This is not about being close minded. I don't know how you came up with that. A bit emphatic maybe but never close minded. But the challenge itself was so blatantly an obvious red as we both agree that having an imposing opinion was asking for it. All I was asking for was that mods don't sit on the fence and give their opinions without being too diplomatic when the situation demands it especially when something of this obvious nature presents itself.

Also I posted my post before your 2nd post so your explanation was little late in that regard. As the 1st post itself was just asking to have a debate on the incident which many agreed there was none. Part of your2nd post should had been in your 1st post as to what specifically the debate needed be which in this case is referee incompetence and the rules thereof.

I'm sure you're quite happy to tell me what my opinions and my thoughts are. Why would you really bother listening anyway? You seem to have quite a few preset notions about mods.

"All I was asking for was that mods don't sit on the fence and give their opinions". When a debate is started, do you think it starts with an answer? It starts with a question. I set the question, and I was looking for the forum to take the initiative and provide input. When the time did come for me to respond, I did so at length, just like any good debater would do. There is no "staying on the fence here". Just because I choose to be polite and respectful on the premiership page does not mean I do not have strong opinions about a team, or that I am being diplomatic. That page is a neutral page. Those that did not give a neutral response.... Their posts were edited out. Like a part of your post was edited out. Still, you managed to go on about me and mods instead of the topic at hand. Even after your initial post was edited, you actually re-edited it again to throw in something meaningless to the discussion at hand.

Another reason my second post was "late" was because I wanted the permiership page to take up the initiative and start a debate. I wanted to see how far people would go in the debate. Most stuck to the obvious, and hence why I put forth a second post and tried to steer the topic a little more.

Now that my explanation for my post is given, tell me, since when is it okay for one member to tell another member to say "this is how you've got to post"? Cause that is in effect what you're trying to tell me. I find it extremely amusing. I've put forth my authority as a mod at the start to prevent any fights. However, when I give an opinion, my opinion is the same as any other member's opinion. No mod assumes that his opinion is of more value than the opinion of another member. After all, we are members of the site too, just with an added responsibility. Why should my opinion on a debate actually set the tone, as you claim it should?

If you have a different topic to debate than the direction a particular thread is taking, you're free to start a new thread yourself. Don't presume to tell me what I should do with a post, and how I should do it. Unless your post goes against the rules, I don't tell you what the content of your posts should be. I don't think that is too much to ask, and I cannot comply your request of "all I was asking". That is a breach of my posting rights on this website, and I am in no mood to accommodate that

Oh didn't see your reply on my wall until today.

Yet again failing to interpret the situation. I didn't question your opinions or thoughts but more a recommendation on why your 1st post didn'y make things clear which was itself questioned by many before cause there was no "healthy debate" that was needed. It wasn't until your 2nd post that you had to make yourself clear on what you actually meant.

Oh and as for the mod(s), the only reason I even use the plural for that is because I didn't wanted to single you in public which is why I generalized it. But since now you've brought up this let me make it clear it was in reference to you alone and no other mods.

You're asking me if a debate starts with an answer.... Well yes it does which is why its called a debate. A person has an answer with respect to his own perspective and that answer is countered by someone else who differs from it. A healthy debater gets involved in the action and not just on the fence asking question especially when the incident in question was so blatantly obvious it didn't even merit a debate let alone of any substance.

The issue about quality of referring and what not which btw you only mention in your 2nd post when people were questioning what is there to debate about on the incident itself.

So for people to take the initiative for a debate there has to be something evenly remotely close to form a debate which you yourself found out as you state most stuck to the obvious. So since you realized there wasn't any debate on the incident itself you steered it towards a more generalized topic which is fine and I was glad that you actually explained yourself on what kind of debate you wanted.

All I was arguing about that the incident in itself never held any ground for a proper debate and even if there was you didn't lay your views on it in the 1st post.

So no I wasn't trying to tell you how to post but more of a suggesstion which you took for some strange reason as an order which it never was as I believe ever person is entitled to his/her opinions under the realms of rules and no rule was broken when I was stating my opinion that mod(s) should be more opinionated when it comes to debate no matter their allegiance and diplomatic obligation. That in itself would make you more accommodating toward other members and so often other mods tend to do