Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
FWIW
DLM
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/60418716
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/60418716
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says
Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change
would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says
Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the
federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change
would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
He has not been promoted.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
Wrong. Masi has been sacked from the role as F1 Race Director. He has
been replaced.
He currently has no role within the FIA. So he has not been promoted
out of the role... for doing such a good job in Abu Dhabi.
So it's clear to anyone that the FIA are not standing behind him
supporting his actions in Abu Dhabi.
You called it wrong then and you continue to call it wrong now.
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
FWIW
DLM
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no chance
that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever
role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good precedent for
the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a
good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word than sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just being a pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
"Scapegoat": look it up.
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that job.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
Nope.
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to
prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word
than sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just
being a pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on his own,
they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he could say would
matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal, and from the fact
that they're offering Masi another position, it's clear he's being
incented not to relate what he knows on the matter.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term. >>>>>
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the >>>>>> company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position? >>>>>
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to
prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word
than sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just
being a pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on his own,
they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he could say would
matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal, and from the fact
that they're offering Masi another position, it's clear he's being
incented not to relate what he knows on the matter.
Expect a tinfoil shortage as you will need all of it for your hat
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
FWIWNow that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop being so petulant.
DLM
So what's your explanation?
It was all Masi's fault... ...but they're offering him another position,
why?
They held an inquiry, but they won't release their findings...
...why?
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:.
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
On 18/02/2022 9:47 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:.
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
I have other better things to do. Not playing your silly game of pedantics.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
I have other better things to do. Not playing your silly game of pedantics.
Got it.
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael >>>>>> Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a >>>>>> good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that job.
On 18/02/2022 9:39 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael >>>>>>> Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a >>>>>>> good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt >>>>>>> that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that job.
He is unlikely, in any position, to say "Yes. I fucked up and admit I am
to susceptible to bullying to be objective in that position".
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt
that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
On 2022-02-17 3:32 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:39 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael >>>>>>>> Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be >>>>>>>> offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a >>>>>>>> good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt >>>>>>>> that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that job.
He is unlikely, in any position, to say "Yes. I fucked up and admit I
am to susceptible to bullying to be objective in that position".
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to make
sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a yellow flag".
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to make
sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a yellow flag".
On 18/02/2022 12:36 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:32 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:39 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be >>>>>>>>> offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to >>>>>>>>> accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a >>>>>>>>> good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt >>>>>>>>> that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that job.
He is unlikely, in any position, to say "Yes. I fucked up and admit I
am to susceptible to bullying to be objective in that position".
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to make
sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a yellow flag".
Maybe ...
geoff
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants >>>>>> to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is
not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had access
to all comms involved.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes, then they
too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever you want to
call it.
Not to split hairs .....
I don't of course.
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes, then
they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever you
want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes, then
they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever you
want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and Masi
is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the organisation.
Not to split hairs .....
geoff
...and you failed.
Sorry, but no.
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes, then
they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever
you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and Masi
is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in them
getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry? >>>>>>>No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have. >>>>>
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes, then
they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever
you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and Masi
is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in them
getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
On 2022-02-17 10:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
He has not been promoted.
Really?
You think he's going to be demoted, do you?
What's your prediction, sunshine?
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
Wrong. Masi has been sacked from the role as F1 Race Director. He
has been replaced.
Nope. Simply, factually, incorrect.
He currently has no role within the FIA. So he has not been promoted
out of the role... for doing such a good job in Abu Dhabi.
So it's clear to anyone that the FIA are not standing behind him
supporting his actions in Abu Dhabi.
"Scapegoat": look it up.
You called it wrong then and you continue to call it wrong now.
On 2022-02-17 3:32 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:39 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote" him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that
job.
He is unlikely, in any position, to say "Yes. I fucked up and admit
I am to susceptible to bullying to be objective in that position".
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to make
sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a yellow flag".
On 2022-02-17 3:00 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben
Sulayem felt that a change would be a good
thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or
possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not
YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different
FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote,
there's no chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major
misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different
position in the company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a
different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of
the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a
sweetener to prevent any protest on his part after removal
(probably a better word than sacked in this case but the
implication is the same you are just being a pedantic twat
playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on
his own, they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he
could say would matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the
inquiry found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
and from the fact that they're offering Masi another position,
it's clear he's being incented not to relate what he knows on the
matter.
