A
Anonymous
Guest
ok
the reason i get so incensed at most, if not all of mac's responses if that they always say the same thing
they never answer the question, and dance around it w/a a prewritten PR statement that they hope will go over the avg readers head
they never answer a public challenge w/the head of the org (mac chairman), which is where the buck stops, vis-a-vis mac's public acts, and words,efforts,involvements
there is NO accountability
the mac site is like paul holthus's reef talk, his reef talk is like the 'questions/challenges' posed to him on the #reefs forum (some of those are questions about/based on why he didn't answer a previous question), and the response posted about mamti is the same thing
answering a question about a statement w/more of that same statement that's questioned in the first place is an 8th grade debate tactic
it's insulting to the entire communities intelligence, and to the degree to which they value the things they're fighting for, be it livelihood, environment, whatevever
and....
sending out a private to answer a question placed to a general doesn't make the army look good to the people it claims to be defending , or sending out a pawn to do the defense of a rook is extremely bad chess
if i (pre-enron collapse)challenged kenneth lay publicly on an enron bb, and a junior secretary posted a reply that mimics in susbtance the employee orientation manual's 'welcome to the company blurb', how do y'all think it would be recieved, and how would it make enron look
if mac had REAL answers now and from the get go, answering the questions/challenges directly would have been a pr gold mine for mac
'here's your answer, and it's a good one, see?!! now we know you'll support us'
keeping quiet is NOT a wise way to try and accomplish that, and if the good substantive replies were there, avoiding or obfuscating the answer wouldn't even take place
a good real answer would always be win-win
now...
in the meantime, while all this is going on, the mac liason is trying to subtley post lots of environmentally concerned fish articles at a higher rate than in the past, on more forums than in the past(not that that in itself is a bad thing at all, i applaude every bit of exra awareness a hobbyist gets exposed to)
the timing though is odd- it's not like we didn't have invasive species back in '02, etc.
so yeah, my bp went through the roof
i'm pretty sure all the parties involved won't be dead of shock, and one of the reply-ers not only owed all of us for replying instead of 'where the buck stops' replying, but the very behavior he uses as an excuse for his own act of pulling his boss's reply , is of the type he STARTED with when joining the bb, and has exhibited on many occasion
the only difference is he uses the 'hurt' card to slip his slander (name calling) in with
how transparent can you get ?
i cry for you calling me a ninny and then state that your a ninny who made me cry?
we deserve a better liason than that when getting an 'answer' from mac
/rant off
(edited once for a typo
)
the reason i get so incensed at most, if not all of mac's responses if that they always say the same thing
they never answer the question, and dance around it w/a a prewritten PR statement that they hope will go over the avg readers head
they never answer a public challenge w/the head of the org (mac chairman), which is where the buck stops, vis-a-vis mac's public acts, and words,efforts,involvements
there is NO accountability
the mac site is like paul holthus's reef talk, his reef talk is like the 'questions/challenges' posed to him on the #reefs forum (some of those are questions about/based on why he didn't answer a previous question), and the response posted about mamti is the same thing
answering a question about a statement w/more of that same statement that's questioned in the first place is an 8th grade debate tactic
it's insulting to the entire communities intelligence, and to the degree to which they value the things they're fighting for, be it livelihood, environment, whatevever
and....
sending out a private to answer a question placed to a general doesn't make the army look good to the people it claims to be defending , or sending out a pawn to do the defense of a rook is extremely bad chess
if i (pre-enron collapse)challenged kenneth lay publicly on an enron bb, and a junior secretary posted a reply that mimics in susbtance the employee orientation manual's 'welcome to the company blurb', how do y'all think it would be recieved, and how would it make enron look
if mac had REAL answers now and from the get go, answering the questions/challenges directly would have been a pr gold mine for mac
'here's your answer, and it's a good one, see?!! now we know you'll support us'
keeping quiet is NOT a wise way to try and accomplish that, and if the good substantive replies were there, avoiding or obfuscating the answer wouldn't even take place
a good real answer would always be win-win
now...
in the meantime, while all this is going on, the mac liason is trying to subtley post lots of environmentally concerned fish articles at a higher rate than in the past, on more forums than in the past(not that that in itself is a bad thing at all, i applaude every bit of exra awareness a hobbyist gets exposed to)
the timing though is odd- it's not like we didn't have invasive species back in '02, etc.
so yeah, my bp went through the roof
i'm pretty sure all the parties involved won't be dead of shock, and one of the reply-ers not only owed all of us for replying instead of 'where the buck stops' replying, but the very behavior he uses as an excuse for his own act of pulling his boss's reply , is of the type he STARTED with when joining the bb, and has exhibited on many occasion
the only difference is he uses the 'hurt' card to slip his slander (name calling) in with
how transparent can you get ?
i cry for you calling me a ninny and then state that your a ninny who made me cry?
we deserve a better liason than that when getting an 'answer' from mac
/rant off
(edited once for a typo
)
