I'm very sorry

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
I find being called a liar to be the most offensive accusation a person can throw at me. I have lied about nothing regarding these events. Had Mason's message stayed private and turned into a private conversation between paul and mason, it is likely that things would have turned out differently. You may disagree with my hypothesis, you may tell me I am ugly and incompetent, but you are very much out of line in calling me a liar.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seemed like this whole thing escalated. PP made his critcisms in a somewhat inappropriate way. Using language like "[censored] swinging contest", etc.

Mason's email was also undiplomatic and unconciliatory, demanding an apology first privately then publically, and making an implied threat that PP would be banned.

PP responds by posting the private email, engaging in some childish name calling, and calling people of Jewish background Nazis.

I have to agree with the other poster that no one looked good here, least of all Harrahs, which called a tournament leader board freeroll a tournament of champions, and is accused of reneging on its agreement with the participants in its circuit events. I guess that was what PP was originally discussing, although most of the post was on the moderation of this board.

[ QUOTE ]
I find being called a liar to be the most offensive accusation a person can throw at me. I have lied about nothing regarding these events. Had Mason's message stayed private and turned into a private conversation between paul and mason, it is likely that things would have turned out differently. You may disagree with my hypothesis, you may tell me I am ugly and incompetent, but you are very much out of line in calling me a liar.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one embarrassing back-pedal job. It betrays a sense of regret over sending such a juvenile and heavy-handed PM in the first place. If you were confident the content of the PM was fair and appropriate, you'd have no problem with its publication.

I've had plenty of heated debates via email in the context of my line of work, and I would not have a problem with the public airing of any of them -- unless I felt, in retrospect, that I had erred in any minor or massive fashion. I would prefer that such exchanges remain private, but a public airing isn't going to change the debate. When I make an argument that's intended to be read privately, I'm not going to be upset if it's dragged into the public unless I regret the argument I've made.

If you believe that his comparison merited action, at least that's more defensible. But it's not the same as walking into a business and audibly shouting that the owner is a Nazi. Rather, in this case, the comparison was made for effect in an environment that is, by its very nature, designed for the expression of opinion -- yep, even heated opinion.

If you think that Paul's comparison convinced your readers that you fall in line with the Third Reich, come off the ledge. We can deal with simile and even hyperbole. When you post a substantive explanation regarding what was wrong with Paul's ORIGINAL post, we can move forward. But stop selling the lame "privacy violation" invention. We're not buying.

[Xcalibur]

[ QUOTE ]

Actually, he will be missed. You're mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who will be missed?

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
This is one embarrassing back-pedal job. It betrays a sense of regret over sending such a juvenile and heavy-handed PM in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really.

For what it's worth (not much), I think Mat's posts in this thread have been very good.

If you want to dismiss my opinion because I'm a mod, that's fine. But truthfully my opinion wouldn't be any different if I was still a normal user.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is one embarrassing back-pedal job. It betrays a sense of regret over sending such a juvenile and heavy-handed PM in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really.

For what it's worth (not much), I think Mat's posts in this thread have been very good.

If you want to dismiss my opinion because I'm a mod, that's fine. But truthfully my opinion wouldn't be any different if I was still a normal user.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't dismiss your opinion because you're a mod. I don't know you, and so until it's proven otherwise, I give you enough credit to dissent where you find it appropriate.

But we are now so far afield from the original debate that it's hardly visible. The explanation for the action against Paul has proven to be one talented shapeshifter, incrementally altering the reason until we eventually believe that Paul was tossed due to an etiquette breach. "Keep firing off excuses, and something might stick!"

Sadly, the merit within Paul's "offending" post has rarely been discussed. Apparently that's just fine with 2+2.

http://fullcontactpoker.com/poker-fo...ic.php?t=36021

Daniel Negreanu's thoughts on this very subject (read down).

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find being called a liar to be the most offensive accusation a person can throw at me. I have lied about nothing regarding these events. Had Mason's message stayed private and turned into a private conversation between paul and mason, it is likely that things would have turned out differently. You may disagree with my hypothesis, you may tell me I am ugly and incompetent, but you are very much out of line in calling me a liar.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one embarrassing back-pedal job. It betrays a sense of regret over sending such a juvenile and heavy-handed PM in the first place. If you were confident the content of the PM was fair and appropriate, you'd have no problem with its publication.

I've had plenty of heated debates via email in the context of my line of work, and I would not have a problem with the public airing of any of them -- unless I felt, in retrospect, that I had erred in any minor or massive fashion. I would prefer that such exchanges remain private, but a public airing isn't going to change the debate. When I make an argument that's intended to be read privately, I'm not going to be upset if it's dragged into the public unless I regret the argument I've made.

If you believe that his comparison merited action, at least that's more defensible. But it's not the same as walking into a business and audibly shouting that the owner is a Nazi. Rather, in this case, the comparison was made for effect in an environment that is, by its very nature, designed for the expression of opinion -- yep, even heated opinion.

If you think that Paul's comparison convinced your readers that you fall in line with the Third Reich, come off the ledge. We can deal with simile and even hyperbole. When you post a substantive explanation regarding what was wrong with Paul's ORIGINAL post, we can move forward. But stop selling the lame "privacy violation" invention. We're not buying.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems like PP raised legitimate issues about the moderation of this forum. These are issues that a lot of people have. PP did not express these concerns diplomatically.

Now Mason's response seems to be to the fact that 2+2 administrators were being criticized and the somewhat nasty way they were being criticized rather than to the nature of the post, which is not particularly offensive to most readers. This leads to accusations of censorship, Nazism etc.

Now Dynasty and other moderators are trying to remedy problems on their forums. The way this is being done is creating controversy. It would be nice if these issues could be discussed in these forums in a civil way, although 2+2 has the legal right to supress any such discussion.

[DoomSlice]

Good. Paul Phillips is a big jerk anyway... even geniuses (not saying that he is one) need to learn how to play nicely.

[ QUOTE ]
2+2 has the legal right to supress any such discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Variations of this statement have come up several times in this thread, and they're superfluous. I'm reasonably certain that all readers are aware of a company's legal rights. The discussion here centers on what kind of conduct is appropriate, not what is subject to suppression.

[Smoothcall]

Hey El D how ya been? I have to disagree with you about Paul though. While i agree he probably could contribute some good poker stuff, he didnt anyway(at least in last year or so). He would rarely ever post. And when he did it was usually to insult or mock someone with one word or one sentence. He was only interested in settling scores.

He would have been great for the forum if he stuck to poker and acted like a gentleman. Just a shame he had to resort to childish and rude behavior.