Expect a tinfoil shortage as you will need all of it for your hat
So what's your explanation?
It was all Masi's fault... ...but they're offering him another
position, why?
They held an inquiry, but they won't release their findings...
...why?
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role
is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the
inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would
have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes,
then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or
whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and
Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given* another position in the organisation.
Not to split hairs .....
On 2022-02-17 10:57 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of
the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they
would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race,
and had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision,
yes, then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that
job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry
and Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the
organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in
them getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
No?
Well we do know that you haven't shown anything to support your claim
that even getting demoted is ever referred to as being "sacked".
On 2022-02-17 10:57 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of
the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they
would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race,
and had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision,
yes, then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that
job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry
and Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the
organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in
them getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
No?
Well we do know that you haven't shown anything to support your claim
that even getting demoted is ever referred to as being "sacked".
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
In article <sum3bh$r25$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Of course they are. If someone refuses to take up said offer, do they
still have a job? Does that count as resignation?
Do they still get
redundancy? Of course not.
I'm not familiar with "redundancy" in this context.
Of course they are. If someone refuses to take up said offer, do they
still have a job? Does that count as resignation?
Yes.
In article <sup54r$vvm$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
Of course they are. If someone refuses to take up said offer, do they
still have a job? Does that count as resignation?
Yes.
So you believe that employers have the right to turn to their employees
and demand they move to a different job, and if they refuse, that would
be resignation with no penalty or reparation?
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no chance
that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop being so >petulant.
FWIW
DLM
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to
prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word than >> sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just being a
pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on his own,
they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he could say would matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal, and from the fact
that they're offering Masi another position, it's clear he's being
incented not to relate what he knows on the matter.
absolutely in US at least many states have "at-will employment" - they
can do whatever the fuck they want to their employees, they are even loopholes for ways they get around discrimination cases - it's basically organized slavery for non-union employers - if you dont like it go elsewhere
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop
being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop being so
FWIW
DLM
petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop
being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Not having the person who fucked him over in a position where he could
do it again at least acknowledges the wrongdoing and addresses the lack
of trust there would be in the culprit.
Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop
being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Not having the person who fucked him over in a position where he could
do it again at least acknowledges the wrongdoing and addresses the lack
of trust there would be in the culprit.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:00 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben
Sulayem felt that a change would be a good
thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or
possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not
YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different
FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote,
there's no chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major
misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different
position in the company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a
different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of
the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a
sweetener to prevent any protest on his part after removal
(probably a better word than sacked in this case but the
implication is the same you are just being a pedantic twat
playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on
his own, they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he
could say would matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the
inquiry found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
and from the fact that they're offering Masi another position,
it's clear he's being incented not to relate what he knows on the
matter.
Expect a tinfoil shortage as you will need all of it for your hat
So what's your explanation?
It was all Masi's fault... ...but they're offering him another
position, why?
They held an inquiry, but they won't release their findings...
...why?
If you weren't so busy defending the indefensible you might take the
time to look at the changes they are making and consider what that says
about the situation. Of course as you like to put your conclusions
before any consideration you might struggle...
...but just ask for help.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:32 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:39 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:15 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 6:46 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote" him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Well somebody has to sweep the floor.
geoff
You won't keep him quiet about what happened by giving him that
job.
He is unlikely, in any position, to say "Yes. I fucked up and admit
I am to susceptible to bullying to be objective in that position".
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to make
sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a yellow flag".
What bosses? Have you even the slightest evidence to make such an
assertion?
All your evidence... here... now?
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
He has not been promoted.
Really?
You think he's going to be demoted, do you?
What's your prediction, sunshine?
What's yours, mealy mouth?
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
Wrong. Masi has been sacked from the role as F1 Race Director. He
has been replaced.
Nope. Simply, factually, incorrect.
Yet, you don't say how, Mealy.
He currently has no role within the FIA. So he has not been promoted
out of the role... for doing such a good job in Abu Dhabi.
So it's clear to anyone that the FIA are not standing behind him
supporting his actions in Abu Dhabi.
"Scapegoat": look it up.
How can he be a scapegoat when he instigated and was solely responsible
for the actions that were deemed the problem.
geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role
is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the
inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would
have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and had
access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes,
then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or
whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and
Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given* another position in the organisation.
