Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaskal
It's quite discouraging of debate or discussion to be told that the rebuttal for our points is not how sound it is, but how valid it is based on factual evidence.
Case in point. So, instead of debating, say.. my points about Sigalet's coaching habits of being a typecast 'yes-man' coach, I am not told not why his behavior or mannerisms should be interpreted as being this particular typecast. I am told that it's not good enough to even warrant a passing reply on the subject.
This is what pisses people off.
|
^ this. Any time it comes to anything critical said about Flames anything.
It's belittling and condescending simply because a formed opinion is not met to the lofty standards of some.
My points earlier were that the insane amount of blind defending by TC during the Gully thing is painfully similar to that now. That does not make me right or wrong on my thoughts. Just makes it so you feel awful for posting a thought.