Good God, I didn't realise capitalisation was mandatory for usernames. I guess I'll have to go and sit on the naughty step. Although if we're being pedantic, I guess you might have to join me. I refuse to have it implied that I am ****** by a man who can't spell "capital" correctly.
As to your actual argument, I agree that Graham has been near Floyd on a number of occasions. That doesn't qualify him as someone worth talking to in my book. Nor does your assertion that I should listen to Graham simply because he's worked in the sport in an official capacity. What he has to say is the key factor in determining how he should be judged, not that he acted as a cheerleader in the Hatton corner for most of his career.
Thread activity isn't the same as people liking the content of the article in question. This conversation, for example, publicises to those who read it that there are people who woould prefer something else.
Your suggestion that I should follow a link is one idea, but it misses the point in that there could have been another, better article in its place. Terry Dooley was either directed to or chose to seek out Billy Graham and interview him. It's a waste of resources, and my following some other link doesn't mean that this one will go away. In general I would consider it preferable to give feedback rather than not, because things change faster if you do.
You also say that more people like this article than not. Well, I count myself and the two who agree with me in the 'dislike' camp, and you and one other in the 'like' camp, with one chap on his own being surprised about Atlanta. This is not a numerical majority. Unless, of course, I and those who agree with me don't count because we haven't capitalised our usernames?
Now go and stick your head in a plant pot and grow yourself a brain.
As to your actual argument, I agree that Graham has been near Floyd on a number of occasions. That doesn't qualify him as someone worth talking to in my book. Nor does your assertion that I should listen to Graham simply because he's worked in the sport in an official capacity. What he has to say is the key factor in determining how he should be judged, not that he acted as a cheerleader in the Hatton corner for most of his career.
Thread activity isn't the same as people liking the content of the article in question. This conversation, for example, publicises to those who read it that there are people who woould prefer something else.
Your suggestion that I should follow a link is one idea, but it misses the point in that there could have been another, better article in its place. Terry Dooley was either directed to or chose to seek out Billy Graham and interview him. It's a waste of resources, and my following some other link doesn't mean that this one will go away. In general I would consider it preferable to give feedback rather than not, because things change faster if you do.
You also say that more people like this article than not. Well, I count myself and the two who agree with me in the 'dislike' camp, and you and one other in the 'like' camp, with one chap on his own being surprised about Atlanta. This is not a numerical majority. Unless, of course, I and those who agree with me don't count because we haven't capitalised our usernames?
Now go and stick your head in a plant pot and grow yourself a brain.
Comment