Work together or implode ..

[Willow]

Thanks for the clandestine (and now open) mention of me in relation to this issue W.... Don't fret, I won't be bothered to give you a war and peace personal response (in public or private).

lol. C'mon bart, people can't sneeze without you taking offence.

Look mate, everything I said I have already said to you up front. I could have edited out the 'war and peace' thing but that wouldn't be right and the funny side of it would have been lost. Besides that, it is common knowledge and you already know it.

In any case, I stand by my belief that your actions were out of line. I doubt any captain would stand by while another captain or referee was denigrating a team mate over something so petty. Unfortunately it was not the first time you have shot from the hip and put down another player. I requested in the past that you refrain from this - imo it is not a good look - and the first time you were happy to see the matter dropped. But you gave a repeat performance, you made excuses, and it looks like you'll do it again.

But bart, despite what you think, it is not about you. There was a bigger ongoing issue that was damaging the F7s, apparently since 2009.

Titanic, my apologies for any angst this may have caused you - that was not the intention. Unfortunately this issue had to be forced at some point if only to bring an end to it and any further suspicions. As I mentioned to you, I am surprised by the revelations and how much it blew up. Thank you for your candor by finally coming forward, and here's hoping the silliness has stopped now.

 

[madunit]

I for one am shocked and apalled that there could be so much controversy in the F7's and not one Panthers players involved.

Mick I think you need to get us fired up again, we've become *gulp* well behaved.

 

[Big Mick]

Maybe seeing as its my birthday today i'm feeling old and non-conflictive. haha.

 

[Willow]

Happy birthday Mick.

Are you going to muck up?

 

[Titanic]

Maybe seeing as its my birthday today i'm feeling old and non-conflictive. haha.

It was my wife's yesterday, should I read something into that?

Happy Birthday Mick.

Thank you for your candor by finally coming forward, and here's hoping the silliness has stopped now.

I happily accept your apology but I don't understand this comment and I don't want to debate it either as I feel have always been forward and happy to give my opinion publicly or by pm on request, popular or not. I also have a team that I represent who have their opinions.

It's funny though, in the context of this debate, that the author of this "event" hasn't been brought to task ... well deflected I'd say.

 

[Amadean]

lol. C'mon bart, people can't sneeze without you taking offence.

Look mate, everything I said I have already said to you up front. I could have edited out the 'war and peace' thing but that wouldn't be right and the funny side of it would have been lost. Besides that, it is common knowledge and you already know it.

In any case, I stand by my belief that your actions were out of line. I doubt any captain would stand by while another captain or referee was denigrating a team mate over something so petty. Unfortunately it was not the first time you have shot from the hip and put down another player. I requested in the past that you refrain from this - imo it is not a good look - and the first time you were happy to see the matter dropped. But you gave a repeat performance, you made excuses, and it looks like you'll do it again.

But bart, despite what you think, it is not about you. There was a bigger ongoing issue that was damaging the F7s, apparently since 2009.

Titanic, my apologies for any angst this may have caused you - that was not the intention. Unfortunately this issue had to be forced at some point if only to bring an end to it and any further suspicions. As I mentioned to you, I am surprised by the revelations and how much it blew up. Thank you for your candor by finally coming forward, and here's hoping the silliness has stopped now.

Congratulations Willow, in one fell swoop I think you just proved every single accusation thrown against you.

Your post was condescending, arrogant, self-righteous and rude.

"despite what you may think, it is not about you" is a ridiculously childish way to address the reasonable questions of a long-serving captain.

"here's hoping the silliness has stopped now" is a ridiculously condescending way of addressing an issue apparently so serious even madunit is trying to calm things down.

"lol... people can't sneeze without you taking offence" is a ridiculously duplicitous way of addressing the response of someone who found themselves unexpectedly attacked in a thread.




You are quite right in noting the bigger, ongoing issue that has been damaging our cherished F7s for several years. You made an excellent start to addressing this issue by passing on large roles to Jessbass and NT. You should continue this excellent progression by ignoring the impulse to put other players, captains and teams down.

 

[Jesbass]

6. I raised with my Team Captain, Dubopov, the issue of articles being marked out of 100. This is because it is so much easier for the marker to add on 1-2 marks for each article of one team, take away 1-2 marks for each article of the other, and you have a 10-20 point difference overall without anyone being the wiser. I do not suggest that this is in fact happening, but the potential for it to happen remains wide open with a scoring system which marks out of 100 and allows for so much marker subjectivity (which apparently is not allowed to be called into question, ever).

Hey DRAGONZ_RULE, I didn't mean to overlook this part of your comment earlier, so I'll respond to it now.

Marks are absolutely allowed to be called into question. I can't comment on how it has previously been done as I can't recall ever actually questioning a mark, but I've mentioned in at least one other thread that I feel a player should be able to seek further clarification on their own mark.

