View Full Version : Dan24 - Why people are getting anoyed with you
WCE2000
26 Jan 2001, 21:02
Dan, ive got nothing against you personally, but you would be aware that alot of people on this board really dislike you.
The reason for this is very simple - you overexplain things. As the hippies always used to say "simplify, man, simplify"
We've all got you point on your finals system so please drop that. Ill admit i got you started on a recent topic, but please give it a break now.
In your post on the biggest rivalray, you post went on for bloody 3 pages or something. Were all aware you love stats, as i do myself, but dont use them non-stop to try and prove things.
------------------
visit the Easts Cricket Club - <A HREF="http://www.eastscricket.com.au" TARGET=_blank>www.eastscricket.com.au
</A>
A must for anybody into statistics - http://cromulent.freehosting.net/
Ummmm...........GO THE CROWS!
sbagman
26 Jan 2001, 21:18
I don't dislike Dan. He seems to be pretty much on the money most times. Just his style of arguement degenerates into frustration and subsequent abuse. Which I think is hilarious, actually, as you can pretty much see the steam coming out of his ears as you read!
BIG POPPA PUMP
27 Jan 2001, 00:38
I gotta stick up for Dan here. What's the point of posting a message or putting your view forward if it's only gonna be 2 words long and nobody knows what the hell youre on about? This is an OPINIONS board, he's just putting his opinion forward. He spends the extra couple of minutes explaining something to get his argument or opinion accross, what's wrong with that?
It's only an opinions board...
BomberGal
28 Jan 2001, 10:02
Yeah, I have to stick up for Dan too. Explaining things is just a way of getting your point across! If he just said "Well, yeah, just because" etc all the time, we'd think him pretty boring huh?!
I'll stick up for you as well Dan.I dunno why but I am. :D
------------------
"Screw you guys,I'm goin' home "
Stealth bomber
28 Jan 2001, 12:29
I wish that Dan (and some other Essendon supporters in here) would be a bit more humble in victory. There is no need to repeatedly remind the world who is on top of the ladder at the moment.
Generally the excuse is that "we won it all so we have the right to be arrogant". I don't really agree with that; generally I don't think anything gives me that right.
That being said, I think some people need to leave him alone. People are making an effort to bait him frequently.
Originally posted by Stealth bomber:
I wish that Dan (and some other Essendon supporters in here) would be a bit more humble in victory. There is no need to repeatedly remind the world who is on top of the ladder at the moment.
Generally the excuse is that "we won it all so we have the right to be arrogant". I don't really agree with that; generally I don't think anything gives me that right.
That being said, I think some people need to leave him alone. People are making an effort to bait him frequently.
I think ya right Stealth, Dan's entitled to his opinions same as me, you and everyone else on this board. I enjoy reading his verbal stoushes with other posters. Keep it up Dan, the place would be boring without your posts (even though i disagree with a lot of what you right..er..write).
where's wally?
Stealth,
I am probably more humble in real life than you may think I am. I just enjoy the gloating as a bit of fun. You don't win premierships every year, so you should enjoy it while it lasts.
I appreciate the game of Australian Football. It comes first. If Essendon never existed, then I'm sure I would still have followed the game, through another team.
I just find it very difficult on these boards to tolerate fools, that's all. And there are a lot of fools.
Originally posted by Dan24:
It comes first.
Not the basis for another topic I hope Dan :D
Dan
You said you find it hard to tolerate fools and that there are a lot of them on these boards. Is your definition of a fool someone that doesn't agree with you?
------------------
I am grateful that I am not as judgmental as all these censorious, self-righteous people around me.
homework_boy
29 Jan 2001, 01:10
a fool is something I get called frequently! Did you just wake up or about to go to bed?
Captain Sensible
29 Jan 2001, 05:31
say what you like Dan. Premierships only come so often. If the doggies ever win one I'd still be celebrating(probably be thinking of having a sleep by now though). And anyway if the post gets to boring I just skim through it. Its better than having to listen to people in real life.
magpie_joffa
29 Jan 2001, 05:42
Dan you are probably a nice guy for all i know.But one thing which is very evident in your posts and that is YOU dont have a sense of humor.This is very sad for someone your age,and believe it or not you are not allways right, you come across as a very cold and boring person.I suggest in all sincerity you piss off those stat books.The one negative about stat books is they really dont show what YOU think.You would be so boring down the pub with the boys infact i think you would be kind of lost.And believe you me if you showed up at the pub with a stat book it would be appropiately shoved up
your ass.And dan we have arseholes and even you have an arshole what im getting at is arseholes are like opinions we all have one.
