The never ending Priddis debate - part II

[Miguel Sanchez]

So he had a decent game against a s**t side that finished below us on the ladder that we couldn't even FTB.

FTB?

 

[Smotie]

FTB?

Flat track bully.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Flat track bully.

They were in the eight at the time, and for most of the season. Beating Collingwood at the MCG would hardly have been a flat track bully performance.

Also...

But keep the love flowing by all means.

Why is it love to highlight decent performances by our club and by our players?

 

[Smotie]

They were in the eight at the time, and for most of the season. Beating Collingwood at the MCG would hardly have been a flat track bully performance.

Also...


Why is it love to highlight decent performances by our club and by our players?

Beating collingwood at the g would have been great. And we should have beaten them with the amount of ball priddis had and others. You can talk them up but they were absolute s**t when we played them.

I don't understand your question. All I can say is why isn't it?
People have set the bar so low on our clubs performances nowadays it seems we are happy with honorable losses.
I remember the dockers being that way for years and its sad to see our supporters that way.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Beating collingwood at the g would have been great. And we should have beaten them with the amount of ball priddis had and others. You can talk them up but they were absolute s**t when we played them.

I don't understand your question. All I can say is why isn't it?

Well they had won four of their last five and won their next two after that, so they were in reasonable form. It wasn't like we were playing Hawthorn though.

You don't see any inconsistency in complaining about the terms "hate" and "hater" for someone who is "just pointing out deficiencies", but then when someone else points out a reasonable game you call it "love"? Isn't it the exact same situation?

 

[Smotie]

Well they had won four of their last five and won their next two after that, so they were in reasonable form. It wasn't like we were playing Hawthorn though.

You don't see any inconsistency in complaining about the terms "hate" and "hater" for someone who is "just pointing out deficiencies", but then when someone else points out a reasonable game you call it "love"? Isn't it the exact same situation?

Fair point but where in my comment was I telling the lovers to piss off or stating that the lovers have no idea about football?
Something that the "haters" get told all the time

My comment was stating the love is misplaced not telling you to piss off.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Fair point but where in my comment was I telling the lovers to piss off or stating that the lovers have no idea about football?
Something that the "haters" get told all the time

I doubt you even watch him play. You may not even watch the eagles games altogether as your comments are so lacking in any evidence of reality its not funny.

My comment was stating the love is misplaced not telling you to piss off.

My criticism was that you were calling it love after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

 

[Smotie]

I ask the question again.
My comment doesn't say that at all.
I said his comments are lacking in evidence. Its not piss off is it?
Where do I say he has no idea?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I ask the question again.
My comment doesn't say that at all.

My criticism was that you were calling my comment "love" after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

But since you want to change the topic to the treatment of "haters" I thought I'd point out that you treat "lovers" in basically the same way as well.

 

[Smotie]

My criticism was that you were calling it love after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

And I've already conceded its a fair point.

End of me responding to your trolling. Maybe you should delete your own comments for trolling cause that's all you are doing

 

[Smotie]

My criticism was that you were calling my comment "love" after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

But since you want to change the topic to the treatment of "haters" I thought I'd point out that you treat "lovers" in basically the same way as well.

No it wasn't. And i already conceded its abfair point. But you were trying to trap me in comments you were inferring I made but realized I didn't so you edited your post.
<don't push it now>

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

No it wasn't. And i already conceded its abfair point. But you were trying to trap me in comments you were inferring I made but realized I didn't so you edited your post.

What comment was I inferring you made?

I never said you told anyone to piss off. You told obeanie he must not watch games, and then complained that "haters" get told they don't know anything about footy.

I'd dearly love to see your definition of trolling. It seems to involve little more than questioning your comments or disagreeing with you.

If you continuously take completely inconsistent positions on something you can expect to get pulled up on it. That's not trolling.

 

[Smotie]

What comment was I inferring you made?

I never said you told anyone to piss off. You told obeanie he must not watch games, and then complained that "haters" get told they don't know anything about footy.

I'd dearly love to see your definition of trolling. It seems to involve little more than questioning your comments or disagreeing with you.

If you continuously take completely inconsistent positions on something you can expect to get pulled up on it. That's not trolling.

You were inferring I told him he had no idea or I told him to piss off otherwise why quote my two comments together.

I say it again. I already conceded your point. This means I agree and accept it was wrong for me to do....yet here we are 6 posts later still discussing it as if I am disagreeing with you.

If you can't see that is trolling then that there really is no point with you.

I think its time you stopped as you are making yourself look foolish. On top of that you keep complaining about this "train wreck" of a thread yet you keep derailing it yourself.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

You were inferring I told him he had no idea or I told him to piss off otherwise why quote my two comments together.

Bold bit is correct.

I say it again. I already conceded your point. This means I agree and accept it was wrong for me to do....yet here we are 6 posts later still discussing it as if I am disagreeing with you.

