequent captain writes a tell all book that addresses exactly what I said was happening during that time, and instead of saying "OK, Maybe Blocky was actually justified in stating what he knew about the change sheds based on interactions with the players" - it's back to the "You're racist because you don't like Taylor"

I find that the absolute worst kind of posting, because ultimately it seeks to label a fair opinion that now has evidence/creedence backing it up as being a dislike of someone because of the color of their skin. That's just utter horse crap.

Newsflash, I've said worse about Guptill - do I hate gingers now?

 

[Athlai]

He takes issue with the fact that two or so years ago, I said Taylor was one of the most hated players in the dressing room due to his behavior and that he had closed himself off from the team.

Two years later, the subsequent captain writes a tell all book that addresses exactly what I said was happening during that time, and instead of saying "OK, Maybe Blocky was actually justified in stating what he knew about the change sheds based on interactions with the players" - it's back to the "You're racist because you don't like Taylor"

I find that the absolute worst kind of posting, because ultimately it seeks to label a fair opinion that now has evidence/creedence backing it up as being a dislike of someone because of the color of their skin. That's just utter horse crap.

Newsflash, I've said worse about Guptill - do I hate gingers now?

But how would that have anything to do with his personal accountability or responsibility for the "crap" he does?

 

[Jord]

Simple. He talks about irredeemable posting, while posting irredeemably

 

[NZTailender]

It's just extraordinary.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It's just extraordinary.

Yeah definitely ex-jord-inary

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

This, case and point, is a typical interaction that ends up in me getting infracted.

Someone, in this case, HeathDavisSpeed takes issue when I make a statement such as "Ross Taylor is not a well liked person in the change sheds" - and somehow attempts to state racism is involved in that view, clings on to it for over two years to bring it up when another view of Taylor being lazy with his training and reckless with his intake is brought up to bring it up again, regardless of the fact that someone inside the dressing room wrote a tell all book that perfectly documented exactly what I said was happening during the time it happened.

I don't get emotional, so simply deadbat the response and point out the failings in the post, but I get the infraction because apparently, despite me taking endless crap from people like this without ever writing a "You're a **** because you have these opinions" post about them, people don't like that I'm happy to talk about the trash as well as the good.

I was the first to indicate Taylor played a blinding knock against Pakistan in the second test, and the first to admit he's one of the most naturally talented guys we have in the side. Just because I don't put these guys on a pedestal (partially because I know a lot of them) like you do, and am happy to talk about their bad points as well as their good shouldn't be an issue, especially when it's proven right.

You brought up Taylor being disliked in the Pakistan series thread. I don't actually remember you mentioning this from two years ago.

The racism bit has nothing to do with that either. You have no evidence he has diabetes, you have no evidence he eats enough KFC to make that a reasonable assessment. The idea of scoffing KFC to the extent that you get diabetes is the one of the most common and base racial stereotypes of pacific island communities. I've seen people being abused with just these sort of crass statements. How do you not get that?

Quite frankly, if you're going to be posting here - I'd rather be banned.

EDIT: And I don't take McCullum's biography as being a disinterested point of view. He certainly has a great deal of self-interest in making it look as if he was doing everyone a favour by forcing out Taylor.

 

[honestbharani]

That was the "Trolling/Baiting" infraction I received; as I pointed out in an email to James, it's not exactly a controversial opinion.

The ***ual Harassment one: Laura Guptill, I'll take that on the chin, I personally don't differentiate her from any other public personality and don't really consider it different to say the "Taylor Swift is a slut" mantra that you see on the internet but that's fine, that's not how the mods see it, I won't post about her.

The repetitive posting one; taken out of context if you see someone posting about events in a cricket match as they occur and you come back to them 12 hours later, it might look repetitive, but in that case, state that threads aren't for "live" reaction to the game. In this case I was talking about the English vs India test when the ball started shooting through the surface and caused three wickets in short order, apparently that's repetitive posting.

Moderators wouldn't have such a hard job if they actually followed their T&C, didn't play favoritism (imagine the response if I posted what ***** posts about me) and were consistent in how they infracted people.

Given the bolded part never happened and you were posting absolute drivel repeatedly, it was very much warranted. Anyone who read the thread could see it.

 

[OverratedSanity]

yay more pitch talk

 

[Athlai]

Yeah definitely ex-jord-inary

Yay Tabletop.

 

[Blocky]

But how would that have anything to do with his personal accountability or responsibility for the "crap" he does?

If I don't like someone or don't like what they're posting - i.e a bunch of people - I put them on ignore and stop bothering to deal with them. I certainly don't enter threads they're in and recriminate an argument that carries back over two years, saying things like "If you continue to post here, I'd rather be banned".

You brought up Taylor being disliked in the Pakistan series thread. I don't actually remember you mentioning this from two years ago.

The racism bit has nothing to do with that either. You have no evidence he has diabetes, you have no evidence he eats enough KFC to make that a reasonable assessment. The idea of scoffing KFC to the extent that you get diabetes is the one of the most common and base racial stereotypes of pacific island communities. I've seen people being abused with just these sort of crass statements. How do you not get that?

Quite frankly, if you're going to be posting here - I'd rather be banned.

EDIT: And I don't take McCullum's biography as being a disinterested point of view. He certainly has a great deal of self-interest in making it look as if he was doing everyone a favour by forcing out Taylor.

Oh I see; we're disregarding everything McCullum has to say despite obvious evidence backing what he (and I) said about Taylor.

It's pretty simple, I'm a Mike Hoskings/Paul Henry style of person who isn't interested in the way you feel about what I say, as long as what I say has merit. You're the liberal left who doesn't like someone having freedom of speech and their own opinion, so you label it racist.

I'll just label you ignored instead. That's the only sane remedy to this.