You remind me of a spoilt child one that cracks the shits when he cant get his own way.In fact if someone disagrees with you SO WHAT...get on with it mate,the sun will still rise tomorrow.So please i dont want this to be a bitch session.i have told you what i think and i hope it helps you.
------------------
Well they blew up the chicken man in philly last night now they blew up his house too down on the boardwalk they're gettin'ready for a fight gonna see what them racket boys can do,SHITE!!
We ALL have our faults....
------------------
Get Over It!!!
Dan, you post with passion and belief. I enjoy reading your posts.
May there be more Dan's in this world and fewer people that fear voicing their opinions lest they be hurt.
------------------
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
Joffa,
I can assure you I do have a sense of humour. It's just a bit more sensible that your version of humour. In fact, I wouldn't call your version humour. It's more like insult, followed by you laughing at yourself thinking you're funny.
A lot of the suff I post on here has nothing to do with footy and I acually have quite a wide interest in heaps of different things and all sorts of topics. You really don't know me at all.
I kow you proably won't believe me, but I am a pretty easy going sort of person in real life. I don't see the point in getting stressed and I love to see the lighter side of things. How I come across to you through my "posts", is really irrelevant. :D
The Old Dark Navy's
29 Jan 2001, 16:10
Well, live and let live as I always say!!
However, one does not become a fool by stating an opinion that is in contrast to your own and then backing up that opinion with argument that has merit. If you can not adequately get your point across after people have answered your arguments, regardless of who is right or wrong, you are out of line calling them fools. See we can throw the same line back if we so choose. I think you should clarify or retract that opinion expressed.
Have a nice evening :D
------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body
Well, a fool to me, is someone that doesn't back up their arguments with anything of merit. You know, people that say stuff like:
"Oh, it's been that way for 100 years so it MUST be right."
There are some people that just can't see things any differently to how they are now.
I also think a fool is someone who doesn't agree with logic and common-sense. How can one not agree with logic and common-sense?
The Old Dark Navy's
29 Jan 2001, 17:42
Well, I always provide valid points whether others agree or not and everybody has their own version of logic and common sense. To not allow scope for the possibility that somebody else may have an opinion more reasonable than your own means that you feel that you have learned all there is to learn in this world or maybe just on the subject. One would then expect that person to be at the top of that field.
Do you fit into this category Dan?
The moment I figured out (in my teens) that life did not revolve around me and that there was always somebody that knew more about something than I did, was the moment I became a rational human being. I will argue things that are unwinnable on either side because they are a matter of opinion. I will challenge somebody that tells me how I should view something because nobody knows me better than me. I do not argue purely out of spite. I do challenge those that claim their opinions to be fact where only speculation exists. That word fact is very easy to say but very hard to substantiate.
------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body
CrowsOK
29 Jan 2001, 18:13
Originally posted by Dan24:
Well, a fool to me, is someone that doesn't back up their arguments with anything of merit. You know, people that say stuff like:
"Oh, it's been that way for 100 years so it MUST be right."
There are some people that just can't see things any differently to how they are now.
I also think a fool is someone who doesn't agree with logic and common-sense. How can one not agree with logic and common-sense?
Dan, take it from someone who uses logic, analysis and deduction every day professionally, you wouldn't know logic if it bit you on the arse. You have absolutely no friggin idea, mate. Seriously.
Just one example ... one doesn't build up a theory by dreaming up some whacky idea and then scanning through piles of numbers searching for faint statistical support while simultaneously ignoring any explanation that goes contrary to the original concept. Its just not the way to do it, mate. Look up "scientific method" and get back to me.
The amusing thing is, you don't even have any idea that you have no idea. Then, its even more amusing when people give you the true picture ... you get abusive and call them fools.
The very fact that you use the term "common sense" in the same breath as logic tells us something - many things believed by people and labelled as "common sense" are in fact illogical.
Get a grip, Dan. When hundreds of people howl you down and point out where they think your thinking is wrong ... it may just possibly be happening because your thinking is wrong!
At least, Dan, for all our sakes, consider this possibility.
