Mark wrote:

I officially propose this as Mark's official Top
9 best teams of all time...

1. Barcelona 2009-2015
2. Milan 1988-1996
3. Real Madrid 1956-1960
4. Santos 1961-1965
5. Ajax 1969-1973
6. Independiente 1971-1975
7. Real Madrid 2014-2018
8. Penarol 1960-1966
9. Boca Juniors 2000-2003

If you are happy with your list, who are we to argue?

Your list, your rules.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:31:55 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

Mark wrote:

1. Barcelona 2009-2015
2. Milan 1988-1996
3. Real Madrid 1956-1960
4. Santos 1961-1965
5. Ajax 1969-1973
6. Independiente 1971-1975
7. Real Madrid 2014-2018
8. Penarol 1960-1966
9. Boca Juniors 2000-2003

If you are happy with your list, who are we to argue?

Your list, your rules.

It's our list. I think my rules say it doesn't get declared the
unofficial rss-sanctioned list unless there's no strong disagreement
about it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-06-09 11:51, Mark wrote:

On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:31:55 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

Mark wrote:

1. Barcelona 2009-2015
2. Milan 1988-1996
3. Real Madrid 1956-1960
4. Santos 1961-1965
5. Ajax 1969-1973
6. Independiente 1971-1975
7. Real Madrid 2014-2018
8. Penarol 1960-1966
9. Boca Juniors 2000-2003

If you are happy with your list, who are we to argue?

Your list, your rules.

It's our list. I think my rules say it doesn't get declared the
unofficial rss-sanctioned list unless there's no strong disagreement
about it.

That is where the flaw in your process is. You are basically giving any
one individual a complete veto over the position in the list of highly deserving teams. Because of the absence of Liverpool in this list
(pointed out by me and several others), and vetoed only by you with your anti-English league bias, I do not accept this as an RSS sanctioned list.

So STRONG disagreenent hereby registered.

As Blueshirt has often said, you are perfectly within your rights to
publish your own lists, and to modify them according to feedback that
confirms your own biases (and hey, we all have biases). But you can't
speak on behalf of everyone.

As I have mentioned, I will get around to posting a process for voting
on this issue, but right now I am in and out of a medical roundabout,
moving house, and wrapping up my lab after a 40 year career. It won't
be for a wee while.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mark wrote:

On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:31:55 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

Mark wrote:

1. Barcelona 2009-2015
2. Milan 1988-1996
3. Real Madrid 1956-1960
4. Santos 1961-1965
5. Ajax 1969-1973
6. Independiente 1971-1975
7. Real Madrid 2014-2018
8. Penarol 1960-1966
9. Boca Juniors 2000-2003

If you are happy with your list, who are we to argue?

Your list, your rules.

It's our list.

Most definitely NOT!

I think my rules say it doesn't get declared the
unofficial rss-sanctioned list unless there's no strong
disagreement about it.

How strongly do you want me to disagree with you this time?

Your list is certainly not my list and I don't think it will
ever represent the opinion of this newsgroup. But as "Mark's
list" it works fine, so be happy with the teams that you have
chosen and the reasons why you have chosen them... all your
list has to do is work for you.

You seem to be concerned about what the people of RSS think and
want our opinions regarding your choices, but then when we
express disagreement you just continue anyway and still propose
your list as an RSS sanctioned list!!! <shrugs>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

MH wrote:

On 2025-06-09 11:51, Mark wrote:

On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:31:55 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

If you are happy with your list, who are we to argue?

Your list, your rules.

It's our list. I think my rules say it doesn't get declared
the unofficial rss-sanctioned list unless there's no strong
disagreement about it.

That is where the flaw in your process is. You are basically
giving any one individual a complete veto over the position in
the list of highly deserving teams. Because of the absence of
Liverpool in this list (pointed out by me and several others),
and vetoed only by you with your anti-English league bias, I
do not accept this as an RSS sanctioned list.

It's a list with biases and yes, we all have them, but even then
Mark's preferences seem to count a lot more than anybody else's preferences/disagreements, so that only goes to strengthen the
fact that it's "Mark's list" and nothing more.

So STRONG disagreenent hereby registered.

I'm not sure it sinks in, as I feel like a goldfish going around
in the RSS bowl. How many times do people have to disagree?

