Has Max been a verryyy naughty boy?

[mcdenife]

Whiteblue wrote:

what a ridiculous speculation

fyi, the man's name is Theissen and not Thiessen! He has been in F1 for 9 years as motorsport director of BMW. His Phd was on engine design and he is honorary professor of Technical University Dresden.

Why is my speculation ridiculous? I cant see why you are bothered by how I spell Thiessen or what his resume has do with it or anything...or perhaps you are Thiessen?

[ben_watkins]

The Dutch are also pretty dismayed by the outcome..

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67959

"Well, we've known Max for a long time. He is always pushing the arguments against him away and he is promoting his own arguments," he added.

"And he has a lot of contacts with the smaller clubs and what we have seen in the general assembly is that more or less the smaller clubs are in favour.

"But when you look to the bigger clubs, the AAA (USA), the triple A in Australia, the JAF (Japan) of 70 million members, the ADAC in Germany, the NWB in the Netherlands, they all are against. So when you count the members behind the members then I don't think he will succeed."

Van Woerkom suggested some clubs are now likely to withdawn all involvement with the FIA, following ADAC's example."

[WhiteBlue]

If Thiessen said: "I love Hitler" the newspapers aren't going to print "Honda spokesman supports Hitler".

True....they will most likely print "BMW Motosport spokesman (or Boss) supports Hitler", rather than "BMW supports Hitler". The F1 teams will say the same thing Thiessen (as team boss) said. They cant say anything else because its not up to them and cannot go it alone (thats up to FOM and that in turns depends on what the clubs, manufactures, etc do). I guess we will see.

Whiteblue wrote:

what a ridiculous speculation

fyi, the man's name is Theissen and not Thiessen! He has been in F1 for 9 years as motorsport director of BMW. His Phd was on engine design and he is honorary professor of Technical University Dresden.

Why is my speculation ridiculous? I cant see why you are bothered by how I spell Thiessen or what his resume has do with it or anything...or perhaps you are Thiessen?

Your speculation is ridiculous because a man like Dr. Mario Theissen would never say "I love Hitler". He is a highly educated engineer with a religious christian view of life. it is annoying to have such a person brought in connection with Nazi sympathy. deliberately continuing to misspell the name isn't exactly respectfull when you are aware of your mistake. I am not Mario Theissen but I am a compatriot who likes his work and respects his achievements.

[mcdenife]

Whiteblue wrote:

Your speculation is ridiculous because a man like Dr. Mario Theissen would never say "I love Hitler". He is a highly educated engineer with a religious christian view of life. it is annoying to have such a person brought in connection with Nazi sympathy. deliberately continuing to misspell the name isn't exactly respectfull when you are aware of your mistake. I am not Mario Theissen but I am a compatriot who likes his work and respects his achievements.

An analogy is quite different to speculation. I was responding to an analogy by gcdugas and neither of us were speculating. Unless you are Thiessen, I cannot see why or how you are taking my mis-spelling of his name personal, compatriot or not. If Thiessen is offended by this I am sure he can speak/write for himself. He is no different to anybody else there have been speculations or misspelling about.

On a side note: My fingers never learned to spell but I will keep on trying to teach them.

[WhiteBlue]

Whiteblue wrote:

Your speculation is ridiculous because a man like Dr. Mario Theissen would never say "I love Hitler". He is a highly educated engineer with a religious christian view of life. it is annoying to have such a person brought in connection with Nazi sympathy. deliberately continuing to misspell the name isn't exactly respectfull when you are aware of your mistake. I am not Mario Theissen but I am a compatriot who likes his work and respects his achievements.

An analogy is quite different to speculation. I was responding to an analogy by gcdugas and neither of us were speculating. Unless you are Thiessen, I cannot see why or how you are taking my mis-spelling of his name personal, compatriot or not. If Thiessen is offended by this I am sure he can speak/write for himself. He is no different to anybody else there have been speculations or misspelling about.

On a side note: My fingers never learned to spell but I will keep on trying to teach them.

so what? it is a ridiculous analogy then if you want.
keep exercising your fingers! or you may learn to type the name correctly by accepting reality.

[mcdenife]

so what? it is a ridiculous analogy then if you want.
keep exercising your fingers! or you may learn to type names correctly by dealing rationally with a bit of criticism.

We could have used any name in the analogy and it would still be valid. That you think its ridiculous merely because of the use of your compatriot, whom you have a lot of respect for, is in itself ridiculous. Thiessen might be offended by the misspelt name but I dont think even he would label the analogy ridiculous. Regardless, I reserve the right to mis-spell (or not) his name as I wish (at least till he joins this forum).

[donskar]

WhiteBlue, please calm down and read over some of your past email. You sometimes burrow down into minutiae while missing the main point other posters are attempting to make.

Example; one of our posters pointed out to you that what Max did IS A CRIME. You basically shrugged and said, "yes, but" and off you went.