One of the hardest things for rational, logical, common sensed and analyticaly minded people to get to grips with is that the majority of people in life very rarely use those qualities! They prefer to take misguided and illogical opinion and regurgitate it as their own thoughts, in most cases to foster approval. Therefore, Dan,you will often be going against an illogical thread which is born out of history, mistake, tradition etc, but will rarely sway opinion.
Let me give you an example :-
Consider what a republic is. Read about it. Look it up in a dictionary.
There can be no doubt to any logical person that not only is Australia a republic but so is England. The power is vested in the people.
Yet, we regularly hear about monarchists. And there probably is not one monarchist in Australia. All people have to do is to understand the meaning of the word monarchist. So simple yet they prefer not to. They relate to the words of respected friends, acquaintances and politicians and prefer to ignore truth and logic. That doesn't make them bad, just different. And that is a key point to learn. We are all different so the way one persons mind works is unlike the next persons.
------------------
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
sbagman
30 Jan 2001, 00:47
Lay off him, geez. If you don't like his posts, don't read them. And haven't you heard the saying "If you havne't got something nice to say...."
Cheers,
A hypocrite.
magpie_joffa
30 Jan 2001, 03:41
Well i have a new name for SHOWBAGS he will now be referred as DOCTOR SPOCK.
------------------
Well they blew up the chicken man in philly last night now they blew up his house too down on the boardwalk they're gettin'ready for a fight gonna see what them racket boys can do,SHITE!!
TigerTank
30 Jan 2001, 04:41
Just curious Dan24.
Do I make your list of fools?
What about Westy Boy?
Shinboners?
------------------
TT - Obligatory bad-tempered Richmond supporter
Me too. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease? :D
Originally posted by TigerTank:
Just curious Dan24.
Do I make your list of fools?
What about Westy Boy?
Shinboners?
Well, when you said that Essendon has no character, that was one of the more foolish comments I have ever heard. I wouldn't say that about any club, let alone the team that just won the premiership, and has been around for 100 years !
As for Shinboners. Well, he's okay, I suppose. He's just a bit of a ******** sometimes that's all.
Westy's alright too. He can just get a bit worked up, when he "thinks" he's right, that's all !
Originally posted by CrowsOK:
Dan, you wouldn't know logic if it bit you on the arse. You have absolutely no friggin idea, mate. Seriously.
When hundreds of people howl you down and point out where they think your thinking is wrong ... it may just possibly be happening because your thinking is wrong!
At least, Dan, for all our sakes, consider this possibility.
I've considered that possibility, and my conclusion is that they are wrong !!!
Oh, and I do know logic. It's not as if my posts are "biased" and "not well thought out" or anything like that.
Remember you're the one who keeps on telling everyone that the Crows were the best team in 1997-98 even though they could only finish 4th and 5th ! You seem to be just about the only person that actually believes the Crows were the best team (over the course of 6 months) in those years.
I wonder if you'd be saying they were the best if the Crows were eliminated after losing to Melbourne in wek one of the finals in 1998. The Crows had to rey on other results to ensure they remained alive. So, if those other results didn't go to plan, and the Crows were eliminated, I wonder if you'd be saying they were the best?
Don't use injuries as an excuse, pal. They are part of the game. Essendon had massive injuries in 1999 and it didn't stop us winning 18 games. Injures are part of the game.
Shinboners
30 Jan 2001, 15:20
Originally posted by Dan24:
As for Shinboners. Well, he's okay, I suppose. He's just a bit of a ******** sometimes that's all.
Yep. Better a ******** only some of the time rather than ALL of the time like you seem to be.
Originally posted by WCE2000:
Dan, ive got nothing against you personally, but you would be aware that alot of people on this board really dislike you.
or put another way :-
Dan, I hate your guts, you get right up my nose and I'm not the only one who hates you. I now take this opportunity to denigrate your character as much as I can.............
I just love it when insults are either prefaced by a nicety or have a smiley on the end to try and tell everyone that the writer is not really a nasty little bleeder
------------------
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
NICK THE PIE MAN
30 Jan 2001, 16:02
Well i don't have a problem with Dan. He seems like a good bloke. And i do enjoy reading his posts.
