Tangent Thread - 2018 Edition

beorach said:
As for the attack on religious types, you were wildly speculating about abortion and sharing that priests used syringes to put holy water in wombs.
Click to expand...




So? He wasn’t doing so here. Do you bring up every argument you’ve ever had with someone every time that person disagrees with you? Because that’s what you’re doing now. Nothing Landlord said implied it had anything whatsoever to do with that topic.

 
beorach said:
If I'm overreacting now, it's because my explanation of what I thought was nothing wasn't accepted the first time.

Again, it doesn't even seem like Landlord knows what his problem with my post was.  He even admitted that people probably vote according to reasoning like what I shared so I don't know why whatever this is still has legs.

Landlord was short and rude with me so the worst I did here was return the favor.  You butted in to support him somehow.  I am not trying to make a big statement as to whether any of this defines anyone but I don't post so much that I can't remember what it is I wrote.
Click to expand...




You’re overreacting. This was a normal discussion until you started accusing people of patronizing you and being mean because you’re Christian or they’re anti-Christian. 

I didn’t butt in to support him. I posted because I disagree with the notion that how Iowa’s running back does has something to do with how Nebraska’s running back does. I don’t give a crap what anyone else said about it.

And more recently I posted to let you know that posting about abortion in the football forum is probably not a good idea. But feel free to keep doing it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
beorach said:
Again, it doesn't even seem like Landlord knows what his problem with my post was. 
Click to expand...


I don't have a problem with your post. But, to hopefully help you understand the nature of why I mindlessly wasted time interacting with your post on a messageboard while bored at work, here it is:

beorach said:
 without a mention of a gimpy Biakabutuka having outrushed him.  
Click to expand...


Runningbacks don't play against each other, so this description seems nonsensical to me. You can outrun somebody that you're racing against. You can outplay someone at an event/sport where the variable you're going against is constant (ie, an obstacle course or something). Or you can outperform someone that you are going directly against. But two runningbacks rushing against each other in a game is a misnomer to me.

Again, this is no big deal. I have no problem with your post. It's just a thing I saw and commented on. No rudeness intended, no need to take it personally. It's not even something I care about. Like, at all. 

Landlord said:
ANYWAYS

There is no set of objective criteria for determining the Heisman. We all know what kind of (superior) player Frazier was to Eddie George, even if everyone else looks at the numbers and doesn't understand why. I think it would be fair to get rid of Crouch's Heisman and give it to Tommie instead though :lol:
Click to expand...

 
Like everyone else, I cannot read intent nor do I care for people telling me my feelings are invalid.

p.s. - Saying one conference has superior rushing defense over another is silly when their teams face different rushing offenses.  ;)

 
beorach said:
Like everyone else, I cannot read intent nor do I care for people telling me my feelings are invalid.
Click to expand...




Even though you admittedly can’t read people’s intent you jumped immediately to the conclusion that someone was harassing you because of a conversation about abortion weeks/months ago in a different forum.

:dunno

 
Moiraine said:
Even though you admittedly can’t read people’s intent you jumped immediately to the conclusion that someone was harassing you because of a conversation about abortion weeks/months ago in a different forum.

:dunno
Click to expand...


I don't think I did.  I admitted I was flip in my original response to Landlord because of how I read his post.  That would have been that without your having jumped in afterward.  Things escalated and I felt he was trolling me but I feel a lot better after reading his last post even though we may not be seeing eye to eye.  You're the only one who seems mad now and it's over board decorum, I guess?  I can own that it's not cool to hold grudges, "laundry list," etc., but you should acknowledge having played a role.  I think you are still mind reading more than I did (or at the least putting more energy into it than I did) but I'm not saying you should know better because only we can know our own hearts.

With respect to intent, I was responding to Landlord's first response alone besides.  I didn't think you were trying to be insulting but I thought, given we had sent private messages over stats in the past, that you'd understand you didn't need to educate me.  I didn't make any conclusion either.  I just thought it might have something to do with it is all I admitted because I couldn't make sense of what we were even arguing about (and when it already felt personal to begin with to me, I hope you follow).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
giphy.gif


 
beorach said:
I don't think I did.  I admitted I was flip in my original response to Landlord because of how I read his post.  That would have been that without your having jumped in afterward.  Things escalated and I felt he was trolling me but I feel a lot better after reading his last post even though we may not be seeing eye to eye.  You're the only one who seems mad now and it's over board decorum, I guess?  I can own that it's not cool to hold grudges, "laundry list," etc., but you should acknowledge having played a role.  I think you are still mind reading more than I did (or at the least putting more energy into it than I did) but I'm not saying you should know better because only we can know our own hearts.

With respect to intent, I was responding to Landlord's first response alone besides.  I didn't think you were trying to be insulting but I thought, given we had sent private messages over stats in the past, that you'd understand you didn't need to educate me.  I didn't make any conclusion either.  I just thought it might have something to do with it is all I admitted because I couldn't make sense of what we were even arguing about (and when it already felt personal to begin with to me, I hope you follow).
Click to expand...




Not mad at all. I found the whole thing out of left field/weird and was trying to help you see reason. I haven’t been mad or upset at any of this.

Again, you made an assumption about what someone said. I disagreed with your logic (still do) and posted about it. You seem to have made the assumption I was talking down to/patronizing you. I was replying to a post with my thoughts on said post, like I normally do. I don’t know why a conversation we had about stats should make me assume you didn’t actually mean that a Michigan RB’s # yards against Eddie George’s team was relevant or should be when it came to George’s Heisman. 

 
Moiraine said:
Not mad at all. I found the whole thing out of left field/weird and was trying to help you see reason. I haven’t been mad or upset at any of this.

Again, you made an assumption about what someone said. I disagreed with your logic (still do) and posted about it. You seem to have made the assumption I was talking down to/patronizing you. I was replying to a post with my thoughts on said post, like I normally do. I don’t know why a conversation we had about stats should make me assume you didn’t actually mean that a Michigan RB’s # yards against Eddie George’s team was relevant or should be when it came to George’s Heisman. 
Click to expand...


Nobody would argue with the statement that TB and the Wolverines outplayed EG and the Buckeyes but remove the teams and it's not logical?  You said you didn't take sides but you did and you weren't adding to any discussion.  I have beaten this dead horse enough, though.  I'm glad we're not mad and everyone else can point at me as the problem child.

 
beorach said:
Nobody would argue with the statement that TB and the Wolverines outplayed EG and the Buckeyes but remove the teams and it's not logical?  You said you didn't take sides but you did and you weren't adding to any discussion.  I have beaten this dead horse enough, though.  I'm glad we're not mad and everyone else can point at me as the problem child.
Click to expand...




Not sure what you’re talking about with removing the teams, but you’re correct that your argument isn’t logical. Michigan’s RB getting more yards than Eddie George in the OSU-UM game shouldn’t impact George’s Heisman chances unless the Michigan RB is one of the top Heisman candidates, because it’s not up to Eddie George to stop the Michigan RB from gaining yards against his defense.

I never said I didn’t take sides, but I’m not sure why it matters to you. I disagreed with your logic and still do. I don’t care what anyone else thinks about it. If I fall on someone’s side, why does it matter? Not sure why it matters to you that I gave my opinion on it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Enhance why are there multiple abortion posts still in the topic? Not sure if you left them there on purpose or missed them. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top