Not to split hairs .....
*"is to be offered"
;-)
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:57 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the
federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of
the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they
would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race,
and had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision,
yes, then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that
job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry
and Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the
organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in
them getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
No?
Well we do know that you haven't shown anything to support your claim
that even getting demoted is ever referred to as being "sacked".
Now you claim he is being "demoted".
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:57 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the
federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of
the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they
would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race,
and had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision,
yes, then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that
job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry
and Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the
organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted in
them getting another position with the same organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
No?
Well we do know that you haven't shown anything to support your claim
that even getting demoted is ever referred to as being "sacked".
Look up "constructive dismissal" cases.
You will find plenty of examples.
In article <sume9e$12b$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
That they have concurred that the WDC title was won outside of the rules
of the sport. This, for a multitude of reasons (not least, legal action
by outside parties) is something that they can not admit.
I would also not be surprised if a large chunk of that "transparent
internal inquiry that we won't be releasing" was spent on working out
the cheapest method of getting Masi out of that position. More laundry
that they wouldn't want aired in public.
In article <sumllj$fpr$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they would have.
This is such a simplistic logical fallacy as I have seen recently. Such
an inquiry would be difficult to conduct without touching on non-public internal structure, policy and ip issues that they wouldn't want made
public.
If they found that Masi's actions were a contravention of the rules
then they can't make that public. Not officially, at any rate.
If anything, the fact that they have reneged on previous statements of transparency intent suggests that the inquiry was quite a thorough one.
In article <sup54r$vvm$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
Of course they are. If someone refuses to take up said offer, do they
still have a job? Does that count as resignation?
Yes.
So you believe that employers have the right to turn to their employees
and demand they move to a different job, and if they refuse, that would
be resignation with no penalty or reparation?
On 20/02/2022 10:51 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop being so >>> petulant.
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move Michael
Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
The only 'mitigation' is that Ham will return this year, rather than
quitting in disgust/despair/dis-whatever.
geoff
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:15:11 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no chance
that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
You are the only one I see trying to make out that Masi was guilty of
*major misconduct*, now involving some sort of FIA coverup; most
people accept that Masi just made a gigantic cockup. Grounds for
moving someone to a less challenging position but not necessarily
getting rid of him entirely.
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the company? >>
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term. >>>>>
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the >>>>>> company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position? >>>>>
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to
prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word than >>> sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just being a >>> pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on his own,
they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he could say would matter. >>
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal, and from the fact
that they're offering Masi another position, it's clear he's being
incented not to relate what he knows on the matter.
Clear to you but not everybody else.
https://i.imgur.com/e9Tb5sT.jpeg
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
Happens regularly in politics e.g. Dominic Rab was sacked as Foreign Secretary and moved to Justice Secretary
If anything, the fact that they have reneged on previous statements of transparency intent suggests that the inquiry was quite a thorough one.
Sorry?
Where is the transparency in holding an inquiry and withholding the results?
How does reneging on previous statements of transparency suggest that
the inquiry was thorough?
It may have been a rubberstamp...
...that they then wouldn't want to make public.
Or it may have been thorough...
...but uncovered things they didn't want to make public.
Or literally anywhere between those two extremes
In article <sv3lb4$v95$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
If anything, the fact that they have reneged on previous statements of
transparency intent suggests that the inquiry was quite a thorough one.
Sorry?
Where is the transparency in holding an inquiry and withholding the results? >>
Non sequitur. I think you must have misread my sentence above.
It may have been a rubberstamp...
...that they then wouldn't want to make public.
Or it may have been thorough...
...but uncovered things they didn't want to make public.
Or literally anywhere between those two extremes
On 2022-02-22 3:02 p.m., Alan LeHun wrote:
In article <sv3lb4$v95$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
If anything, the fact that they have reneged on previous statements of >>> transparency intent suggests that the inquiry was quite a thorough one. >>>
Sorry?
Where is the transparency in holding an inquiry and withholding the results?
Non sequitur. I think you must have misread my sentence above.
How does reneging on previous statements of transparency suggest that
the inquiry was thorough?
It may have been a rubberstamp...
...that they then wouldn't want to make public.
Or it may have been thorough...
...but uncovered things they didn't want to make public.