The basic foundation I laid down was:
- Be respectful.
- Go via your captain.
- Have said captain approach the referee and referees boss simulataneously. (And maybe the F7s Boss, but I'm not convinced on a need for their involvement.)
- Query your own mark in an open-minded nature to learn how to score better in the future.
- Take on board the constructive criticism that you receive.

It's all common sense, I know, but common sense doesn't always come to the fore when we feel aggrieved, as was evidenced recently.

On a side note, thanks for your respectful post. Your mature sense of decorum is greatly appreciated.

ADDENDUM: Perhaps it would be better to communicate your own mark directly, but CC your captain? That way, it isn't all up to your captain to pass the message on, and it helps to prevent percevied breakdowns in communication. (Thoughts, anyone?)

 

[madunit]

I think there needs to be a genuinely obvious transgression with the marks, otherwise you'll end up with everyone whinging that their mark is crap.

 

[Jesbass]

Wow, what a thread.

Coby, not sure if it's been picked up yet - the link from the sidebar in the forums to F7s Central since the upgrade needs a dot au on the end as well (404 not found).


Thanks for the clandestine (and now open) mention of me in relation to this issue W.... Don't fret, I won't be bothered to give you a war and peace personal response (in public or private).

However in the context of this thread/discussion I'd like to state that (imo) one F7s player not able to welcome new thought in the form of a discussion about the concept of an F7s marking framework for the future, shouldn't result in any F7s captain seemingly charting a course of action to openly fracture the F7s on that player's behalf. No one wanted or wants anyone gone from F7s - that's just inflammatory stuff, throwing the toys out of the playpen.

Jes, for what it's I think you're doing a great job with the F7s and I support your method of refereeing and cannot see how bias (rather than humanity) was involved? For those who have an issue with one recent match result, it's natural to blow off steam in the moment - but then in F7s we all tend to get told by those around us to pull our heads in, and then take any grumbles or unconstructive stuff back behind closed doors (team locker rooms or PMs) - that has been the F7s way.

Last I checked the Member Guidelines state posting another person's PMs on the open forum without permission is not allowed? It's a simple matter of integrity and I expected better from those concerned than to need to settle anything through the open F7s forum/threads in the current playpen manner. Talk about implosion...

Jes, good luck with pulling this all back together. But until the club-based paranoia that leads to attitudes/statements such as "If Mort comes back, then you'll be off the hook" is cast out from F7s, then I think you'll have a big job on your hands.... Not a great loss I know, but since there seems such resistance to new thought in improving F7s over summer (and now culminating in this debacle), I resign as a non-playing referee, and wish everyone positively involved in F7s the best of luck in whatever its future holds. It has been a great competition to be involved in over the years.

I think they'll come right, mate. Truth be told, I hope this cathartic release can help to set the record straight, allow people to let sleeping dogs lie, hopefully provide improvement to the competition via rule changes or process changes if necessary, and move forward bigger and better than before.

I'm an optimist, so this is natural for me, but as messy as this is, I can see benefits for the competition in the longer term.

Thanks for your support, by the way. I hope you'll stick around to see the F7s emerge from these present doldrums. :thumn

 

[Jesbass]

I think there needs to be a genuinely obvious transgression with the marks, otherwise you'll end up with everyone whinging that their mark is crap.

Sorry, unit - I'm not quite sure that I understand your suggestion. Can you elaborate?

Incidentally, I think there will always be players who get marks that aren't what they think they deserve. No matter how stringent a marking system, that will always happen to some degree.

 

[Jesbass]

Holy crap.

I just read through this thread.

I haven't seen this many people having periods since the lesbian convention.

Think everyone should just take a few days away from this thread and chill out a little bit. Emotions always run high in F7's...god knows they have for me on occassions, but the easiest way to settle is at a point just stop, take a step back...and just move on to do what is best for this game...have fun writing articles with great guys in your team.

Yes and no.

Yes, people need to step back, take a breather, and work for what's best for the competition as a whole.

But if there is room for the competition to improve, I see no harm in discussing it (as we have been for several weeks).

Accusations of bias and favouritism aside, I think the clarification of marks would be assisted if we were to adopt some sort of marking guideline as opposed to the very loose structure that we're currently incorporating.

P.S. Happy birthday, mate. Have a good'un! :thumn

 

[Jesbass]

Wow, now that was a read and a half! I am not an incredibly active member on the forums; I don't comment a lot on anything, preferring rather to read rather than get involved in bickering, but I have been a part of the F7's comp for 9 years now (except for one year when my life decided to go topsy-turvy on me). The reason that I've been involved for so long is quite simple, this comp combines two of my favourite things in the world; footy and writing - a match made in heaven.

