The Early Monday Poll: Reunification?

[Missy Q]

You make me laugh. This isn't heated. If it was heated I would be swearing. You're not 'winning' anything either. You asked me a question and I answered, where does 'winning' come into that? Pathetic.

and Chicago, it has nothing to do with Miami, whatsoever.

Loco, you usually make a better argument than that. Professional paintball heading in one unified and identifiable direction is not a scary thing, and nor should it be compared to lemmings. I consider that scaremongering, and for no valid reason, none that you mention anyway.

The word spectacle scares you too it seems. Perhaps my wording could have been more to your liking, but if my word choice is the thing that bothers you most perhaps there is little else you would not like about unification. I use the word spectacle from a promotional point of view, not a paintball one. The NPPL cover that side. Fact is, I am fairly sure you would have liked the progress that would have been made both from a team perspective and a professional one. It is a pity you will likely not get to see it now.
BTW - Your last paragraph makes little sense, and so I have quit trying to get past the ugly grammar and understand your meaning, as I am not sure there is any substance to it anyway.

Once more for the masses and to remind Loco:
PP = Flavor/Spectacle/Money/Venues/logistics/Television/sponsors
NPPL = Substance/Sport/schedule/reffing/rules/teams

Hope this makes it easier to understand my direction and word usage.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Missy Q
1--Loco, you usually make a better argument than that.
2--Professional paintball heading in one unified and identifiable direction is not a scary thing, and nor should it be compared to lemmings. I consider that scaremongering, and for no valid reason, none that you mention anyway.

3--The word spectacle scares you too it seems. Perhaps my wording could have been more to your liking, but if my word choice is the thing that bothers you most perhaps there is little else you would not like about unification. I use the word spectacle from a promotional point of view, not a paintball one. The NPPL cover that side.
4--Fact is, I am fairly sure you would have liked the progress that would have been made both from a team perspective and a professional one. It is a pity you will likely not get to see it now.
5--BTW - Your last paragraph makes little sense, and so I have quit trying to get past the ugly grammar and understand your meaning, as I am not sure there is any substance to it anyway.

6--Once more for the masses and to remind Loco:
PP = Flavor/Spectacle/Money/Venues/logistics/Television/sponsors
NPPL = Substance/Sport/schedule/reffing/rules/teams

Hope this makes it easier to understand my direction and word usage.

1--no argument. Just an observation. My arguments are those things you run away from and refuse to answer directly.
2--Perhaps if anyone had bothered to reveal during the process just what that direction and proposed purpose was it might have generated sufficient additional support to sway the decision makers over. That would have made it a first, but hey--
3--Yes, I'm aware of your mantra, Missy, and while I don't deny it's possible to do numerous things at once and do them all well I remain unconvinced by actual results.
4--easy to say. Tell me what it would have/could have been and I'll tell you whether I like it or not.
5--Yes, it required you to recall what your own argument from the prior post with Chicago was and his immediate reply. I took your view, his view and synthesised the two in a harmonious single conception. (This is where I would normally throw in a totally gratuitous insult just for fun but not today. Maybe next time. )
6--"Seeing" it and believing it are two completely different things.

 

[Chicago]

Originally posted by Missy Q
You make me laugh.

Well good. As long as we're all having a good time.

 

[Missy Q]

Senor Loco,

2--Perhaps if anyone had bothered to reveal during the process just what that direction and proposed purpose was it might have generated sufficient additional support to sway the decision makers over. That would have made it a first, but hey--

Surely it would be silly to do this before unification was agreed. For PP to share their idea's and future plans with their competition before an agreement makes no sense. Sure you understand that. The promotional capabilities and forward thinking of PP are what has made it successful. It is a main aspect of what PP can bring to the table. PP is a promotional company, not a consultantancy firm.

1--no argument. Just an observation. My arguments are those things you run away from and refuse to answer directly.

OK, I will look out for one in the future. Answering indirectly and running away are not the same thing though, and as we are 'online' I would tend to think only the former could possibly be accurate.

3--Yes, I'm aware of your mantra, Missy, and while I don't deny it's possible to do numerous things at once and do them all well I remain unconvinced by actual results.