Or literally anywhere between those two extremes
On 2022-02-20 1:42 a.m., Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term. >>>>>>
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben >>>>>>>>>>>> Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no >>>>>>> chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the >>>>>>> company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position? >>>>>>
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a sweetener to >>>> prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word than >>>> sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just being a >>>> pedantic twat playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on his own,
they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he could say would matter. >>>
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the inquiry
found that there are things they don't want to reveal, and from the fact >>> that they're offering Masi another position, it's clear he's being
incented not to relate what he knows on the matter.
Clear to you but not everybody else.
https://i.imgur.com/e9Tb5sT.jpeg
Really?
So you're claiming that they're withholding the results but there are no >facts they don't want to reveal?
Really?
Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop
being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Not having the person who fucked him over in a position where he could
do it again at least acknowledges the wrongdoing and addresses the lack
of trust there would be in the culprit.
On 2022-02-20 1:04 a.m., Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:15:11 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no chance
that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
You are the only one I see trying to make out that Masi was guilty of
*major misconduct*, now involving some sort of FIA coverup; most
people accept that Masi just made a gigantic cockup. Grounds for
moving someone to a less challenging position but not necessarily
getting rid of him entirely.
So you're claiming he's being removed from the Race Director position
for MINOR misconduct, are you?
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the company? >>>
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Well?
On 2022-02-20 1:49 a.m., Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote" >>>>>>>> him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position. >>>>>
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
Happens regularly in politics e.g. Dominic Rab was sacked as Foreign
Secretary and moved to Justice Secretary
Look up "rhetorical language".
A cabinet shuffle is not a sacking.
On 2022-02-18 1:45 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided
to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race
Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA
role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
is not a good precedent for the federation but
obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a
good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
He has not been promoted.
Really?
You think he's going to be demoted, do you?
What's your prediction, sunshine?
What's yours, mealy mouth?
I asked you first, so pony up, pussy.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA position.
Wrong. Masi has been sacked from the role as F1 Race Director.
He has been replaced.
Nope. Simply, factually, incorrect.
Yet, you don't say how, Mealy.
"Sacked" means dismissed from an organization.
'verb [with object ]
1 informal dismiss from employment: any official found to be involved
would be sacked on the spot.'
He currently has no role within the FIA. So he has not been
promoted out of the role... for doing such a good job in Abu
Dhabi.
So it's clear to anyone that the FIA are not standing behind him supporting his actions in Abu Dhabi.
"Scapegoat": look it up.
How can he be a scapegoat when he instigated and was solely
responsible for the actions that were deemed the problem.
And you know he was solely responsible... ...how?
On 2022-02-18 1:48 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:00 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:21:48 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 1:04 p.m., alister wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe
Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the
role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
be offered another FIA role, but whether
the Australian wants to accept whatever
role is on offer remains to be seen. This
is not a good precedent for the federation
but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
Sure you did. LOL!
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly "promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably
not YOU.
'or possibly "promote" him'...
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a
different FIA position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote,
there's no chance that YOU can read between the
lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different
position in the company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a
different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not
misuse of the term.
geoff
Show an example of it being used in that manner.
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
As everyone knows any possition he is offered is simply a
sweetener to prevent any protest on his part after removal (probably a better word than sacked in this case but the implication is the same you are just being a pedantic twat
playing with words as normal)
Nope.
I'm making the very salient point that if Masi acted solely on
his own, they could have actually sacked him, and nothing he
could say would matter.
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the
inquiry found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
and from the fact that they're offering Masi another position,
it's clear he's being incented not to relate what he knows on
the matter.
Expect a tinfoil shortage as you will need all of it for your
hat
So what's your explanation?
It was all Masi's fault... ...but they're offering him another
position, why?
They held an inquiry, but they won't release their findings...
...why?
If you weren't so busy defending the indefensible you might take the
time to look at the changes they are making and consider what that
says about the situation. Of course as you like to put your
conclusions before any consideration you might struggle...
...but just ask for help.
I notice you failed to address anything I said.
On 2022-02-18 1:57 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided
to move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race
Director. He says Masi will be offered another
FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be
seen. This is not a good precedent for the
federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a
change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA, they
would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race, and
had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision, yes,
then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from that job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the inquiry and
Masi is getting a new job and not being sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given* another position in the
organisation.
