The Makings of a Juggernaut?

[RagahRagah]

4 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

If you were self-aware you'd realize that trying to gotcha people with 2005 as a bad thing is absolutely ridiculous.

Not if you actually just take it as an example that anything can happen and not overanalyze it, FFS. Some of you guys just reach so far to find something to pick at and split hairs rather than just accept an obvious point.

The Astros were 15-30 to start that year and ended up in the World Series and the same logic can apply backwards. IDK, is that any better an example for those of you who are anal-retentive or like to argue semantics?

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[southsider2k5]

Just now, RagahRagah said:

Not if you actually just take it as an example that anything can happen and not overanalyze it, FFS. Some of you guys just reach so far to find something to pick at and split hairs rather than just accept an obvious point.

You are arguing a point that literally no one made.

No one thinks the season is over. It hasn't been said.

You invented something to be mad about, made a bad argument to support it, and are now salty about everything but your own strawman being burnt down.  

[RagahRagah]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

You are arguing a point that literally no one made.

No one thinks the season is over. It hasn't been said.

You invented something to be mad about, made a bad argument to support it, and are now salty about everything but your own strawman being burnt down.  

Someone attempts to dig for a "gotcha" because of how things stand a quarter way into the season. I stated that it was way too early for that. That is not a bad argument, it is fucking correct.

That's all there is to this, dude. You and others are the only ones trying to turn it into something else just because of an example I used when you know what the damn point is. 

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

Someone attempts to dig for a "gotcha" because of how things stand a quarter way into the season. I stated that it was way too early for that. That is not a bad argument, it is fucking correct.

That's all there is to this, dude. You and others are the only ones trying to turn it into something else just because of an example I used when you know what the damn point is. 

Ah yes, the unwritten rules police are here to make sure no one makes bad assumptions,  by using bad assumptions to prove it.  You saved us all. 

[RagahRagah]

34 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Ah yes, the unwritten rules police are here to make sure no one makes bad assumptions,  by using bad assumptions to prove it.  You saved us all. 

Why are you being so intellectually dishonest?

Are you seriously going to deny that what I said in the first paragraph is correct? Yes or no? Simple question. 

[RagahRagah]

55 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Ah yes, the unwritten rules police are here to make sure no one makes bad assumptions,  by using bad assumptions to prove it.  You saved us all. 

 

20 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

Why are you being so intellectually dishonest?

Are you seriously going to deny that what I said in the first paragraph is correct? Yes or no? Simple question. 

I see you are still active and posting but of course you won't answer the simple question. Because you are just looking for a reason to bash me, even by playing stupid. And that is exactly what you are doing. You knew the point I was making. Otherwise you would answer the question, which would mean acknowledging that I am correct and that your posts towards me were nothing more than a bad troll attempt.

Funny how putting everything to a simple yes or no always exposes a troll and gets him to shut up.

[southsider2k5]

Just now, RagahRagah said:

 

I see you are still active and posting but of course you won't answer the simple question. Because you are just looking for a reason to bash me, even by playing stupid. And that is exactly what you are doing. You knew the point I was making. Otherwise you would answer the question, which would mean acknowledging that I am correct and that your posts towards me were nothing more than a bad troll attempt.

Funny how putting everything to a simple yes or no always exposes a troll and gets him to shut up.

You are really trolling hard here. You made a bad faith argument,  with a wrong example, and are now running with the goalposts to reframe it into something else. It was obvious what you were trying to do there, no matter how you try to change its presentation.

[RagahRagah]

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

You are really trolling hard here. You made a bad faith argument,  with a wrong example, and are now running with the goalposts to reframe it into something else. It was obvious what you were trying to do there, no matter how you try to change its presentation.

You haven't answered yes or no yet. That says everything. 

I didn't "frame" anything. I said why it was dumb to attempt a gotcha right from the get go and you won't even acknowledge that that occurred and that it was dumb to do that because you needed to solely attack me.

Sorry, but you know you're being intellectually dishonest and exposed yourself. And now you're projecting.

Answer the damn question if I'm wrong. Just fucking answer it.

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, RagahRagah said:

You haven't answered yes or no yet. That says everything. 

I didn't "frame" anything. I said why it was dumb to attempt a gotcha right from the get go and you won't even acknowledge that that occurred and that it was dumb to do that because you needed to solely attack me.

Sorry, but you know you're being intellectually dishonest and exposed yourself. And now you're projecting.

Answer the damn question if I'm wrong. Just fucking answer it.

Playing your game validates the troll job you were trying to pull off with your argument.  It's not happening.  Come back when you want an actual discussion and aren't just looking to troll posters.

[RagahRagah]

14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Playing your game validates the troll job you were trying to pull off with your argument.  It's not happening.  Come back when you want an actual discussion and aren't just looking to troll posters.

I asked you a yes or no question and you won't answer it.

You don't want a discussion, Otherwise you would have answered the question by now.

Keep lying and protecting. 

 

Yes or no, sir? Is looking for a gotcha 1/4 of the way through the season sensible?

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[southsider2k5]

2 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

I asked you a yes or no question and you won't answer it.

You don't want a discussion, Otherwise you would have answered the question by now.

Keep lying and protecting. 

 

Yes or no, sir? Is looking for a gotcha 1/4 of the way through the season sensible?

Your gotcha of a gotcha, 1/4 of the way through the season, based on something that never happened, is not sensible.   Final answer.

[RagahRagah]

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Your gotcha of a gotcha, 1/4 of the way through the season, based on something that never happened, is not sensible.   Final answer.

What about his gotcha? 

Wow, it would really kill you to just admit my saying his gotcha was dumb was correct, wouldn't it?

Mine wasn't a "gotcha." Telling someone who claims 2 + 2 = 5 he is wrong isn't a "gotcha," it's a correction. I used an example to simply further cement the point.

No, instead you have to fixate yourself on semantics due to a personal bias.

I'd even go for "you both were being dumb" but I don't think we're even gonna get that, huh?

Sorry, your final answer was the wrong one. 

 

Don't ever call me a fucking troll when you can't answer a yes or no question because you can't give someone validation over personal bias. It's pathetic. 

If you had any integrity you'd acknowledge what he said was wrong, not just go after me.

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[southsider2k5]

2 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

What about his gotcha? 

Wow, it would really kill you to just admit my saying his gotcha was dumb was correct, wouldn't it?

Mine wasn't a "gotcha." Telling someone who claims 2 + 2 = 5 he is wrong isn't a "gotcha," it's a correction. I used an example to simply further cement the point.

No, instead you have to fixate yourself on semantics due to a personal bias.

I'd even go for "you both were being dumb" but I don't think we're even gonna get that, huh?

Sorry, your final answer was the wrong one. 

 

Don't ever call me a fucking troll when you can't answer a yes or no question because you can't give someone validation over personal bias. It's pathetic. 

If you had any integrity you'd acknowledge what he said was wrong, not just go after me.

Stop talking integrity like you are some sort of a message board super hero. You tried trolling someone,  failed, and are trying to pretend it never happened. 

Again there is zero chance of getting that troll job validated.

[RagahRagah]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Stop talking integrity like you are some sort of a message board super hero. You tried trolling someone,  failed, and are trying to pretend it never happened. 

Again there is zero chance of getting that troll job validated.

How the hell is pointing out a bad argument trolling? And how is using an example to support it, EVEN IF IT WAS WRONG, trolling?

You don't have a clue what trolling is. 

The fact you will not admit the person who made a claim based on 1/4th of a season was wrong is what is trolling. You sound like a boomer who just heard that word for the first time and now can't stop using it even though you don't even know what it means.

At this point it's clear you are both biased against me and a liar. 

You lost the argument the second you failed to answer a simple question. 

It's really weird how admins can't call things both ways on this forum out of personal bias.

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[GermanSoxFan]

Every single Ragah post:

 

[southsider2k5]

8 hours ago, RagahRagah said:

How the hell is pointing out a bad argument trolling? And how is using an example to support it, EVEN IF IT WAS WRONG, trolling?

You don't have a clue what trolling is. 

The fact you will not admit the person who made a claim based on 1/4th of a season was wrong is what is trolling. You sound like a boomer who just heard that word for the first time and now can't stop using it even though you don't even know what it means.

At this point it's clear you are both biased against me and a liar. 

You lost the argument the second you failed to answer a simple question. 

It's really weird how admins can't call things both ways on this forum out of personal bias.

Yes, you got me. I am 70 years old and just got the internet. 

Either that or you have a history of getting personal with people who disagree with you, to the point where you have been previously banned from Soxtalk for going after posters with bad faith arguments and personal attacks.  

The irony is you have been all over this thread making a bad argument to a problem that you invented and no one has, one upping with additional name calling with each post in an attempt to cover up for the audacity that someone would disagree with you, to cover up for the hole in the original theory.

If that bothers you, do better.

[southsider2k5]

And of course the point that you have been willfully ignoring to make this "argument" is that if it is too early to decide on the status of a team for this season,  it is also wrong to tell someone they are wrong for deciding the status of a team. Invoking a historic perspective can only be done after the fact.

Statistically the reason teams like 2005 Cleveland stand out is because they are anomalies.  Typically if a team buries themselves double digit games out they don't recover, and the original poster is much more likely to be right than you are.

[RagahRagah]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Yes, you got me. I am 70 years old and just got the internet. 

Either that or you have a history of getting personal with people who disagree with you, to the point where you have been previously banned from Soxtalk for going after posters with bad faith arguments and personal attacks.  

The irony is you have been all over this thread making a bad argument to a problem that you invented and no one has, one upping with additional name calling with each post in an attempt to cover up for the audacity that someone would disagree with you, to cover up for the hole in the original theory.

If that bothers you, do better.

 

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

And of course the point that you have been willfully ignoring to make this "argument" is that if it is too early to decide on the status of a team for this season,  it is also wrong to tell someone they are wrong for deciding the status of a team. Invoking a historic perspective can only be done after the fact.

Statistically the reason teams like 2005 Cleveland stand out is because they are anomalies.  Typically if a team buries themselves double digit games out they don't recover, and the original poster is much more likely to be right than you are.

All these walls of text but you couldn't and can't answer a simple yes or no question.

(And still can't, because it would invalidate your posts)

You keep staying fixated on my example because you just can't acknowledge the premise was correct. Amd my example was simply for perspective and was absolutely fine anyway.. You really took the red herring and sprinted away with it.

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah

[southsider2k5]

And you still can't admit you were wrong and attacking people to cover up for it.

[RagahRagah]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

And you still can't admit you were wrong and attacking people to cover up for it.

What came first, the saddle or the horse? If I did that, you're saying you would answer the question?

Predicating answering a question honestly on someone answering another question is stupid. It's childish game playing. 

Who am I attacking? The person who made a bullshit grab and the person who won't admit that that's what it was. Quite justifiably. 

But again, it was merely an example to quash a fantasy and you overanalyzed it and ran away with the herring.

[GermanSoxFan]

Dude just let it go, nobody gives a shit

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

What came first, the saddle or the horse? If I did that, you're saying you would answer the question?

Predicating answering a question honestly on someone answering another question is stupid. It's childish game playing. 

Who am I attacking? The person who made a bullshit grab and the person who won't admit that that's what it was. Quite justifiably. 

But again, it was merely an example to quash a fantasy and you overanalyzed it and ran away with the herring.

Your answer is there if you want it.  If his assumption was bad, so was yours, for the exact same reason.  No matter how you try to change around the argument and the goalposts, this doesn't change.

Your need for validation is the real issue here, as is your need to target anyone who disagrees with you.  But, again, this is exactly why you were banned in the past.

[RagahRagah]

44 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Your answer is there if you want it.  If his assumption was bad, so was yours, for the exact same reason.  No matter how you try to change around the argument and the goalposts, this doesn't change.

Your need for validation is the real issue here, as is your need to target anyone who disagrees with you.  But, again, this is exactly why you were banned in the past.

I didn't assume anything. 

I believe my example was fine. You won't even say whether you agree with me or not about the other poster.

With that mindset, no one ever has to take accountability. It's cowardly.

 

Still wondering why you keep responding to post the same long winded red herring over and over again but still can't just answer the question. Because there is no "agreement" or "disagreement," there is simply someone who made an absurd conclusion and you don't want to admit it.

No, I don't need your validation; you mistake me. I'm just forcing you into a corner and letting you expose yourself because I just simply don't let people get away with this kind of stuff. 

You can answer the question, keep responding to me without answering the question, or stop responding to me, whichever you choose. Either is fine with me because either way you lose. 

If you aren't working towards a logical conclusion then there is no point to an argument in the first place. 

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, RagahRagah said:

I didn't assume anything. 

I believe my example was fine. You won't even say whether you agree with me or not about the other poster.

With that mindset, no one ever has to take accountability. It's cowardly.

 

Still wondering why you keep responding to post the same long winded red herring over and over again but still can't just answer the question. Because there is no "agreement" or "disagreement," there is simply someone who made an absurd conclusion and you don't want to admit it.

No, I don't need your validation; you mistake me. I'm just forcing you into a corner and letting you expose yourself because I just simply don't let people get away with this kind of stuff. 

You can answer the question, keep responding to me without answering the question, or stop responding to me, whichever you choose. Either is fine with me because either way you lose. 

If you aren't working towards a logical conclusion then there is no point to an argument in the first place. 

Yes, you made an absurd conclusion and won't admit it.

Yes by only targeting others, you take the cowardly way out, and never have to admit you are wrong.

Thanks for finally admitting to this being nothing but a troll job.  That concludes this thread.

[RagahRagah]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Yes, you made an absurd conclusion and won't admit it.

Yes by only targeting others, you take the cowardly way out, and never have to admit you are wrong.

Thanks for finally admitting to this being nothing but a troll job.  That concludes this thread.

Again... I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Another question you probably won't answer: what was the exact conclusion I made?

And where did I admit I was trolling? Anytime you call someone out for something bogus, it's "trolling" now? 

I targeted the two people guilty of what I accused them of. Who the hell else would I Target? What are you even talking about?

Edited May 19, 2021 by RagahRagah