Quote:
Originally Posted by nik-
I want people who have a different opinion to me to be honest about why they have that opinion and not continue going to the well of arguments that has been shown again and again to be dubious at best.
The way I'm framing my argument is as someone who has seen the numerous commentaries and documents linked in the multiple iterations of these threads showing that this is a bad deal for cities, and now get to see the same people, who just completely ignore the above, try to trot out the same talking points again and again.
I can totally accept someone who has weighed the cost/benefit scenarios and decided in spite of them that this is something they want because they love the Flames. As I said, clearly, in my post.
As for the "what gives you the right" part, come on. You're a little tougher than that.
|
Except there is tangible value, direct economic and indirect. The question is, how much (or perhaps how little is a better way to put it) - but certainly value. The argument that there is zero value is every bit as bad as the ones suggesting there is significant value.
We've had one zero value guy who keeps telling people who assign more than zero value are stupid put into timeout today. That helps