things get so convoluted, ill try to keep it simple.
lets take a look at a single incident. youll have to take my word for it, or go to the "should i feel bad" thread to see this in actual writing.
scott stated simply: if a player goes back to his chair after a foul, and does not inform the player of his foul, he is a cheater.
so, if you follow the rules of pool and simply go back to your chair after a foul-- you cheated. the reason this is so important is that there are many good players out there that do this. there is a rule, a good one, that says outgoing players cant touch the cb. so, a lot of good players that i know simply go back to their seats after a foul and let the rest take care of itself. to look down upon these players who are really just doing what they think is correct, that is wrong, and scott was propogating this false statement. its not good because there is bad blood during pool matches because of this very poor logic.
there is no black and white here, scott is 100% wrong (if you are defining right/wrong by the rules of pool). so, where does that leave us? everybody can think what they want, but he is wrong, and even if everybody told him he was dead wrong, he'd still say he was right.
if he did say he was wrong, id be very impressed... id even come full circle and perhaps change my opinion of him. but he wont, even though it can be shown 100% that he is wrong. he will prove his true character.... you watch. he will say he is RIGHT! this is why ill keep my opinion of him. so if you want to keep your same opinion of him too, that hes this great guy. fine, it really is fine by me. best.....
Enzo,
Can you not see that this post disproves your entire premise? For the sake of argument let us say that Mr. Lee is 100% wrong about this. Let's say the rules are clear and the player is not required to call a foul on himself.
Can you see that a respected instructor who is only interested in advertising his business is committing a grave error with such an obviously wrong interpretation of the rules? Furthermore he labels people who don't call fouls on themselves cheaters who might have been viable prospects for his services. But by alienating them with his statement he may be costing himself clients. A person who is only interested in promoting their own business takes a much less controversial position and tries to pander to both sides of the topic, remaining adroitly balanced on the fence and tap dancing for your entertainment.
Lastly, you say that there is no black and white but that Mr. Lee is 100% wrong. You seem confused here as that would mean that the situation you describe is black and white if one side is 100% wrong and the other side is by default 100% right.
I happen to agree with Mr. Lee if the situation is thus; A player commits a foul in a match without a referee and the opponent does not see it. Morally the player who committed the foul should inform his opponent of it. If they do not they are cheating the integrity of the game regardless of what the rules say. If a player has committed a foul that is a ball in hand penalty then they certainly will be in no further penalty by picking up the cue ball and handing it to the opponent.
It is very sad if this is the entire basis of your attack on Mr. Lee and the ensuing drama of wanting to erase all of your content. However I would be very grateful if you would PM me the trick about erasing all of the content via a signature as there are some message boards where I may want to apply it. It would be nicer though if you would stay and continue to have good discourse.