Claeys rumoring...

Donate To GopherHole
KillerGopherFan said:
I believe he is suggesting that you hypocritically hammered John Galt for his opinion about CM leaving when JG was just expressing his opinion, like you are doing here.
Without looking at all of JG's posts, I don't really recall him claiming to know definitively about his theory on CM. It just seemed like an opinion, like the rest of GH posts.
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 

Spoofin said:
WTF? Hammered JG? Are you kidding me. Good Night guys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Spoofin, John Galt used the words "very possible" "possibly", and "potentially" in his last several posts on CM. Bronco just busted you for the hypocrisy. No big deal.
 

KillerGopherFan said:
Spoofin, John Galt used the words "very possible" "possibly", and "potentially" in his last several posts on CM. Bronco just busted you for the hypocrisy. No big deal.
Click to expand...

What am I being hypocritical about? I challenged him saying playing time was the "only logical reason" with what I felt were other logical reasons. I hope he recovers from the hammering I gave him.

Hypocritical? Even if I did hammer him (which I didn't), what in this thread was hypocritical? Did I tell someone not to hammer me?

Of all the things I have posted on GH this is absolutely the dumbest thing anyone has ever tried to call me out on. I didn't even name call - yet you are all over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
What am I being hypocritical about? I challenged him saying playing time was the "only logical reason" with what I felt were other logical reasons. I hope he recovers from the hammering I gave him.

Hypocritical? Even if I did hammer him (which I didn't), what in this thread was hypocritical? Did I tell someone not to hammer me?

Of all the things I have posted on GH this is absolutely the dumbest thing anyone has ever tried to call me out on. I didn't even name call - yet you are all over it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
"All over it"? Seems like you're martyring yourself a little now.
Agreed, you didn't call him a name. Do you want congratulations for that? I think you've conducted yourself quite well recently. I'm happy to debate with you when I disagree, but probably haven't completely disagreed with you on much recently.
I do think it's a little funny that Bronco caught you in a little hypocrisy. Like I said, "no big deal". Relax. You'll give yourself a headache.
 

KillerGopherFan said:
"All over it"? Seems like you're martyring yourself a little now.
Agreed, you didn't call him a name. Do you want congratulations for that? I think you've conducted yourself quite well recently. I'm happy to debate with you when I disagree, but probably haven't completely disagreed with you on much recently.
I do think it's a little funny that Bronco caught you in a little hypocrisy. Like I said, "no big deal". Relax. You'll give yourself a headache.
Click to expand...

Again, please explain the hypocrisy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Spoofin said:
What am I being hypocritical about? I challenged him saying playing time was the "only logical reason" with what I felt were other logical reasons. I hope he recovers from the hammering I gave him.

Hypocritical? Even if I did hammer him (which I didn't), what in this thread was hypocritical? Did I tell someone not to hammer me?

Of all the things I have posted on GH this is absolutely the dumbest thing anyone has ever tried to call me out on. I didn't even name call - yet you are all over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

My goodness, after seven thousand, three hundred and sixty six posts this is the dumbest? Please, even you must see the stupidity in that post. My friend, just be fair.
 

Spoofin said:
Again, please explain the hypocrisy?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
He gave a theory using some qualification. You said you can't know, so stop saying you know. You gave a theory on another topic with very little qualification. Bronco spotted the hypocrisy of your position on two different threads. It is your right to disagree.
 

KillerGopherFan said:
He gave a theory using some qualification. You said you can't know, so stop saying you know. You gave a theory on another topic with very little qualification. Bronco spotted the hypocrisy of your position on two different threads. It is your right to disagree.
Click to expand...

Disagree I do.

I didn't challenge his theory (even said it could be right) - I challenged it being "the only logical reason". I didn't present my theory that way - I said it doesn't have to be this as it could be that. I have zero doubt I've presented my theories as fact in the past - but I didn't in either of the threads in discussion here.