I don't know your expectations, but I think the results have been pretty good. A good ESPN deal with no bought airtime, 4 solid events (2 being outstanding in my opinion) and 1 failed 'experiment', a very healthy and exciting level of competition, a league structure that has made every game mean something, a true pro league closed to impersonators, and a final event 1st prize of $50,000. I think there will be 5 solid events and 3 outstanding ones next year. But thats yet to come of course. All in all I think it was a great season and it was a shame that Miami was the last event. Miami was a disappointment but at least there has been no spin put on that. Everyone knows that was not what it should have been, heads have rolled, and it won't happen again. And thats not my Mantra anyway. My Mantra is work hard play hard - Always has been.

5--Yes, it required you to recall what your own argument from the prior post with Chicago was and his immediate reply. I took your view, his view and synthesised the two in a harmonious single conception. (This is where I would normally throw in a totally gratuitous insult just for fun but not today. Maybe next time. )

Now I know for sure you are making this **** up. If you can take my view and Chicago's and synthesise them into a single conception, harmonious or otherwise, then you are in cloud cuckoo-land.

6--"Seeing" it and believing it are two completely different things.

Ah, the conspiracy theory resurfaces huh? Do you honestly think this has legs or is it just cooler to be a skeptic? If what you wanted to believe was true in any way you would have found out by now, surely? Not understanding the relationship between PP and the NPPL is not reason enough on its own to disbelieve it. Investigate, find something (anything) to point to an untruth in what PP and NPPL (and I for that matter) tell you about this unique relationship and I will give you $1000 out of my own pocket. A bold yet risk-free promise.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Missy Q
Senor Loco,
1--Surely it would be silly to do this before unification was agreed. For PP to share their idea's and future plans with their competition before an agreement makes no sense. Sure you understand that.

2--OK, I will look out for one in the future. Answering indirectly and running away are not the same thing though, and as we are 'online' I would tend to think only the former could possibly be accurate.

3--I don't know your expectations, but I think the results have been pretty good. A good ESPN deal with no bought airtime, 4 solid events (2 being outstanding in my opinion) and 1 failed 'experiment', a very healthy and exciting level of competition, a league structure that has made every game mean something, a true pro league closed to impersonators, and a final event 1st prize of $50,000. I think there will be 5 solid events and 3 outstanding ones next year. But thats yet to come of course. All in all I think it was a great season and it was a shame that Miami was the last event. Miami was a disappointment but at least there has been no spin put on that. Everyone knows that was not what it should have been, heads have rolled, and it won't happen again. And thats not my Mantra anyway. My Mantra is work hard play hard - Always has been.

4--Now I know for sure you are making this **** up. If you can take my view and Chicago's and synthesise them into a single conception, harmonious or otherwise, then you are in cloud cuckoo-land.

5--Ah, the conspiracy theory resurfaces huh? Do you honestly think this has legs or is it just cooler to be a skeptic? If what you wanted to believe was true in any way you would have found out by now, surely? Not understanding the relationship between PP and the NPPL is not reason enough on its own to disbelieve it. Investigate, find something (anything) to point to an untruth in what PP and NPPL (and I for that matter) tell you about this unique relationship and I will give you $1000 out of my own pocket. A bold yet risk-free promise.

1--Missy, once again you miss the point. The point was a) all this business occurs well out of view (and if PP failed to give a future agenda to it's potential future partners no wonder unfication died) and b) if the the promoters of unfication had campaigned to the playing public to make it happen they might have been able to force the issue. Just a thought. Nothing more. Except of course it seems the last thing anybody with a bit of control wants to do is let anybody in on whats up.

2--answering indirectly and/or running away are both attributes of avoidance, literally and figuratively. All I was saying.

3--I could quibble but instead will ask again what's IMG's interest in the TV deal and how do they figure? (This is where you put Number 2 into practice whilst failing to recognize that the average reader will realize there is more going on than you are prepared to elaborate on and begin to view your posts with at least a rational skepticism. And just so we're clear I'm not accusing you or anybody else of lying. Only of sprucing the truth up and presenting only those parts of it which suit. )
Beyond that I was only referring to your determination to separate the NPPL from PP at every turn, and probably PP from WDP as well. And yes, I do comprehend how it all works on paper but everyone knows who is calling the shots.

