Is "having the last word" what we should be aiming for, in these forums?
Shouldn't we be trying to post helpful; stimulating; informative; or other positive stuff?
Patron Saint of Pitchers
Re: how to get the last word no matter what
Is "having the last word" what we should be aiming for, in these forums?
Shouldn't we be trying to post helpful; stimulating; informative; or other positive stuff?
"Whate'er should be our Zodiac's star
We all are born to make or mar.
To each is gi'en a bag of tools
Some mentors, and a set of rules:
And each must carve, ere life has flown,
A stumbling block, or a stepping-stone"
(Author unknown)
Generation 35.
"Spikes" The cleats on baseball boots
"Spikes" On which newspaper editors impale copy for future reference, or ultimate destruction.
sorry hgm
ive seen you say at least twice that such back and forths would simply end if the other person stopped replying.
its time to for you to realize and accept that you could stop replying as well.
its extremely hypocritical.
and lest you forget ,
since i dont actually care to converse with you
continually hammering away does nothing but reinforce
that speaking with you is always going to be circular.
and therefore pointless
{ Don't even try to say that I twisted your thread into a flame war }
exsqueeze me - notice the link i post .
that guy posted somehting about hi rookie of the year....
which turned into
SIXTEEN FRICKING PAGES of
is too
is not
and speaking of altering words, funny how you changed my sentence from
"fray" "argument" to discussion.
also kinda funny how you dont notice at the people in your closer topic who disagree , cuz they are as plain as day , and its also funny how the initial post and several replies have vanished. i recall that thread started with you giving a specific example with mariano and torre, thats magically vanished.
so if youre going to say something like "show me where"
dont edit the threads beforehand.
very convenient !
so now im going to outright challenge you.
IF you can manage to simply not hit reply ,
i wont see any need to further share my actual opinion of you or the situation.
JUST to be fair to HGM,
i think maybe i am just confused and it is this closed thread about basically the same thing that i was thinking of when referring to editing.
http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=157502
E=I*R
You don't have to repeat yourself. Those of us reading know what you said, even if some others who are replying (seemingly intentionally) do not. If their selectively ignoring things, there's no doubt that it's intentional. Regardless, the repetition pisses people off because they want to be pissed off, and it's easy to get pissed about that. You're being baited, and you walk right into it every single time.Originally Posted by HoustonGM
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
E=I*R
Perfect example:
He was not fired - he did NOT accept the offer made - it was his choice.Good points.
Personally, I would not have fired Joe Torre because I do think he's a great fit for the Yankees. But also, I don't praise him because he won 4 World Series. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.
It will be interesting to see next year the "minimalist" impact of managers on baseball though,unlike you I believe that managers' have a large impact on the results of a game & thus the season.But also, I don't praise him because he won 4 World Series. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.I would have not lowballed him for the sole purpose of making him seem like the guy at fault. I would have resigned him. Whatever. You get the point.He was not fired - he did NOT accept the offer made - it was his choice.
Unfortunately, if Rivera, Pettite, Posada, and A-Rod all leave, the Yankees are going to do worse, and than everybody's going to say "See! Joe Torre should've stayed! The Yankees suck without him!" - completely ignoring the fact that the Yankees no longer have the best player in the league, a great catcher, the greatest closer of all time, and a good pitcher.It will be interesting to see next year the "minimalist" impact of managers on baseball though,unlike you I believe that managers' have a large impact on the results of a game & thus the season.
If the Yankees undergo significant roster changes, there's no way to at all tell what Joe Torre's impact on winning/losing was. Even if they stay relatively the same, comparing win-loss record after next season to Torre's reign still says nothing. Jorge Posada is unlikely to repeat his career year. Other players will outperform expectations. Others will play worse than they did this year. All things unrelated to the manager.That's baiting.Yes I did get the point (that is why II would have not lowballed him for the sole purpose of making him seem like the guy at fault. I would have resigned him. Whatever. You get the point.-ed,btw) but the facts are 1) he was given an offer of 5 million for 1 year * & 2) he REFUSED ipso facto/thus he was not fired.
This is all hypothetical & totally subjective AS OF TODAY.The point I made was in reply to the "minimalistic" view of the role of the manager made here:Unfortunately, if Rivera, Pettite, Posada, and A-Rod all leave, the Yankees are going to do worse, and than everybody's going to say "See! Joe Torre should've stayed! The Yankees suck without him!" - completely ignoring the fact that the Yankees no longer have the best player in the league, a great catcher, the greatest closer of all time, and a good pitcher.
If the Yankees undergo significant roster changes, there's no way to at all tell what Joe Torre's impact on winning/losing was. Even if they stay relatively the same, comparing win-loss record after next season to Torre's reign still says nothing. Jorge Posada is unlikely to repeat his career year. Other players will outperform expectations. Others will play worse than they did this year. All things unrelated to the manager.
my reply:. That's a great accomplishment, but I agree with you, his impact was minimal. The players did it. And likewise, his impact on the losing is minimal.
* & he would still have been the HIGHEST paid manager in Baseball
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Yes that should be aim (except perhaps in certain Ejection's threads) but also the information has to be correct.
E=I*R
"the information has to be correct" is such a perfect excuse for you, isn't it?
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Valentine Lake Horror
lol
If HGM wants to "debate" everyone on the forums until they're banned, then let him. If people are going to keep on being banned/chastised/threatened/insulted for posting in threads he's involved in, then eventually people will wise up and limit their replies to him, ignore him, or just be permanently banned.
That's what it's come down to for a bunch of people now. Just leave the sandbox when he comes. No need to do anything else, just ignore him.
Ohms, if HGM is repeatedly going to use that tactic in his posts, then turnabout is fair play. He want's to "debate a point endlessly with someone who's willing to do it with him, let him. So what? If no one else wants to read it, no one's forcing them to read it. So long as it doesn't degenerate to swears or threats of physical harm, let them type until their fingers bleed. Why bother moderating what one mod and several members don't want moderated? Let 'em have a debate thread all to themselves. Set up a stream of conciousness thread and see where it ends. Could actually be interesting to see where it winds it's way to in a month or three.
Valentine Lake Horror
Good post, RH. I tend to agree.
Valentine Lake Horror
That is..the part about letting people debate endlessly. Its like in a typical poker game, where there is usually a 3 raise limit, per round. Except if there is just 2 players left in the hand...then they can raise each other endlessly. I suppose that, at some point, a discussion/debate just deteriorates into an argument. At some point, no one is going to convince anyone else that they are wrong. However, if thats how people want to spend their time, as RH points out, let them. Nobody has to read it, or comment on it. Now that I think about it, I wonder just how long 2 people would continue an argument in this forum. A week? A year? Might be interesting to see.
E=I*R
That's basically where I am at. That doesn't mean that I have to like that it's going on though, and it most certainly doesn't mean that I can't speak out against it.
That being said, I am going to move the threads that become problematic here to Ejections. These things have a nasty habit of spreading beyond those who want to be involved.
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Posting Permissions
