Quote Mrs Barista="Mrs Barista"Are you saying Agar was a positive force for good at "our" club?'"
If you look at my post I explicitly didn’t express any opinion, positive or negative. I simply quoted verbatim from the HDM. People can make up their own minds.
What you unwittingly did by jumping in with your “negative” comment was display your cognitive bias. You decided that my post was negative based on your own subjective view of the world.
How do you know that I don’t think that Agar was a good coach held back by bad management of the club (I’m not saying that’s my view but unless you can read my mind you wouldn’t know that). You just elected yourself judge of what’s “positive” or “negative” and came out all guns blazing.
I’m sure you don’t consciously mean it (and you’re by no means the only person on these boards who does it) but some of the intolerance on these boards verges on outright bullying.
The comment about “first post in a week” is another example. Where does it say in the AUP that there’s a minimum posting frequency? I have a highly demanding job that requires me to travel all over the USA, Europe and the Middle East, as well as having a wife and four young children. This means that posting on these boards is hardly a priority for me, but I’ll damn well defend my right to do so when I want to.
There is a debate necessary about how people treat each other on these boards. As long as posts don’t contravene the AUP no-one should be derided for posting their point of view. I often disagree with lots of different people on here, but if I do I post constructive counter arguments, not simply abuse and derision. A sense of balance is required.
The constant peer pressure to conform to what’s subjectively deemed as “positive” is unhealthy and will only lead to a self-reinforcing clique that renders any semblance of debate meaningless.