4--in the future I will try to use smaller, less challenging words and ideas. (It was time for the gratuitous insult.)

5--It was a joke. You see, you wrote down how you'd like everyone to view the relationship between the NPPL and PP and while you can no doubt assert the legal reality the fact that it can be described as written--"seeing"--doesn't necessarily make it believable. Nor is it much of a conspiracy. I tend to think of it as a legal fiction. Not exactly Scott Turow but, hey, it's only paintball.

 

[Missy Q]

I know its only a partial reply but I'm busy.

If, as you say "everyone knows who is calling the shots" then who do you think is calling all these shots?

Now Chicago told me that Bart calls all the shots, and that "everyone knew" this, but he was horribly wrong. That alone makes a mockery of your statement, as the one guy that you would think would agree with you has no clue who is calling what shots.

sorry but I find all this hella amusing...

 

[Chicago]

Ged->Bart->everybody else.

But Bart has pretty wide lattitude.

The decision-making rests with Pure Promotions, not with NPPL. While some decision making may be delegated to Chuck, NPPL depends on the checks written by Pure Promotions to exist. Pure Promotions, conversely, doesn't need NPPL to keep going. There is not a single area of responsibility where, if Ged/Bart/PP want something, and Chuck/NPPL want something else, that Ged/Bart/PP don't prevail.

I suppose you could say that Chuck is allowed to call some shots the way PP wants them called, but that's about it.

By "everyone knew", go pick 10 random industry folk, and ask them this question: "If you have a major problem at a NPPL event, who is the person you ultimately talk to?", they are not going to say "Chuck". If you don't like what Chuck says, you can talk to Bart. If you don't like what Bart says, talking to Chuck is going to do you no good. You'll never year Bart say "I'll need to ask Chuck about that."

 

[Missy Q]

Chicago, you are on my turf, and I know how all this works. You simply can't tell me how it goes down any more than I can tell you what you had for breakfast this morning. You are wrong, just believe me and move on to something you have a chance with.

Chuck is perfectly able to veto decisions made by PP if it affects the NPPL. Bart would naturally have to run decisions relating to the event past Chuck. Vendors would speak to Bart. Teams would speak to Chuck. Teams asking Bart questions would be told he had to check with Chuck, and vice versa.

seriously, you can't win this one by debating the PP/NPPL relationship as I am in possession of all the facts and you are definitely not. I am sure it won't stop you from making it all up though.

 

[Chicago]

You're confusing delegting areas of job responsibility with control. You see that Chuck is allowed to hire the refs, and confuse that with control of reffing. Who determines how much money is available for reffing? You see that Chuck is apparently allowed to do the schedule (I have no idea who actually does the schedule, but you list it in NPPL's responsibility area), but who gets to decide how many days long the event is? Who gets to fire staff?

Does Bart make every decision about everything that happens at NPPL/PP events? Of course not. No organization operates like that. But does Bart have the AUTHORITY to make ANY decision about ANYTHING? Yes. Does Chuck? No.


You can just stand around these two guys for a short amount of time and just sense which one is the alpha wolf. Chuck is present at the grace of PP. That's control.

 

[Missy Q]

I'm confused?

Dude, for the last time, you are wrong. I wouldn't care if you were right, what difference would it make to me? But you are wrong. Why would you choose to debate on something I know about 100% and you can only guess about. Its suicide. You don't have a chance.
Sack up, bow out, and come at me from an angle you can win from. Its just plain ridiculous for you to be 'telling me' how this **** works. I know how it works Chicago, I deal with it and am immersed in it every day. Give it a rest, go away and try to find something accurate and truthful to say.

and if you want to ask questions, ask them, don't just provide your own answers, especially when they are the wrong ones. Try to learn something from your questions, not just perpetuate your own misguided opinions.

Its things like this that give you a bad name. If it can be demonstrated that you make stuff up and don't know what you are talking about, even once, then how will people trust what you say in the future? If you can't win a fight because you don't have the ammo, then just bow out gracefully. In fact it doesn't even matter that you don't have the ammo, its the making stuff up thats the problem. Where I come from we call that lying. You would probably call it bull****, but it adds up to the same thing.

take the last word and do your best. I have no more time for you.