Now, I have nothing but respect for the people behind the scenes (although the curtain's been drawn back now!) who make this comp possible. However, from a personal point of view, I can't tell you how shattered I was to look in the game thread this morning and find that I was the ONLY Souths player to post an article. Sure, it was a quickly, roughly put together piece done in my spare time (ha), but I made the effort. So, perhaps you can understand how disappointed I was to read through this thread and hear all the in-fighting and crap that's been going on and to find that the South's captain was in here yesterday talking about how it's no longer fun to write articles, at the same time I was busting a boiler trying to get something, anything in, to find that I'm the only one who bothered!!!!

As for the debate, to be honest, there has only been one article of mine that I really felt I didn't get the mark I deserved, but I can live with that. It is true that every time I read an article where there is some heart-wrenching stuff in it, I immediately mark it in my mind as the winner, as this is how it seems to go a lot. I have only written one such article, back in 2006 and only because it truly was the story in me at the time. While I know the sob stories will often do it, that's not my style (I prefer humour - in life as well) and I continue to stick by my writing abilities rather than try and manufacture something for the mark.

Bottom line; you're never going to please everyone all the time, but from someone who has been in a team that is struggling to produce every week (for the last couple of years), this bickering between the powerhouse team's is just so counter-productive; I don't know how you do, but ffs put egos aside please; sh*t could be worse, you could put in every game only to find you're the only one on the field to take on the other team :crazy:!!

Agreed, Bubbles. I think this is the bigger issue, although solving one may well go some way to solving the other.

 

[DRAGONZ_RULE]

Sorry, unit - I'm not quite sure that I understand your suggestion. Can you elaborate?

Incidentally, I think there will always be players who get marks that aren't what they think they deserve. No matter how stringent a marking system, that will always happen to some degree.

I think what madunit is saying is that he feels the disparity between the mark given and the mark the writer thinks he/she deserved (and arguably what other observers felt the piece deserved) should be substantial.

For example, the writer feels he/she deserves 90+, the neutral observer feels the article deserves 90+, and the referee gives the piece a mark of 80.

 

[Jesbass]

I think what madunit is saying is that he feels the disparity between the mark given and the mark the writer thinks he/she deserved (and arguably what other observers felt the piece deserved) should be substantial.

For example, the writer feels he/she deserves 90+, the neutral observer feels the article deserves 90+, and the referee gives the piece a mark of 80.

And fair enough too, but it's difficult without a marking framework. It's all very subjective under the current system, so it's difficult to quantify, but with a marking guideline, one could say in which areas the article was weakest.

That's why I thought Titanic's original matrix was a good idea. Some said it was university level. (Perhaps it was - I never went to university - but it looked 4th Form (Year 10) level to me.) It was too wordy in its original form, though.

 

[Willow]

Congratulations Willow, in one fell swoop I think you just proved every single accusation thrown against you.

Your post was condescending, arrogant, self-righteous and rude.

Quite an outburst - You obviously think you know me and have a personal insight into the thoughts of others.

And just when we were burying the hatchet too.

Indeed, I had no idea that someone as humble as yourself also has such a low opinion of me.

You'll excuse me if I don't respond in kind.

 

[madunit]

Sorry, unit - I'm not quite sure that I understand your suggestion. Can you elaborate?

Incidentally, I think there will always be players who get marks that aren't what they think they deserve. No matter how stringent a marking system, that will always happen to some degree.

Well I think if people are given an avenue to complain that their mark is wrong etc, then it will be exploited as mucha s possible.

As far as refs marks are concerned, All players need to realise that their articles, like all forms of art, subject to personal interpretation.

What Person A thinks is brilliant, Person B may thing is average.

After god knows how many articles I've writted, I've had scores ranging from 78 to 95. Some of the articles I personally believe are my best ever score mid 80's.

Some of my lesser articles, in my opinion have scored in the 90's

And I'm sure EVERYONE has instances of this.

Welcome to the world of art people. Interpretation varies from person to person.

I have had my grievances about marks before, but never question it.

If players can be allowed to question refs marks, I think this would be detrimental to the game as it could see refs scores not being taken seriously and open to criticism.

Could lead to refs leaving, and ALL the fun being completely removed from the game.

To those whinging about scores, sh*t happens.

Just remember what prize you are playing for people.....