Not to split hairs .....
*"is to be offered"
;-)
Isn't it funny how you normally hang on every word Hamilton says:
On 2022-02-18 1:50 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
He's quite likely to say "I was under pressure from my bosses to
make sure the race ended with excitement rather than under a
yellow flag".
What bosses? Have you even the slightest evidence to make such an assertion?
Are you pretending that there are not officials/employees of the FIA
who are Masi's bosses?
All your evidence... here... now?
Why?
You claimed he was "solely responsible" without any evidence, didn't
you?
On 2022-02-18 12:35 p.m., Alan LeHun wrote:
In article <sume9e$12b$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
It's clear from the fact that they aren't disclosing what the
inquiry found that there are things they don't want to reveal,
That they have concurred that the WDC title was won outside of the
rules of the sport. This, for a multitude of reasons (not least,
legal action by outside parties) is something that they can not
admit.
I would also not be surprised if a large chunk of that "transparent internal inquiry that we won't be releasing" was spent on working
out the cheapest method of getting Masi out of that position. More
laundry that they wouldn't want aired in public.
And on who was pressuring him from above.
On 2022-02-18 1:59 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 10:57 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 4:40 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 7:27 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:49 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:37 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 12:27 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 3:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 9:41 am, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role
of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but
obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change
would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
Made easy by an obviously culpable party.
See below.
Why do YOU think they won't disclose the results
of the inquiry?
No idea. But they should.
And if Masi were the only one involved at the FIA,
they would have.
Didn't realise that you sat in on his role at that race,
and had access to all comms involved.
I don't of course.
If anybody else was involved in coming to that decision,
yes, then they too should be re-assigned, sacked from
that job, or whatever you want to call it.
And that's why we're not getting the results of the
inquiry and Masi is getting a new job and not being
sacked.
Sacked from that job, and given another position in the organisation.
Sorry, but no.
I asked you to show an example where sacking someone resulted
in them getting another position with the same
organization...
...and you failed.
Cos I'm not a pedantic dickhead.
No?
Well we do know that you haven't shown anything to support your
claim that even getting demoted is ever referred to as being
"sacked".
Look up "constructive dismissal" cases.
You will find plenty of examples.
I already know what "constructive dismissal" is...
...and you have no evidence at all that this is that.
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says
Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the federation
but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good
thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
If they could have supported Masi's decisions... and those of the stewards... they would have done so and by doing so saved face and
their integrity would have remained intact.
They did that by not overturning the results.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says
Masi will be offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains
to be seen. This is not a good precedent for the federation
but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good
thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it must be true
/s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild conspiracy theories.
On 2022-02-20 1:49 a.m., Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the
company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position?
Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term.
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
Happens regularly in politics e.g. Dominic Rab was sacked as Foreign
Secretary and moved to Justice Secretary
Look up "rhetorical language".
A cabinet shuffle is not a sacking.
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it must be
true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and remembered
everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end of the
race would be ended as quickly as possible),
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who above
all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild
conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that this was
solely Masi?
They did that by not overturning the results.
No, they really didn't. There is no protocol or precedent for
overturning the results.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director.
He says Masi will be offered another FIA role, but
whether the Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a good
precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it must be
true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and remembered
everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end of the
race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the regulations
or fairness"
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who above
all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to support
such a conspiracy theory.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild
conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that this was
solely Masi?
"backing"?
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the decisions to
ignore the regulations and do what he did.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 13:47:23 -0800, Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-20 1:49 a.m., Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:47:06 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 7:15 am, Alan wrote:Show an example of it being used in that manner.
On 2022-02-17 10:09 a.m., Bigbird wrote:Sacked 'from a position' and given another is not misuse of the term. >>>>>
Alan wrote:'or possibly "promote" him'...
On 2022-02-17 8:32 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 8:05 a.m., D Munz wrote:Sure you did. LOL!
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1): >>>>>>>>>>>
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi >>>>>>>>>>> will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian >>>>>>>>>>> wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. >>>>>>>>>>> This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously >>>>>>>>>>> Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW DLM
Called it.
"What do you want to be that they keep Masi (or possibly
"promote"
him)?"
"He says Masi will be offered another FIA role,"
Indeed, sacked as RD as several of us said; notably not YOU.
...or could you just not read those words?