------------------
"Collingwood forever"
The Old Dark Navy's
30 Jan 2001, 16:19
Spare us the psychology lesson Frodo. If somebody chooses to sugar coat something they wish to say then maybe they are trying to fight an emotion they would rather not have and keep a civil bone in their body.
On the other hand, maybe they mean EXACTLY what they say. When did you get the BigFooty interpreters job??
Some people hide their nastiness behind a few big words and ambiguous rhetoric that they can back out of, if the heat becomes to much.
People have the right to word their feelings as they see fit and reveal as much as they see fit. It's not a cop out. It's a personality trait. Some choose the direct line and whereas they have no skeletons in their closet, they find themselves in trouble more often than not. If you prefer to be a certain way, doesn't mean that everybody else should.
CrowsOK
30 Jan 2001, 16:25
Originally posted by Dan24:
I've considered that possibility, and my conclusion is that they are wrong !!!
Oh, and I do know logic. It's not as if my posts are "biased" and "not well thought out" or anything like that.
Actually Dan, this is just one more place that you are wrong. As for your flawed logic, the most recent example is where you thought that at team which had gained top spot through a season with very few injuries then copping injury for the finals was somehow the "mirror" to the situation of a good team with high rate of injury getting players back for finals. I split my sides over this elementary error.
Its a classic for you, though, Dan. Most of the time you can proceed logically enough, but more often than not you start with false assumptions. Sometimes though your "reasoning" degrades into classical logical blunders, such as the non sequitur I have left as your opening gambit above.
::Remember you're the one who keeps on telling everyone that the Crows were the best team in 1997-98 even though they could only finish 4th and 5th ! You seem to be just about the only person that actually believes the Crows were the best team (over the course of 6 months) in those years.
I have made a good case for that view. High rate of injry throughout the year, then for the last few minor round games burdened themselves with extra workload at training. Certainly, after the tapering off of that workload, as it was designed to do, Crows were then the best performed team in the finals series (except in 98 they mistimed the tapering-off effect). Both times that form when it came was sustained over several matches and enabled them to beat all the "top" sides in consecutive critical games.
Not conclusive proof, by any means, but certainly good evidence that when Crows had a "normal" number of players available they were at least as good as any other contender for the best team of those years. This was the claim, BTW, and backed up with evidence, a valid enough case to form an OPINION on. Just because it doesn't concur with YOUR view Dan doesn't make it wrong. Nor does having such a view make one foolish.
::I wonder if you'd be saying they were the best if the Crows were eliminated after losing to Melbourne in wek one of the finals in 1998. The Crows had to rey on other results to ensure they remained alive. So, if those other results didn't go to plan, and the Crows were eliminated, I wonder if you'd be saying they were the best?
Nope. Admitted several times over that the Crows didn't get the timing right here, and that that game was a poor one indeed from Crows. If it had cost them their finals campaign, then certainly "the best" team wouldn't make such a terminal mistake. OTOH, "the best" team just might take the lessons learned from a near disaster and go on with it ... whereas other teams might be tempted to look at one poor performance and underestimate the opposition. I know which is the worse error to make.
: :Don't use injuries as an excuse, pal. They are part of the game. Essendon had massive injuries in 1999 and it didn't stop us winning 18 games. Injures are part of the game.
I didn't use injuries as an excuse. Here is yet another shining example of how your logic is so flawed. This particular error is called a strawman arguement - arguing against something that is not the opponents position.
How can I be making any type of excuse for years when Crows proved they were the form team? What excuse do I need? What do I need to excuse them for?
Sheesh, Dan, you are a twit sometimes.
Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's:
Spare us the psychology lesson Frodo.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Naaa TODN, it's my hobby.
If somebody chooses to sugar coat something they wish to say then maybe they are trying to fight an emotion they would rather not have and keep a civil bone in their body.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yea, absolutely right
On the other hand, maybe they mean EXACTLY what they say.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cobblers, you are more intelligent than to say that!
When did you get the BigFooty interpreters job??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Whenever I bloody want mate. If ya don't like it presss the back button.
Some people hide their nastiness behind a few big words and ambiguous rhetoric that they can back out of, if the heat becomes to much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They sure do, but the biggest problem anyone can have is to feel any heat at all from a bulletin board!
People have the right to word their feelings as they see fit and reveal as much as they see fit. It's not a cop out. It's a personality trait.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Perfectly correct and everyone has the right to interpret those words and how they perceive those feelings as they see fit and respond as they feel fit.