But I will also express STRONG DISAGREEMENT.

As Blueshirt has often said, you are perfectly within your
rights to publish your own lists, and to modify them according
to feedback that confirms your own biases (and hey, we all
have biases). But you can't speak on behalf of everyone.

Exactly.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mark wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 17:01:07 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

MH wrote:

That is where the flaw in your process is. You are
basically giving any one individual a complete veto over
the position in the list of highly deserving teams.
Because of the absence of Liverpool in this list (pointed
out by me and several others), and vetoed only by you with
your anti-English league bias, I do not accept this as an
RSS sanctioned list.

It's a list with biases and yes, we all have them, but even
then Mark's preferences seem to count a lot more than
anybody else's preferences/disagreements, so that only goes
to strengthen the fact that it's "Mark's list" and nothing
more.

That's nonsense. What about Futbolmetrix's
preferences/disagreements?

His list is his list and your list is your list. That's fine. We
don't all have to agree on what the best club sides are/were.
That's the point you seem to be missing. You are trying to
impose YOUR list on the rest of us. It's YOUR list compiled with
your preferences and biases. So I object the THAT. People having
different ideas of what the best club sides of all time is
perfectly normal. YOUR list is fine, as YOUR list. It is not an
RSS list.

So STRONG disagreenent hereby registered.

I'm not sure it sinks in, as I feel like a goldfish going
around in the RSS bowl. How many times do people have to
disagree?

But I will also express STRONG DISAGREEMENT.

So which teams do you strongly disagree about in my proposal
for the top NINE?

Give it up dude, nobody is interested in your list as an RSS
sanctioned list and more people here have disagreed with it than
agreed. It's your list compiled for your reasons. Continuing to
keep going on and on about it is getting annoying at this stage.

There is football being played in the real world, let's discuss
that... not some hypothetical list comparing teams from
different parts of the world and different eras, which makes it
a near impossible task for 100% agreement anyway as we would all
have different criteria of what makes a team "great" in the
first place.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 8:27:04 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

Mark wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 17:01:07 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:

MH wrote:

That is where the flaw in your process is. You are
basically giving any one individual a complete veto over
the position in the list of highly deserving teams.
Because of the absence of Liverpool in this list (pointed
out by me and several others), and vetoed only by you with
your anti-English league bias, I do not accept this as an
RSS sanctioned list.

It's a list with biases and yes, we all have them, but even
then Mark's preferences seem to count a lot more than
anybody else's preferences/disagreements, so that only goes
to strengthen the fact that it's "Mark's list" and nothing
more.

That's nonsense. What about Futbolmetrix's
preferences/disagreements?

His list is his list and your list is your list. That's fine. We
don't all have to agree on what the best club sides are/were.
That's the point you seem to be missing. You are trying to
impose YOUR list on the rest of us. It's YOUR list compiled with
your preferences and biases. So I object the THAT. People having
different ideas of what the best club sides of all time is
perfectly normal. YOUR list is fine, as YOUR list. It is not an
RSS list.

I'm not trying to impose my list on anybody. We're supposed to be
compiling a list that nobody strongly disagrees with, which would be an
RSS list.

So STRONG disagreenent hereby registered.

I'm not sure it sinks in, as I feel like a goldfish going
around in the RSS bowl. How many times do people have to
disagree?

But I will also express STRONG DISAGREEMENT.

So which teams do you strongly disagree about in my proposal
for the top NINE?

Give it up dude, nobody is interested in your list as an RSS
sanctioned list and more people here have disagreed with it than
agreed. It's your list compiled for your reasons. Continuing to
keep going on and on about it is getting annoying at this stage.

Nobody? Futbolmetrix is for a start. And he's hardly the only one.

There is football being played in the real world, let's discuss
that... not some hypothetical list comparing teams from
different parts of the world and different eras, which makes it
a near impossible task for 100% agreement anyway as we would all
have different criteria of what makes a team "great" in the
first place.

I think you'll find the football played in the 1970s was played in the
real world. What do you think I'm trying to discuss?

If it's going to be an RSS list, I still think it makes more sense to
have a list that nobody strongly disagrees with, rather than a list that includes teams that people do strongly disagree with.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)