Let's sum up:
Masi is not being fired: he is being offered a different FIA
position.
The FIA won't disclose what their inquiry discovered.
Since you can't read the words that I actually wrote, there's no
chance that YOU can read between the lines...
...but I bet there are those that can.
Tell me:
When a company finds someone has committed major misconduct...
...do they typically offer that person a different position in the >>>>>> company?
Is someone "sacked" when he's actually offered a different position? >>>>>
geoff
You've got the entire internet to choose from.
Happens regularly in politics e.g. Dominic Rab was sacked as Foreign
Secretary and moved to Justice Secretary
Look up "rhetorical language".
A cabinet shuffle is not a sacking.
When it is a demotion it might as well be
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 21:11:56 -0000 (UTC), "Bigbird" <bigbird.nospam.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0 <user@account.invalid>
wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian wants to
accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can stop
being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at
unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Not having the person who fucked him over in a position where he could
do it again at least acknowledges the wrongdoing and addresses the lack
of trust there would be in the culprit.
I don't think Masi *fucked him over* in any deliberate sense; he made
a bad decision in the heat of the moment which shows he isn't up to
the job and was rightly removed from it.
On 2022-02-23 12:37 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race
Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA
role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
is not a good precedent for the federation but
obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a
good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it must
be true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and remembered everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end of
the race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the
regulations or fairness"
Why? It isn't relevant.
The fact that he told them that especially means something was up.
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who
above all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to support
such a conspiracy theory.
And you've admitted you have none to support your claim he acted on
his own intiative only.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild
conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that this
was solely Masi?
"backing"?
Are you unfamiliar with English?
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the decisions to
ignore the regulations and do what he did.
What EVIDENCE is that?
The special briefing with the team is evidence that other factors
were involved.
What's YOUR evidence that Masi "alone" made the decision.
On 23/02/2022 9:59 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 21:11:56 -0000 (UTC), "Bigbird"
<bigbird.nospam.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:33:31 +1000, keithr0
<user@account.invalid> wrote:
On 18/02/2022 2:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race Director. He says Masi"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to move
will be offered another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer remains to be seen.
This is not a good precedent for the federation but obviously
Ben Sulayem felt that
a change would be a good thing." >> >> FWIW >> DLM
Now that Mercedes have his head on a pike, perhaps Ham can
stop being so petulant.
How on earth does Masi being sacked mitigate Ham's annoyance at unfairly being deprived of a record WDC win?
Not having the person who fucked him over in a position where he
could do it again at least acknowledges the wrongdoing and
addresses the lack of trust there would be in the culprit.
I don't think Masi *fucked him over* in any deliberate sense; he
made a bad decision in the heat of the moment which shows he isn't
up to the job and was rightly removed from it.
Agreed. Herbie Bash said that a red flag should have been thrown
(which was also my instinct as soon as the safety car came out - I
was "What??? No red flag?"). At that stage of that race a red flag
was really the only fair and equitable call - other than finishing
under the SC which would have, although consistent with the previous application of the rules, been an anticlimax.
Under a red the lapped cars would still have been unlapped but at
least there would have been tyre parity between Max and Lewis and a
race for a few laps. It would have been a riveting end to a very
close season.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 12:37 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has decided to
move Michael Masi out of the role of F1 Race
Director. He says Masi will be offered another FIA
role, but whether the Australian wants to accept
whatever role is on offer remains to be seen. This
is not a good precedent for the federation but
obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change would be a
good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it must
be true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and remembered
everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end of
the race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the
regulations or fairness"
Why? It isn't relevant.
LOL. You have rarely said anything so stupid... and you say a lot of
stupid things.
The fact that he told them that especially means something was up.
Don't be mealy mouthed. Elaborate, giving all the context you have.
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who
above all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to support
such a conspiracy theory.
And you've admitted you have none to support your claim he acted on
his own intiative only.
That is yet another falsehood. The entirety of everything that has been published suggests he was solely responsible for his decisions.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild
conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that this
was solely Masi?
"backing"?
Are you unfamiliar with English?
I am unfamiliar with the way you attempt to use/abuse it.
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the decisions to
ignore the regulations and do what he did.
What EVIDENCE is that?
"ALL" available evidence.
Are you unfamiliar with English.