 

[Bubbles]

I like what you say madunit. I too have had articles that I thought would score higher given a mark in the mid-80s and vice versa, as you say. I have also had times when I've been disappointed and did not agree with a ref's comments, however I also accept that the very nature of creativity, any art form, is one of subjectivity and I take it on the chin and move on.
I remember back in 2006 (I think) when Jesbass first entered the F7s. He sent me a PM out of the blue to tell me how much he enjoyed one of my articles. I was so chuffed that someone thought enough about it to let me know and we then went on with a friendly rivalry as we went point for point in the Player of the Year comp (I believe we went two, three that year(?). The reason I'm reminiscing is that this to me is what the F7s has been about; enjoyment in writing about a sport, which is probably one of the only things we all have in common and hearing other's stories and opinions. There was comradarie, friendly rivalry, encouragement, healthy competitiveness and most importantly, it was fun.
I don't know the full background of what's gone on, however I think some people seem to be taking it all a bit too seriously and have strayed from the essence of this competition. For what it's worth, I don't believe that we should be trying to find a formula for marking, nor do I think the ref's should be opened up to have to answer to all and sundry. I think everybody needs to take a step back, work out why they're involved in this comp and cop to the fact that any art form (as madunit said) is subjective and cop it on the chin!

 

[Willow]

unit, I always thought you were an artist.

Good post btw. :thumn

Personally, I've never once thought I deserved a better mark for writing. If I got a good score, it was a bonus. Heck, if I got any score it was a bonus.

Of course we all want to win, but it is primarily about writing and reading and rugby league.

I think people sometimes overstate the clangers, like they are commonplace. But the truth is that refs get it right more than they get it wrong. Sometimes they seem to miss the mark a bit but that's life.

At the end of the day, no system is perfect and no adjustment is going to change a ref's interpretation.

The push to have a marking criteria will lose its way if the motivation is for some players to achieve better scores. Who can decide what is 'better'? Each to their own view of course but if I think any such motivation is missing the point of the F7s.

I have consistently held the view that any introduction of a marking criteria should be minimal, simple and act as a guideline to help refs and players. And the ref's word is still final.

Could lead to refs leaving

If we're looking for a single problem, it is the lack of referee depth. The more non-playing refs we have, the better off we'll all be. Unfortunately it is hard to get refs to step up if they see other refs copping flak over a match result, and in some cases grudges being held for months/years afterwards.

I like what you say madunit. I too have had articles that I thought would score higher given a mark in the mid-80s and vice versa, as you say. I have also had times when I've been disappointed and did not agree with a ref's comments, however I also accept that the very nature of creativity, any art form, is one of subjectivity and I take it on the chin and move on.
I remember back in 2006 (I think) when Jesbass first entered the F7s. He sent me a PM out of the blue to tell me how much he enjoyed one of my articles. I was so chuffed that someone thought enough about it to let me know and we then went on with a friendly rivalry as we went point for point in the Player of the Year comp (I believe we went two, three that year(?). The reason I'm reminiscing is that this to me is what the F7s has been about; enjoyment in writing about a sport, which is probably one of the only things we all have in common and hearing other's stories and opinions. There was comradarie, friendly rivalry, encouragement, healthy competitiveness and most importantly, it was fun.
I don't know the full background of what's gone on, however I think some people seem to be taking it all a bit too seriously and have strayed from the essence of this competition. For what it's worth, I don't believe that we should be trying to find a formula for marking, nor do I think the ref's should be opened up to have to answer to all and sundry. I think everybody needs to take a step back, work out why they're involved in this comp and cop to the fact that any art form (as madunit said) is subjective and cop it on the chin!

Spot on.

 

[madunit]

unit, I always thought you were an artist.

was it one of the bullsh*t variety :lol:

I'd like to state that I'm not into taking sides here.

At the end of the day, I have respect for all F7's writers, bar one, and I believe every one of us is unique in our style from everyone else, which makes this comp so magnificent.

Furthermore, we aren't playing for gold rings, millions of dollars, gold bullion or Willow's 4 storey mansion that he rents out to rich Japanese businessmen on an hourly rate.

We're playing for banners containing pretty colours and letters.

I don't want to take anything away from the title, It's something I definitely aspire to achieve, always have and always will, but things have to be in perspective.

This may all sound very odd to a lot of F7's players who have witnessed my behaviour over the years, but after all the whinging and complaining and hissy fits, I realised it was writing the articles which had always given me the pleasure, not the score.

To those who think we should allow articles covering all sports, I ask you to explain how players like Titanic have been able to write over 40 consecutive club articles, all of exceptional high quality, not to mention the rep games between all that?

The fact that Jesbass and myself have also written around the same consecutive articles, and someone like Willow has over 100 articles to his name, says to me that having the articles Rugby League related isn't at all restrictive.

It's a game guys, a fun little writing gig that we play, with friends, for a laugh, an insight, a trip down memory lane, a tear, but most of all, to bask in the glory of the amazing ability we all have to reveal a part of ourselves through words over the internet.

And we do it all for an internet forum picture.

And if we get that picture, we display with it pride.

Now if you don't mind, I've gotta go and do something violent before Willow changes my username to Hippyunit or some gay f**king bullsh*t.

Now, where's my scissors and the cat?

 

[Big Mick]

Happy birthday Mick.

Are you going to muck up?

Thanks.

Nah...just amazed at this thread.