« on: December 10, 2015, 03:16:29 pm »
Well, this was an intersting topic to see here today, especially four days after the current "Reader's Poll" was published. For the record, I wrote the poll; I wrote the options; I take full responsibility. Part of me wanted to wait until more people gave their perspectives on our poll (and specifically the options provided) before posting a response here, because I am genuinely curious if Mr. Right's take is representative of many others. But I won't delay. And even though part of me would prefer to just post a big ol' "Lighten up! It was a joke!", I'm going to basically post here what I wrote in response to the few e-mails we received shortly after the poll was published on Sunday (e-mails, which I might add, though "concerned" about the absence of the "NESCAC" as an option, acknowledged the possibility of an honest oversight/clerical error--a granting of the benefit of the doubt that was appreciated).
Given the NESCAC had just claimed both men's and women's titles (something I assumed everyone reading and responding to the poll would know), the poll was somewhat of a rhetorical, toungue-in-cheek joke (not that a case couldn't be made for the UAA--actually a very strong case, and maybe another conference or two). I wanted to have fun with it as I have sometimes done in the past with our poll questions. But apparently what I intended to be funny (the blatant omission of the most glarringly obvious answer) hasn't translated for everyone even though I tried to make it rather obvious by placing the "other" option right where the NESCAC should have been listed instead of placing the "other" option at the very end of the list as is normal. I thought that would assure everyone would "get it" . . . if not right away, as least after a few seconds.
My other option was to post the same poll question, but repeatedly list the NESCAC as option one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and nine, with the obligatory "other" as option ten. I opted for the more subtle, might-take-a-second-or-two-to-get approach knowing it might put a rise into some NESCAC fans until they got the joke (not if they got the joke). I miscalculated, apparently, whether that is due more to over-estimating my ability to execute the intended joke or under-estimating how seriously NESCAC fans take this stuff and wouldn't be able to find the humor in it, I don't know.
Bottom line, the honest truth is that the poll was/is meant as a light, humorous tip of the cap to the NESCAC, not an unintended oversight nor an intentional slight (neither of which would have been consistent with the website's complete body of work, in my opinion). I hope that most fans have picked up on that and have taken the poll in the sense it was/is intended. If not, it won't be the first nor last time I miss the mark, and I can live with that.
However, what would have the potential to bother me much more would be if the broader sentiments seemingly expressed by Mr. Right were representative of a larger segment of the fans on here and the visitors to our website. I truly hope not and would be surprised and disappointed to find that to be the case. Even if this particular poll didn't/doesn't sit right with some, I would hope that's not reflective of or consistent with a broader perception of the website. But, if it is, I am open to listening to Mr. Right and any others who believe they have reason to think D3soccer.com is guilty of or prone to (i) pettiness, (ii) unappreciativeness of NESCAC fans (or any segment of fans) for visiting/supporting the website, (iii) disrespect of NESCAC fans (or any segment fo fans), and (iv) biases and favoritism shown to certain schools (e.g. Messiah) or conferences. If there are instances or examples of these types of things, please specifically name them so they can be discussed and maybe we can learn and improve moving forward. (And that can be done openly on the message board or privately via e-mail.)
The Final Top 25 and All-America teams will be coming. No promises on time-table.