Here we go again, round 2. Let me get the mop out.
We carefully balance the site's overall philosophy with the desires of the membership. No decision is made in a vacuum, and none are made in haste. The notion that P&R should stay out of other forums has been widely held here for as long as I can remember. (And yes, we know the Aussies post P&R in their forum.) Assuming you have a job, do you follow the wishes of the owner of your company, or do you ignore them and do whatever the hell you want? How long do you suppose rogue moderators would last here? D
We moderators, as unpaid volunteers, do not have the resources nor ability to monitor every post. We rely on the community to report potential violations. If you have any other posts you would like (including the Putin one you mentioned) reviewed, I encourage you to notify them to me. Just need the post link. Best to you. Affirmative, a rule that's been active for 20 years. this is due to the comments being deleted. Not bad, and appro pro - since yes, we are actually moderators whose task is to enforce the rules. You're getting it! In a way, yes, that's why FIA has its own rules on what drivers can and can't do regarding politics. The same way Fchat does. A big reason is that many folks don't want F1 or the FIA to delve into political discussions.
Please close the thread. Makes 'unpaid' time for Mod's better used. This thread has offered nothing new in my opinion.
It's like porn, you know it when you see it. That said, I think you're both smart men that know when something crosses into politics (without having to delve into the sociological/philosophical). I seriously don't think either would prove my assumption wrong. However, feel free to send me a pre-note if there is a question on what comments are considered political or not before you post if you want to stay on the safe side.
No, we're intentionally keeping it up, some folks need reminding. Edit: Removed last sentence that was antagonistic.
While I understand you personally may not understand why the FIA recently launched an investigation on a driver for particular conduct, I think now you should have a pretty decent understanding of the context? Let me know if not, I am more then happy to teach you what's going on.
You both discuss WW2, Far-Right Movements, treatment of Jews, and the appropriateness of French national responses to global war. Would this ever be the plat du jour by Brundle or Crawly on the opening at Sochi? @nerofer & @william I understand you both would love to discuss politics here in F1. I would say you both need to ask yourself if you're willing to leave this community permanently if the rules on this privately owned (sub-forum only for goodness sake) are too disagreeable. We understand and can accommodate if so.
My feeling was and still is that if Schumacher was not punished in 1994, neither Senna in 1990, then it would have happened again in 1997. But as the "righteous wraith" of the FIA this time didn´t have any real consecuences, they were righteous. Schumacher´s bigest mistake was not cheating but doing it wrong. I think that the penalty was right, and the FIA hypocrite.
Unfortunately, if we did that, we'd just end up with new threads popping up presenting the same problem, or the problem would move to pollute many other threads in the F1 forum. It's better to address the issue in one area where it's visible than to chase it all over the place and spoil the discourse going on in those other threads. As much as this thread is distasteful and problematic, it's at least helping to keep the rest of the F1 forum a little cleaner. All the best, Andrew.
To add to DM's comment, we have contained certain topics to P&R for most of 20 years. During that time, we have learned which topics cause controversy, raise blood pressures, start flame wars, go on for thousands of posts, and possibly end in nasty grudges against other users (kind of like F1 ). The topics I listed as examples, and others, are those we consider P&R because they have this result.
Well, Paul, you got me wrong on the matter. I don't like discussing this matter, to the point that I usually refuse to do so. My only point was in reference to the alledged "french conspiracy" regarding the Suzuka incident, and trying to explain why many persons here refuse even the idea of such an association. If you look the english Wikipedia about Balestre, no reference whatsoever is made to his past. Therefore, I thought non-french people might be interested to know why, that's all. Without the context, it is impossible to understand. Nothing more. All the rest - that is the general history of France during these times - has been very well explained by more capable people than me, first of who being the american author Robert O. Paxton, to whose work those interested in the matter are encouraged to refer. Rgds
Thanks so much, sir. I don't know much about the topic so appreciate the context. We don't exclude P&R from F1 because of any ideological bias. Some folks like you don't like discussing politics in F1 by drivers and participants alike. We agree. We don't censor P&R as an overarching policy; anyone is welcome to go to the P&R forum to discuss it to their heart's content (for about $1 a month) or open a sidebar conversation if they would rather not pay. Best to you.
I see your comments and mine more "historical" than political. It was just to put things in context and give a broader view about the protagonists regarding the Suzuka incident. But if that's too much, then so be it. Tomorrow is another day, and Sochi may surprise us. A different winner perhaps?
Thank you gentlemen for your understanding and cooperation. Like the FIA, we too have certain rules about participants and drivers. I think both of you are wise enough to know now where that line starts. Best to you both and carry on!