If you can't see that is trolling then that there really is no point with you.

You conceded my point about love vs hate, and then brought up another issue. That's why we're still here. Unless you've also conceded that you telling Obeanie he must not watch footy is the same as saying he has no idea, but I don't think you have.

 

[Smotie]

Bold bit is correct.



You conceded my point about love vs hate, and then brought up another issue. That's why we're still here. Unless you've also conceded that you telling Obeanie he must not watch footy is the same as saying he has no idea, but I don't think you have.

Telling someone they must not have watched the footy is not saying they have no idea. Its saying they didnt see the evidence.

We are still here because you keep banging on about something I have already conceded.

 

[RookiePick]

mmm...blowholes

Ain't the offseason wonderful?

 

[kranky al]

 

[Smotie]

Fair point but where in my comment was I telling the lovers to piss off or stating that the lovers have no idea about football?
Something that the "haters" get told all the time

My comment was stating the love is misplaced not telling you to piss off.

So here are your comments all banging on about my inconsistent position and then you deny we are still here about it. Even after I conceded it in every post.
And you reckon you aren't trolling.

My criticism was that you were calling it love after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

My criticism was that you were calling my comment "love" after complaining that criticism gets called hate.

But since you want to change the topic to the treatment of "haters" I thought I'd point out that you treat "lovers" in basically the same way as well.

What comment was I inferring you made?

I never said you told anyone to piss off. You told obeanie he must not watch games, and then complained that "haters" get told they don't know anything about footy.

I'd dearly love to see your definition of trolling. It seems to involve little more than questioning your comments or disagreeing with you.

If you continuously take completely inconsistent positions on something you can expect to get pulled up on it. That's not trolling.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Telling someone they must not have watched the footy is not saying they have no idea. Its saying they didnt see the evidence.

We are still here because you keep banging on about something I have already conceded.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. It's basically the same in my book.

I know you've conceded the earlier point. You raised another one, which is what I was "banging on about". We've now reached an impasse on the second point so I think we're done.

 

[kranky al]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. It's basically the same in my book.

I know you've conceded the earlier point. You raised another one, which is what I was "banging on about". We've now reached an impasse on the second point so I think we're done.

Oh no

Do go on

We were all soooo entertained

 

[Smotie]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. It's basically the same in my book.

I know you've conceded the earlier point. You raised another one, which is what I was "banging on about". We've now reached an impasse on the second point so I think we're done.

I don't think we are done. You made a failed point about "another one" and then fell back to the initial one quite a few times as my quoting proved. Usually in discussions when someone concedes the discussion ends but you wanted to continue to bang on about it and derail the thread which you continue to call a "train wreck".

Why don't you see that you contribute to the train wreck that you complain about. I'd call that an inconsistent position.

You concede none of these points despite the fact the evidence in on the screen in front of you...bit like a Priddis supporter actually. (<-----just to keep it on topic lest my post gets deleted for not being on topic even though I am responding to you about the topic)

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Oh no

Do go on

We were all soooo entertained

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I don't think we are done. You made a failed point about "another one" and then fell back to the initial one quite a few times as my quoting proved.

Oh for crying out Glavin. I was pretty sure we were done.

My initial point was your inconsistency on "love" and "hate". Your response to that was "fair point, but..." and then started talking about how you don't treat "lovers" like you think "haters" are treated i.e. by being told to piss off or that they know nothing about football.

My posts from then on were either:
(a) pointing out that you were changing the topic from my original point, and/or
(b) pointing out that telling someone he must not watch the games is, IMO, the same as someone telling you you know nothing about football.

You disagree with me on (b). That's fine. We can agree to disagree. But I think you've confused me pointing out that you were changing the topic with me trying to "bang on" about the earlier topic.

Now are we done?

 

[ThePuma #9]

Now are we done?

Sadly never.

I forwarded this thread to Dr. Stephen Hawking a few weeks ago.


For those you don't know....He's kinda a big deal.


He informed me based on new evidence presented, his theory of the universe, black holes and our eventual demise have to be recalculated to take into account the anomaly known as MPBFBHT.

Sadly he didn't tell me what the abbreviation means, but what i did gather is that apparently this thread has created a black hole so heavy with mass that eventually everything in the known and unknown universe shall slip into it's abyss.

I asked him is this the end of the universe and life?

Good news...no.

He confirmed life shall go on as MPBFBHT is far too adaptable however whatever comes out the other side will be formed, molded and populated by the Priddiseses.

Previous subjects to this theory were Chuck Norris, Keith Richards and Cockroaches.

While all could handle the black hole collapsing they weren't able to contain the added mass of the universe.

MPBFBHT apparently solves this mathematically.

So next time you look up to the heavens and see a shooting star, think to yourself how lucky we are to be living in the age of MatthewPriddises.

 

[eagles 2014]