RJ_Bell said:
RJ - I respect your efforts to alleviate a situation, but I have a couple of concerns and questions I hope you will address.
First, you talk about showing respect and that is fine. In fact it's commendable. However, I wonder how you define respect? If you look at the questions put forth to Hizz regarding his record, then look at the attacks and profanity spewed by Hizz and his cheerleaders at those who dared to ask such questions, which side would a reasonable person conclude isn't showing respect?
Next, transparency. Again, I'll ask for your definition. I mean, you say 100% transparent - nothing being hidden. Does that jive with presenting an inaccurate record of picks? And I'm not talking just missing a game or two, according to duke4's efforts, it's a clear pattern. Have you tracked Hizz's picks yourself or has some administrator done that? Has someone at least communicated with duke4 to assess his calculation? If not, then how can you claim 100% transparency?
You say a handful are not fine with the way Hizz presents his record. That may be so in terms of number of posts, but I'll bet that there are many who see it as disingenuous but don't post anything for fear of backlash by Hizz and his cheerleaders, and now perhaps you and pregame itself. Have you taken that into consideration?
I'm quite sure I'll be put down and attacked by most posters here for taking this stand, and perhaps you'll ban me or something for doing so, but I don't mind being the scapegoat. Someone's got to do it. In fact, this will be an interesting test for the new respect thing. Let's see some of the responses to this.
I understand Hizz has been here forever and has a huge following. Kudos to him for that. But, I would submit that along with that, and his designation of Director of the Boards, that there should be a higher standard, not a lower one. Usually, that's how it works. The way I read your post, RJ, you are saying that Hizz is hands-off, no one is allowed to upset him, he can do what ever he wants, post any record he wants, and lash back at anyone he doesn't agree with. Am I wrong?
Listen, in the end I understand this isn't really a big deal, I'm glad Hizz will return and I'm glad his supporters are happy. I was just hoping that the ability to to question and disagree with someone in a reasonable manner truly existing in this forum. On both sides. Doesn't criticism make you better? Won't that help each of us win?
Thank you.
One of many thoughtful replies in this thread.
First, the simple element of your question ... once initial disrespect is allowed, then a response that's disrespectful seems justified ... and on goes the domino effect ...
Not allow any disrespect solves that problem.
#2
Consider the following types of judgements ...
Objectively Right
Objectively Wrong
Subjective Agreement
Subjective Disagreement
The first two are a matter of fact. 2 + 2 = 4. 6 wins and 4 losses = 60% winners.
If HIZZ or anyone is objectively wrong, then pointing that out, and the corrector being made is beyond debate. No reasonable person disagrees with that.
Next, when there's subjective agreement, there's no problem. For example, if two people think Pats are the best NFL team currently.
If a third person disagrees about the Pats, he has a right to express that disagreement respectfully. And those who disagree have every right to go back and forth as much as each side would like. But once a side is done with that ... we are at the "agree to disagree" stage. At that point, it would not be OK for the Pats skeptic to post in every thread of a Pat's Believer that "Pats are not the best team." Nothing is being added - rather in this case the Pats skeptic is not able to accept that someone disagrees with him.
Now with HIZZ ... the disagreements are subjective ... I.E., what is the best way to track and convey a record. I don't care if it's 90% in favor of Hizz's way, or 10% in favor of his way ... no matter, it's still a subjective disagreement. So you can have your say once, and Hizz gets to consider it to whatever degree he chooses. Anything after that is an inability to accept that someone doesn't agree with you - and that's not ok. Some may feel their subjective opinion is so clearly correct that they have to protect others from thinking otherwise ... and clearly that is not anybody's job - not even mine.
HIZZ's approach is fine because there is no objective incorrectness (on the rare occasions that there is, it is quickly corrected). Otherwise, all of the information is available for each forum reader to make his or her assessment (the games are all there, and so is the record, and so is the juice approach - that's everything). There may be many people who would follow Hizz more if he kept records a different way - or maybe not. Either way, that is Hizz's decision to make - and it's every reader's decision to decide how to react to it.
Some may wonder if it would be better to make the pick posting standard more objective ... requiring a certain record keeping approach, or even requiring use of the automated pick tracking. The increased objectiveness would be an upside ... but IMO the downside would be bigger - and that downside is that we want community participation from as many people as possible ... not just those who want to spend significant time engaging with the forum. Somebody who spends 5 mins a week during FB season posting the games he bet -- with no record keeping at all -- is providing some value. That value is likely less than the guy who spends 5 hours a day contributing ... but if you add up enough 5 minute contributors, the value provide is substantial. And there is NO REASON to not accept that value ... because each reader votes with his clicks ... allowing the posters to see what works and what does ... and those posters who care are guided in the popular direction.
What's obvious is how popular Hizz's approach. Might it be more popular if he took some of his critic's advice? Maybe - I have no idea. But what I know for sure is that should be his decision. And I also know for sure that Pregame is much better off for having Hizz.
[/quote]
RJ - Thank you for responding.
I do disagree with some of your rationale regarding objectivity and subjectivity, but that's fine. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.
I like the fact that you are willing to give freedom to posters in regards to what they post and how they track records, etc. I never suggested Hizz or anyone else should be required use Pregame's or any other tracking service. However, I do maintain that if you do take the risk of posting an unsubstantiated record, you need to be prepared to defend it, if questioned in a reasonable manner.
I still get the sense that you are giving Hizz a pass on this and that questioning his record is off limits. The problem with this is, are you going to defend every other forum poster who does the same with regard to record keeping? Probably not.
If you'll indulge me, I feel that Hizz's threads are now a designated a "safe space" where no opposing views are allowed. Maybe this is what Hizz wants (maybe not), but that doesn't sound very interesting to me. I wouldn't want that in my threads.
Now, I understand Hizz is a special situation and deserves some latitude for his years of contribution, but where do you draw the line?
As much as I'm disappointed at Hizz and his followers for their attacks and name calling for questioning his record, I see that he has been enabled all these years. Why wouldn't he feel invincible and unquestionable?
Actually, I would welcome the opportunity to engage in a passionate football debate with a guy like Hizz, who has been handicapping for so many years and obviously has developed such a loyal following. I'm sure many others would, too. I believe it would be much more appealing to read than this bickering over record keeping. But, there has to be a balance, and shutting down opposing views is not going to get us there.
Thanks again.