And how a person spells is NOT necessarily indicative of their ability to reason. All my posts are sent rather furtively from work, so I type as fast as I can and often leave out some of the points I'd like to make. I assume (usually rightly) that we are a loose brotherhood of common interests and we will thus "cut each other some slack."

Just my impression. Meant to be constructive.

My opinion: this is a black day for F1. Sponsors' senior management and politicians will NOT want to be associated with Max any more in the future than they are now. They do not want to be seen with him because of what he DID, not whether or not he got a vote of confidence. Case in point: OJ Simpson. He was acquitted. BUT he has been persona non grata ever since.

My hope is that this sordid episode is the beginning of the end of the current structure of F1 as we know it.

[ben_watkins]

The other thing that I can see happening now, is that Max will seek retribution on the clubs and people who spoke up against him, such as BRDC, ADAC, AAA etc.

Bang goes the British GP, the German one and so on.

[nae]

on the issue of spelling, do you annunciate properly in the pub when talking to mates or do you chat away casually, i treat forums as a casual form of communication and not a CV or job interview. saying that thins improved for me greatly with firefox and it spell checker.

the British GP has been in the firing line for many years and this episode is yet another nail in its coffin

having said that i think the back room motor sport types in the world will be doing a lot of 'discussing the future' in the next few weeks, months and years

there is still hope

well i hope there is at least

[WhiteBlue]

WhiteBlue, please calm down and read over some of your past email. You sometimes burrow down into minutiae while missing the main point other posters are attempting to make.

Example; one of our posters pointed out to you that what Max did IS A CRIME. You basically shrugged and said, "yes, but" and off you went.

And how a person spells is NOT necessarily indicative of their ability to reason. All my posts are sent rather furtively from work, so I type as fast as I can and often leave out some of the points I'd like to make. I assume (usually rightly) that we are a loose brotherhood of common interests and we will thus "cut each other some slack."

Just my impression. Meant to be constructive.

My opinion: this is a black day for F1. Sponsors' senior management and politicians will NOT want to be associated with Max any more in the future than they are now. They do not want to be seen with him because of what he DID, not whether or not he got a vote of confidence. Case in point: OJ Simpson. He was acquitted. BUT he has been persona non grata ever since.

My hope is that this sordid episode is the beginning of the end of the current structure of F1 as we know it.

Donskar, I believe that Ciro's opinion that Max SM session was a crime is shared by a minute number of people. Certainly not by the authorities in the UK who might want to prosecute Max if it were. I listened to one hour of public discussion on the BBC (which is petty sharp in legal terms) and none of the experts and callers thought it was illegal.

cutting some slack would perhaps also include not to make Hitler and Nazi remarks whenever something or someone German is involved. I found the analogy far fetched and inappropriate for the person it was applied to. that was at the core of my comment. call me over sensitive but other peole have other issues. I would not engage in killing holy cows or eating pork with muslims either.

Dankar, nae and all others, forget the typing/spelling issue if you please. I accept that it is irrelevant.

[Belatti]

Hi, I left this thread arround page 20 because I got bored. I want Max out because his time is out, but don´t give a f*ck about what he did. Lust is cool, but Max don´t.

Let´s see the definition for crime.

crime
A noun
1 crime, law-breaking

(criminal law) an act punishable by law; usually considered an evil act; "a long record of crimes"

2 crime

an evil act not necessarily punishable by law; "crimes of the heart"

Come on! Max having sex with 5 paid girls (to me, a less offensive term than whore, prostitute or hooker... after all we are all prostitutes just because we work ) is not evil! Max guiding F1 certainly is!

Would anyone dare to resume what have we learnt with all these 40+ pages of discussion? (Beyond we all have different perceptions about what a leader-public figure should do with his private life and we all are susceptible when other generalize, as it is the case of someone being called "Nazi" just because it collects WW2 memorabilia)

[donskar]

I like grandprix.com for issues peripheral to the actual racing in F1. I think they expressed the situation in an inelligent and dispassionate way (emphasis added by me):

[quote]The decision by the FIA General Assembly to support Max Mosley paints the federation in a very poor light, at least in the eyes of the general public. A large number of people in this world believe that married men should not break their vows and involve themselves with lurid sexual games, involving uniformed dominatrices. They believe that personal betrayals of trust are not something that should be ignored because it is in one's private life, but rather should be seen as an indication of the character of the person concerned. If one follows this logic, it is clear that Max Mosley is not a man who can be trusted. He admits that he did what he did. What he does not do is admit his own responsibility. It is, in his mind, someone else's fault that he was caught with his trousers literally around his ankles when in reality he is to blame for having put himself in that position. Whether it is written in the statutes or not, the people who elected Mosley expected him not to get mixed up in such scandals. If they had suspected such things it is unlikely that he would have ever been elected president. The fact that he was caught means that he cannot really fulfil the functions of the president and so the two deputy-presidents must stand in for him.[/quote]

All I would add is that there is no question about the veracity of the film. That is, no one made up the event, then tried to pretend Max did something he did not do. He did it and he got caught. And it makes no difference about the circumstances under which he was caught. What matter is the perception of the public and sponsors. That perception is not positive. AGAIN, what WE think has little bearing on the overall impact of this affair.