Some choose the direct line and whereas they have no skeletons in their closet, they find themselves in trouble more often than not.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yea, the truthful have always had a hard time of it. Not so the lilyguilders
If you prefer to be a certain way, doesn't mean that everybody else should.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Perfectly correct, but when Dan is attacked for being open and honest, traits which I personally very much like, then it opens up a forum for opinion. I have responded with mine, like them or not. Your choice
------------------
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
I don't have a problem with Dan. I would say most of the time I would not agree with him but we are all allowed to have our own thoughts.
Carey_is_King
30 Jan 2001, 17:09
Dan,
They can please themselves. You argue with passion, and apart from your occasional tendency to try to turn everything into an Essendon discussion (that's the passion coming through), I have no problem with you or your posts. At least you always set out to substantiate your comments.
Unfortunately, there are very few things discussed on this board which can be definitively proven, as most come down to opinions.
Don't let the "lords of intelligence" push you down. Most of them would not know shit from clay.
------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.
The Old Dark Navy's
30 Jan 2001, 17:27
Frodo, I have chosen not to respond to the content of your reply as I don't feel there was much content to speak of.
However, you have cheered me up with the cobblers and lilyguilders comments. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm packing up my goods and chattles and exiting this post.
:) (Just to piss you off). :)
Dan for an Essendon supporter your ok by me. If i ever see you waving a jacket though its on!!! :)
------------------
I can handle the fighting, its the affection i cant stand and i dont mind us talking just dont try to touch my hand.
Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's:
Frodo, I have chosen not to respond to the content of your reply as I don't feel there was much content to speak of.
However, you have cheered me up with the cobblers and lilyguilders comments. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm packing up my goods and chattles and exiting this post.
TODN, I feel you are a wonderful person but some other wretches may believe that when you say "I have chosen not to respond to the content of your reply" and then go on to actually make a response to the content that you may feel you have been rather duplicitous :D ;) :o :p :eek: :rolleyes: :confused:
------------------
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
CrowsOK,
We will go back and forth for hours, if we keep this up.
I have stated many times that I think the Crows were a very "good" team in 1997 and 1998.
But I'm not going to beleive they were the best, just because you tell me they were. I don't believe they were the years best team in either of those years. Injuries are not something that you can measure. There are too many variables.
Look, I think you are being guilty of exactly the same thing that I always get accused of. I'm sorry, but IN MY OPINION, the Crows were NOT the best team of the year (even though they won the Grand Final) in 1997-98. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I feel.
frodo
Congratulations, you have worked out how to use the smilies. :rolleyes:
------------------
mantis
The Old Dark Navy's
31 Jan 2001, 15:51
Bravo Frodo, nitpicker par excellence
CrowsOK
31 Jan 2001, 17:28
Originally posted by Dan24:
CrowsOK,
We will go back and forth for hours, if we keep this up.
I have stated many times that I think the Crows were a very "good" team in 1997 and 1998.
But I'm not going to beleive they were the best, just because you tell me they were. I don't believe they were the years best team in either of those years. Injuries are not something that you can measure. There are too many variables.
Look, I think you are being guilty of exactly the same thing that I always get accused of. I'm sorry, but IN MY OPINION, the Crows were NOT the best team of the year (even though they won the Grand Final) in 1997-98. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I feel.
No need to feel sorry for that, you are entitled to an opinion. See thread on "consistency or flair" after a while to see what people in general feel.
The problem you have is that you don't express your opinion as opinion. You keep claiming nonsense like "its a fact" or "everybody thinks so" or "its proven by" or somesuch, when in fact all you have is your opinion. Thats what gets up peoples goat. They way you try to foist your opinion upon everybody as gospel. And the way you try to call others "foolish" or "ridiculous" if they hold a differing opinion.
People just won't buy that sort of thing Dan. Never have, never will. "Up yours" is by far and away their most likely response.
OTOH, we can all accept what you say if you present it as your opinion. I can't really see anybody having any problem with that.
You can say what you want CrowsOK, but it's a "fact" that the Crows finished 4th and 5th after the home and away in 1997 and 1998, so there is always going to be a question mark over whetehr they were the best. You're just going to have to live with that question mark. It really doesn't mater because you won the GF, but there will always be a question mark over how good they "really" were.