The special briefing with the team is evidence that other factors
were involved.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that
statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will disregard
the regulations and the teams all agree.
What's YOUR evidence that Masi "alone" made the decision.
Everything of relevance that has been published.
Which is very different from the "NOTHING" that you admit you have.
On 2022-02-24 3:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 12:37 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good precedent
for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it
must be true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and
remembered everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end
of the race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the
regulations or fairness"
Why? It isn't relevant.
LOL. You have rarely said anything so stupid... and you say a lot of
stupid things.
The fact that he told them that especially means something was up.
Don't be mealy mouthed. Elaborate, giving all the context you have.
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who
above all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to
support such a conspiracy theory.
And you've admitted you have none to support your claim he acted
on his own intiative only.
That is yet another falsehood. The entirety of everything that has
been published suggests he was solely responsible for his decisions.
Ummmmm.... ...nope.
And we know there is information that HAS not been published.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that
this was solely Masi?
"backing"?
Are you unfamiliar with English?
I am unfamiliar with the way you attempt to use/abuse it.
You really didn't know what I meant by "backing" in this context?
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the decisions
to ignore the regulations and do what he did.
What EVIDENCE is that?
"ALL" available evidence.
OK. Give an example.
Are you unfamiliar with English.
The special briefing with the team is evidence that other factors
were involved.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that
statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will
disregard the regulations and the teams all agree.
It isn't necessary.
Do you acknowledge that such a discussion took place?
Yes or no.
What's YOUR evidence that Masi "alone" made the decision.
Everything of relevance that has been published.
Give an example.
Which is very different from the "NOTHING" that you admit you have.
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-24 3:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 12:37 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward
(joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role of
F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be offered
another FIA role, but whether the Australian
wants to accept whatever role is on offer
remains to be seen. This is not a good precedent
for the federation but obviously Ben Sulayem
felt that a change would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then it
must be true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and
remembered everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the end
of the race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the
regulations or fairness"
Why? It isn't relevant.
LOL. You have rarely said anything so stupid... and you say a lot of
stupid things.
The fact that he told them that especially means something was up.
Don't be mealy mouthed. Elaborate, giving all the context you have.
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those above, who
above all did not want this season to end under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to
support such a conspiracy theory.
And you've admitted you have none to support your claim he acted
on his own intiative only.
That is yet another falsehood. The entirety of everything that has
been published suggests he was solely responsible for his decisions.
Ummmmm.... ...nope.
LIAR. You have admitted you have no evidence to the contrary.
And we know there is information that HAS not been published.
Sure, maybe it says you are an ignorant cunt. You certainly can't prove otherwise.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or wild
conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares that
this was solely Masi?
"backing"?
Are you unfamiliar with English?
I am unfamiliar with the way you attempt to use/abuse it.
You really didn't know what I meant by "backing" in this context?
No. For someone who has previously demonstrated a hypocritical pedantry
it makes no sense whatsoever.
Would you like to elaborate?
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the decisions
to ignore the regulations and do what he did.
What EVIDENCE is that?
"ALL" available evidence.
OK. Give an example.
Every single article that discussed the decisions taken in Abu Dhabi.
https://www.google.com/search?q=masis+abu+dhabi+decisions
A good few hundred here I would think.
Do you have a single one to the contrary?
You have certainly FAILED to declare even one in the last few months.
Are you unfamiliar with English.
The special briefing with the team is evidence that other factors
were involved.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that
statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will
disregard the regulations and the teams all agree.
It isn't necessary.
Not if you admit you really don't know what was said except in the
loosest terms that do not support your assertions in the slightest.
Do you acknowledge that such a discussion took place?
Yes or no.
No, Clearly no discussion that would support your claim that Masi was
given the authority to ignore the regulations.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that
statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will
disregard the regulations and the teams all agree
Do you admit you cannot do that (because you are dishonest and are
attempting to misrepresent an undocumented discussion)?
YES or NO.
What's YOUR evidence that Masi "alone" made the decision.
Everything of relevance that has been published.
Give an example.
See above.
Got it.