I'm done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
WTF? Hammered JG? Are you kidding me. Good Night guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But it's not goodnight. You continue to chatter your gibberish. Please, say what you mean.
 



BroncoRedux said:
But it's not goodnight. You continue to chatter your gibberish. Please, say what you mean.
Click to expand...

Saying that the set could also include B and C as a challenge to the statement "there is only A" does not mean that you are asserting B and/or C are any "better" than A. It just means he disagrees that {A} because {A,B,C,...}.
 

I'm starting to think that we need to have two separate FB boards - one for the pro-Fleck crowd, and one board for the skeptics.

I agree 100% with what Spoofin said. One poster said that something "was the only logical reason" - another poster said I don't agree - there are other perfectly logical reasons. That is not being hypocritical. The key word is "only" implying 1 possibility.

Again, can't wait for real games to come along so we can argue over something significant, as opposed to arguing over trifles.
 

howeda7 said:
Well, every $ Iowa pays him is a $ we don't have to pay him. If he wants to freeze is @ss off in Iowa and work 60 hours/week for free, more power to him.

But seriously, I don't get why he would agree to any position lower than DC outside of it being Iowa out of spite. He'll be able to pick his DC job next off-season.
Click to expand...

Correct, he is not taking a job that is less than D coordinator and he doesn't need the money. We should hope he does not take a BIG job.
 





short ornery norwegian said:
I'm starting to think that we need to have two separate FB boards - one for the pro-Fleck crowd, and one board for the skeptics.

I agree 100% with what Spoofin said. One poster said that something "was the only logical reason" - another poster said I don't agree - there are other perfectly logical reasons. That is not being hypocritical. The key word is "only" implying 1 possibility.

Again, can't wait for real games to come along so we can argue over something significant, as opposed to arguing over trifles.
Click to expand...
Yet you chose to weigh in on this trifle.
Look, Spoofin took issue with John Galt over his opinion that about why Mayes was transferring. Whether JG was very confident or just offering a possibility is a matter of degree regarding the opinion. But it's still just an opinion, and Spoofin didn't like his confidence in his opinion.
BroncoRedux called him out for being hypocritical for not being tolerant of another opinion (as confident as it may be). Yeah, it isn't a big deal, which I said several times.
It seems to be that the only way this discussion, and many other discussions, can end is by declaring the infalliability of Spoofin. I'm sure he would approve.
The only thing is that it's difficult to gauge seriousness of a post, but some posts are made with tongue in cheek. Many of Spoofin's posts are tongue in cheek for his pleasure. And someone does it to him and all hell breaks loose (tongue in cheek).
And lastly, we can debate issues big or small, but the impact of this forum's effect on those issues is equally non-existent. So whether we're debating major Gopher Football goings on or Spoofin's hypocrisy, it is completely unimportant. We're just killing free time for entertainment.
 


KillerGopherFan said:
Yet you chose to weigh in on this trifle.
Look, Spoofin took issue with John Galt over his opinion that about why Mayes was transferring. Whether JG was very confident or just offering a possibility is a matter of degree regarding the opinion. But it's still just an opinion, and Spoofin didn't like his confidence in his opinion.
BroncoRedux called him out for being hypocritical for not being tolerant of another opinion (as confident as it may be). Yeah, it isn't a big deal, which I said several times.
It seems to be that the only way this discussion, and many other discussions, can end is by declaring the infalliability of Spoofin. I'm sure he would approve.
The only thing is that it's difficult to gauge seriousness of a post, but some posts are made with tongue in cheek. Many of Spoofin's posts are tongue in cheek for his pleasure. And someone does it to him and all hell breaks loose (tongue in cheek).
And lastly, we can debate issues big or small, but the impact of this forum's effect on those issues is equally non-existent. So whether we're debating major Gopher Football goings on or Spoofin's hypocrisy, it is completely unimportant. We're just killing free time for entertainment.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think you don't like me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom