To tea or not to tea....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Everything, either relevant, or irrelevant would have been missed by those online in the intervening thirty minutes. In this specific case of attempting a quip, nothing important. But once the first post was read by a member, that member would not see (unless one backed up) my additional unimportant information.

Your off-topic responses far outnumber your relevant posts for the last 2 days. SMH

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Your off-topic responses far outnumber your relevant posts for the last 2 days.

While it's nice of you to pay so much attention my posts, enough to actually read them, and count them, but I'm sure that it's been more than two days, probably as far back as my retirement back in mid-September.

I'm grateful that the moderators seem to allow me some latitude, but you may still want to try complaining to them, or became a moderator, or don't bother to read any of my posts, or skim over my posts looking for information that you deem important, or just block me and put yourself out of your misery.

As far as I know, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to read all my posts, or everything in all my posts.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As far as I know, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to read all my posts, or everything in all my posts.

If somebody is, just type a bunch of asterisks to let us know.

(I watched The Town (2010) on television last night ("sunny skies")).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As far as I know, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to read all my posts, or everything in all my posts.

Do not have to read your posts to see that you respond to yourself multiple times before we can see the actual responses to the information in the post by people actually having a conversation with other people. It can be pointed out that you clearly like posted multiple times and it is our right to say it is a bit annoying. But it is not going to stop you. You like being annoying.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But it is not going to stop you.

But it may slow me down. I do read everybody's posts. And such posts may not be posted in vain. I do occasionally need a friendly (or not so friendly) reminder to back off a little (or a lot).

It's all about checks and balances. Without checks there wouldn't be balance.

You may think that I'm not paying attention, but I actually am.

In many cases I'm having some fun, but in some cases I actually have new thoughts several minutes after my original thought thus requiring a new post, because members don't usually back up on the Forum, and my new thoughts would go unread by those online in the intervening minutes.

In other cases I may want to intentionally separate two related thoughts into two different posts to make the ideas easier to understand, and thus, easier to respond to (see commuting miles versus business expense miles, two separate, but related, tax issues, thus two different posts):

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1027108

[LRZ]

Billy, your methodology may be self-defeating. When I see you replying to yourself or your string-of-posts, I often say to myself, "Oh, it's Billy, talking to himself again," and skip them. If others react similarly, your teaching efforts may be wasted, for both "the young 'uns" and us old-timers alike.

And because you often post long sequences when you have new thoughts, maybe you should think things through more thoroughly before posting.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by LRZ

... maybe you should think things through more thoroughly before posting.

Agree. I post and then I reflect. I should reflect and then post. Saying I agree doesn't mean that I can do it, but at least I agree with you, and can try.

I'm Irish, I love to talk, which in the realm of the Forum means that I love to post.

You should have seen me before I gave up all caffeine and was put on Xanax.

Pulp Fiction (1994), Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) meets Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and she asks him, “When in conversation, do you listen, or do you just wait to talk?”

Vincent thinks about it and then responds, “I wait to talk, but I’m trying to listen.”

Note: Who doesn't think that Uma Thurman was red hot in this movie?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Billy, your methodology may be self-defeating. When I see you replying to yourself or your string-of-posts, I often say to myself, "Oh, it's Billy, talking to himself again," and skip them. If others react similarly, your teaching efforts may be wasted, for both "the young 'uns" and us old-timers alike.....

That's my main point. I've mentioned it before; one (a newcomer) may actually miss some good information because they don't want to sift through so many off-topic or irrelevant posts.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Raymond

That's my main point. I've mentioned it before; one (a newcomer) may actually miss some good information because they don't want to sift through so many off-topic or irrelevant posts.

It's true:

Actually just read through this thread for the first time a few minutes ago. After seeing that first off-topic post, I skipped over ALL of Billy's posts.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

But it may slow me down. I do read everybody's posts. And such posts may not be posted in vain. I do occasionally need a friendly (or not so friendly) reminder to back off a little (or a lot).

You do what you want, but trying to tell you that people are ignoring your posts, especially when they are long and talking about things that have nothing to do with the OP. You can do what makes you feel good, but I was trying to help.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... but I was trying to help.

I know. Thanks. You're one of the "checks" that "balances" me.

Watch my posts today, I'm really going to try to stay on topic, but it will be "one day at a time".

Not counting this response post, I believe that I'm two for two (on topic, high quality, posts) today.

As New York City Mayor Ed Koch used to say, "How'm I doing?".

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While it's nice of you to pay so much attention my posts, enough to actually read them, and count them, but I'm sure that it's been more than two days, probably as far back as my retirement back in mid-September.

I'm grateful that the moderators seem to allow me some latitude, but you may still want to try complaining to them, or became a moderator, or don't bother to read any of my posts, or skim over my posts looking for information that you deem important, or just block me and put yourself out of your misery.

As far as I know, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to read all my posts, or everything in all my posts.

There's also moderator choices, like whether we delete off-topic posts or whether we give you a timeout. Just saying.

I hope that reminder helps you in your quest to stay more on-topic.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Last night-- coach demonstrating and complaining about a call (when she was up by 32 points). I told her to settle down, we're not going to do that tonight. She told me I was too sensitive. I put an official warning in the book and didn't hear anything else all night. Do you whack her? She also then told my partner I'm too sensitive.

**edit- spelling

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Last night-- coach demonstrating and complaining about a call (when she was up by 32 points). I told her to settle down, we're not going to do that tonight. She told me I was too sensitive. I put an official warning in the book and didn't her anything else all night. Do you whack her? She also then told my partner I'm too sensitive.

I would've told her to look at the scoreboard and her reaction after that would determine my next move.

I have little tolerance for coaches who start acting up when their team is up by an insurmountable margin. A bench warning is certainly fair. I probably wouldn't have whacked her if she shut up but wouldn't really have a problem with a T in that situation. If I was your partner I also would've told her to look at the scoreboard.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Last night-- coach demonstrating and complaining about a call (when she was up by 32 points). I told her to settle down, we're not going to do that tonight. She told me I was too sensitive. I put an official warning in the book and didn't her anything else all night. Do you whack her? She also then told my partner I'm too sensitive.

Your partner should have whacked her since you had already issued a warning. I had a game last season where I warned a coach in the first half. In the 3rd quarter one of my partner had to engage the coach and was about to issue a warning when he looked at me and realized that HC had already been warned, so he whacked him.