We'll Never Forget #1 - Rejected because it supports an agenda ?

[+briansnat]

I will not try and step on any toes here, but I do have a few things to say. First off, the statement, "reviewers are only human" is such a "cop out". Saying there is no "black and white" is also a cop out. Leaving the interpretation of the rules and guidelines open to each reviewer would be like Baseball Umpires, Football Referee's and other's in charge of enforcing sports rules allowed to enforce the rules as they see fit. The rules become meaningless as there is no uniform enforcement. Like I tell my children who are starting to drive, 35 miles per hour means 35 MILES PER HOUR, whether you are 16 or 106. BLACK AND WHITE. One police officer can't allow 45 and another 55, etc.... The only "gray" area is that, by law, I believe they can't ticket within 3 mph either way due to speedometer variance's.

 

You are referring to rules and laws, rather than guidelines. Rules and laws are usually meant to be rigid, while guidelines are meant to have some fluidity.

 

Even though, how many police officers stop and ticket people for going 3, 5 and even 10 MPH over the speed limit? On highways posted at 65 MPH I routinely pass state troopers while going 70, or 75 and don't merit a second glance.

 

And in sports there is even more subjectivity, despite clear rules. I see conferences between teams of referees on the football field and umpires on the baseball field to discuss interpertations of the rules. In soccer there are clear fouls, but also an "advantage clause" meaning that if in the judgement of the referee calling a foul would negate an offensive advantage of the team that was fouled, the foul won't be called. The referee is given leeway, the same way the reviewers are given some leeway within the guidelines.

[+cachew nut]

Go back and real all of the posts.

 

Past the post where Hydee approved the series? What would be the point?

 

El Diablo

 

uh, to unconfuse you?

Sheesh, let's recap.

You said:

I'm confused. With out going back and reading all the posts,

 

then you said:

I'm even more confused.

 

and then:

Someone please enlighten me here.

 

It seems only you are confused, probably from not reading the entire thread. You do know that you are supposed to read the entire thread before you post to a thread, don't you? You jumped into the middle of a thread, all confused, and expect someone else to unconfuse you.

 

I remember that I was warned, and suspended at one time for posting to a thread without reading it entirely. I'm not sure why that hasn't happened to you yet, maybe the moderation is unlevel as the reviewing. But then again, I'm not confused.

 

So, if you read the entire thread, you would see that there are others who are as unaware as you, and don't know that everything has been resolved. That's why they are still posting to this thread. It's pretty simple, I wouldn't let it keep you up all night. Glad I could help you out here.

Edited September 30, 2006 by cachew nut

[+El Diablo]

I remember that I was warned, and suspended at one time for posting to a thread without reading it entirely. I'm not sure why that hasn't happened to you yet, maybe the moderation is unlevel as the reviewing. But then again, I'm not confused.

 

So, if you read the entire thread, you would see that there are others who are as unaware as you, and don't know that everything has been resolved. That's why they are still posting to this thread. It's pretty simple, I wouldn't let it keep you up all night. Glad I could help you out here.

 

Thank you! I'm not sure it helped my confusion, but I certainly appreciate your efforts to enlighten me.

 

I'm not sure why I haven't been suspended yet for being confused. Moderation has always been fairly consistent around here. Maybe there is an exemption this weekend for confused people?

 

El Diablo

[+Trucker Lee]

preety soon now we'll have to place a memorial cache for this thread cuz were are beating this puppy to death...

 

Consider it done, just have to find the right cemetary to bury the evidence. Oh wait, buried caches not allowed!

 

There is a certain bit of subjectivity in almost every rule, regulation, or guideline. If the cache was not published for something in the name, change the name. Personally, I don't consider it a commercial cache unless I am required to purchase something (ie. -- pay an entry fee) to participate. If we eliminate all caches on commercial property, even those placed with permission as in the guidelines, we will eliminate many of our urban caches.

 

Keep in mind that "political correctness" is just a lousy name to call the reasoning behind not being allowed to call a spade a spade because you don't want to hurt the shovel's feelings. The rest of us don't need to correct our language, the shovel just needs to realize that it is a shovel, and learn to live with the truth!

[+Confucius' Cat]

Keep in mind that "political correctness" is just a lousy name to call the reasoning behind not being allowed to call a spade a spade because you don't want to hurt the shovel's feelings. The rest of us don't need to correct our language, the shovel just needs to realize that it is a shovel, and learn to live with the truth!

Great definition!

 

I've always wondered why "freedom of speech" only applies to certain "correct" types of speech. The "politically correct" crowd is always closely guarding this freedom until someone dares to express an opinion with which they disagree.

 

Although the thread was posted relative to a single cache being archived for "promoting an agenda" and the specific problem has been resolved, the bigger issue is still open. It is in fact the issue of "political correctness" and how it has been and is being applied in the sport.

 

It is still a relevant topic for discussion, whether or not there is currently an outstanding example of alleged improper application of guidelines.