[WhiteBlue]

...Would anyone dare to resume what have we learnt with all these 40+ pages of discussion? (Beyond we all have different perceptions about what a leader-public figure should do with his private life and we all are susceptible when other generalize, as it is the case of someone being called "Nazi" just because it collects WW2 memorabilia)

It is pretty simple I believe. One reason to throw someone out is obviously breaking the law.

The other one is double standards. If a minister tells people how to live their life and applies different standards to himself this isn't tolerable.

If a company executive who demands high performance and strikt guidelines for expenses from his people bribes the workers representatives by luxury trips an brothel visits (Volkswagen) it is certainly double standard.

If Max preaches road safety and drives under the influence of alcohol this is double standards.

But if the thing has nothing to do with his special obligations and what he demands of other people it should not have a relevance for him.

A good example from German high level football administration is Franz Beckenbauer whom they call the emperor in Germany. He demanded highest performance from his club and players and from the managers of the last soccer world cup that he organized. He got caught drink driving and subsequently bribing the police officers not to bring charges against him. It was a huge scandal. Eventually they decided it has nothing to do with his job and bad as it is they left him in the job. There were similar controversies as there are with Mosley now. difference is he was universally liked and Mosley does a job that doesn't make that many friends.

Mosley has been compared to Spitzer. I don't see the relevance. Spitzer caught crooks who cheated on taxes and had prosecuted prostitution. He then was himself caught as customer of a high level prostitution ring ($1000/h) which involved certain offenses according to the law in NY. It was also a clear double standard issue because you cannot be a client of those who you prosecute by law. there is a collision of interest.

Personally I would denie a double standard in the Mosley case. He didn't cheat with road safety or received payment for fixing motor racing rules. There were internet suspicions (from the notorious Mr. Rubython) that he was bribed by Ecclestone for the 100 year deal and other FIA/FOM deals. But that has never been prooven by a trial and he cannot be made responsible for rumors. He was simply caught in legal activities that many people find revulsive. His peers had to determine if he was still fit for the job according to their own rules however the rules were made.

I thought that most club presidents would be under great preasure by their members to vote Mosley out. that may have been the case for the big mobility clubs. but you also have to consider that the mobility clubs never asked their members what they thought. at least they didn't in Germany. and they had a conflict with the FIA due to their own sub organization of transnational business. so it isn't quite so clear why for instance the ADAC voted against Mosley. There are mostly negative comments from ADAC members about the German voting policy in the blogs that I have seen.

The main point in my view is that the decision was taken according to the statues and all concerned including F1 will have to live with it for perhaps another 18 months. or perhaps they can continue to bitch and moan about it because they regret they didn't get even for things that they felt was done to them by Mosley. It will make no difference as it made no difference in the 10 weeks before the FIA vote.

I know that I am in a minority with the wish to find out who stiched up Mosley because that is the worst double standard that you can apply. I hate exposing someones private deviations that make him look bad in the public eye and do it by illegal means and lie about it. I cannot even proove that such a thing happened but it is plausible and fits into my experiences of 30 years in business and internal politics. I would hate to have the hippocites at NoTW and in other places get away with it. Bernies and the teams perceived problem with the sponsors is as much a consequence of the media circus that was pushed by the newsgroup concern as it is a consequence of Max having a despicable private hobby. after Mosley was brought to trial I would like to see the other side questioned by the law about the legality of their actions.

in my view there is a pretty good chance that a guilty verdict is the fastest way to finish the Mosley affair. once he sees that they do not get away with it he may be inclined to step back perhaps a lot faster than many people think.

[nae]

whilst i can easily respect your view I find my self wondering how
anyone could conduct business with the full knowledge that mosley
made a vow of fidelity and then regularly ignores his own pledges

the question still remains what else does he lie and deceive about
(oh ok every thing he ever said after all he is a lawyer to trade)

even worse mosleys own solution is that he wont do part of the job
he was elected to do as even he is aware that he is tainted and that
some people will not wont to deal with him.

I am no puritan and i certainly believe private life is exactly that
then again i don't pass judgment or moralize on others in an official
capacity

that is to say i am not a hypocrite whilst max will always be seen as one
even by himself

[WhiteBlue]

whilst i can easily respect your view I find my self wondering how
anyone could conduct business with the full knowledge that mosley
made a vow of fidelity and then regularly ignores his own pledges

with all due respect that is a point that is undefensible. half the mankind (actually 55%) dosen't keep the marital pledge. please look at the divorce figures and add unknown number of cheaters.

that is to say i am not a hypocrite whilst max will always be seen as one even by himself

if you believe that you can end up on the good 45% like one of our valiant moderators claim you have the odds stacked against you.