On 2022-02-24 10:31 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-24 3:49 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 12:37 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-23 4:11 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-18 1:54 a.m., Bigbird wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:19 p.m., geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2022 5:05 am, D Munz wrote:
Apparently they have decided. From Joe Saward (joeblogsf1):
"The FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has
decided to move Michael Masi out of the role
of F1 Race Director. He says Masi will be
offered another FIA role, but whether the
Australian wants to accept whatever role is
on offer remains to be seen. This is not a
good precedent for the federation but
obviously Ben Sulayem felt that a change
would be a good thing."
FWIW
DLM
Was inevitable.
Yup.
The FIA needed a scapegoat.
No, they didn't.
Yes... ...they really did.
Oh well, if an intransigent, habitual liar insists then
it must be true /s
So why did they need a scapegoat?
Because it's obvious to anyone who actually learned and remembered everything that went on
(including Masi's special instructions to the
teams before the race that any safety car period near the
end of the race would be ended as quickly as possible),
Quote the part where he says "with total disregard for the regulations or fairness"
Why? It isn't relevant.
LOL. You have rarely said anything so stupid... and you say a
lot of stupid things.
The fact that he told them that especially means something
was up.
Don't be mealy mouthed. Elaborate, giving all the context you
have.
that Masi did not act
solely of his own accord.
No, that is yet another falsehood.
He acted with the influence and pressure from those
above, who above all did not want this season to end
under a yellow flag.
You have already admitted you have no evidence whatsoever to support such a conspiracy theory.
And you've admitted you have none to support your claim he
acted on his own intiative only.
That is yet another falsehood. The entirety of everything that
has been published suggests he was solely responsible for his decisions.
Ummmmm.... ...nope.
LIAR. You have admitted you have no evidence to the contrary.
You've presented no evidence he acted solely on his own.
None.
And we know there is information that HAS not been published.
Sure, maybe it says you are an ignorant cunt. You certainly can't
prove otherwise.
Do you acknowledge that the FIA held an inquiry and then declined to
make the findings of that inquiry available?
Yes or no.
Try not to rely too heavily on your lack of evidence or
wild conspiracy theories.
So don't act like you, who without any backing declares
that this was solely Masi?
"backing"?
Are you unfamiliar with English?
I am unfamiliar with the way you attempt to use/abuse it.
You really didn't know what I meant by "backing" in this context?
No. For someone who has previously demonstrated a hypocritical
pedantry it makes no sense whatsoever.
Would you like to elaborate?
"backing": a colloquialism for "support" in the sense of "support for
a position held".
WTF are you on about.
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE suggests that Masi alone made the
decisions to ignore the regulations and do what he did.
What EVIDENCE is that?
"ALL" available evidence.
OK. Give an example.
Every single article that discussed the decisions taken in Abu
Dhabi.
Sorry. Saying "every single article" is a cop-out.
https://www.google.com/search?q=masis+abu+dhabi+decisions
A good few hundred here I would think.
Do you have a single one to the contrary?
You have certainly FAILED to declare even one in the last few
months.
You've yet to present one that supports your position.
And I've declared the acknowledged-to-be-unusual-at-the-time
announcement by Masi before the race that any safety car period
towards the end of that race would be ended as quickly as possible.
Do you acknowledge that that was told to the teams prior to the race?
Yes or no.
Are you unfamiliar with English.
The special briefing with the team is evidence that other
factors were involved.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will
disregard the regulations and the teams all agree.
It isn't necessary.
Not if you admit you really don't know what was said except in the
loosest terms that do not support your assertions in the slightest.
Do you acknowledge that such a discussion took place?
Yes or no.
No, Clearly no discussion that would support your claim that Masi
was given the authority to ignore the regulations.
I'm not asking whether you agree it supports my claim.
I'm asking if you acknowledge that in an unusual move, Masi informed
the teams especially for the final GP that any safety car period near
the end of the race would be ended as quickly as possible.
Do you acknowledge that that statement was made to the teams?
Yes or no.
Why not remind us of exactly what the words and context of that
statement is with emphasis on the bit where he says he will
disregard the regulations and the teams all agree
Do you admit you cannot do that (because you are dishonest and are attempting to misrepresent an undocumented discussion)?
YES or NO.
Until you honestly answer my question, I will defer answering yours.
What's YOUR evidence that Masi "alone" made the decision.
Everything of relevance that has been published.
Give an example.
See above.
Where you provided no actual example. Got it.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 46:20:47 |
| Calls: | 6,648 |
| Files: | 12,198 |
| Messages: | 5,329,853 |
