McGrady wants Jordan to start final All-Star Game

[scubilete]

At least I'm no arguing whether he deserves to get to the All-Star or Not, cause for me MJ has been playing average. My point is the Fans elected the starting line up not for those players to decide they want to see someone else starting.

All-Star selection takes into account many factors (coach's selection, not the fan's

I repeat the Fans are the ones selecting the starting line up, not the Coaches. Those players selected by the fans are not supposed to offer the spot given by the public to someone else, not for MJ "Not My Idol" or for Magic "My all time favorite". If the fans wanted to see MJ starting they would have chosen him over Vince but they wanted to see Vince, that's what they should get.

[GloveGuy]

MJ couldn't have been voted in the starting lineups over Vince since Carter was in the "FORWARDS" category while MJ was with the "GUARDS." My respect for Carter has lowered a bit because of his supposed reason of not even considering to give his spot to MJ. Saying that he didn't want to disappoint the fans that voted for him is in my mind bullshit. Then he said that they voted for him in the amount of games he's played is also pretty stupid. If he were got injured after his first game and hadn't come back until now they still would've voted for him. Carter never thought to himself, "Well, I'll still get to play and MJ is one of the greatest...Heck it's his last year and maybe I should give it up." But no, Carter didn't think of it. If he wanted to be on TV more then why didn't he decide to participate in the Slam Dunk Contest. Thousands of fans are already disappointed that he didn't do that.

[Andrew]

Those players selected by the fans are not supposed to offer the spot given by the public to someone else, not for MJ "Not My Idol" or for Magic "My all time favorite". If the fans wanted to see MJ starting they would have chosen him over Vince but they wanted to see Vince, that's what they should get.

True, but it's still a classy gesture, and since the NBA has made those exceptions in the past, it would not be unprecedented nor "wrong" per se. And as gloveguy pointed out, MJ was listed as a guard on the ballot. Had he been listed as a forward, one could suggest he might have been voted as a starter (as he received more votes than Jermaine O'Neal).

[scubilete]

The case is he was not elected, either if he was as a guard, forward or center. If you guys wanted him to start, you just had to vote for him as a starter and pray for others to think the same way, that way MJ would have gotten those votes to be over Iverson or McGrady. The same thing I said for McGrady I would say for Vince. The fans voted for him, so I accept his xcuse about not giving up his spot for MJ to start.

True, but it's still a classy gesture

If someone is running for president, you do vote for that guy, would u like to see him giving away the place earned and say this other guy deserves much more my place cause he's older and has done a lot for the country? That would be a classy gesture as well but doesn't mean that is right.

The Fans elected those to start, those that were not (Shaq, MJ, Dirk) they just have to come from the Bench.

Should Yao say I'm going to let Shaq start cause he's already a legend and I'm still a rookie?, NO.

The year Hardaway Let Magic take his Starting spot, notice that the roster for the west was 13 players that year, Magic was not in the ballot, he made the moves and asked the league to let him play in the classic.

So none of you should feel any anger for those who didn't offer their spot or for their excuses, you should feel happy that at least MJ was chosen to participate.

[JJcoolL]

As far as Lavor Postell is concerned, JJCooL... Postell was a second round pick by the New York Knicks 3 or 4 seasons ago, out of St. Johns. He was known mainly for his athletic ability and defensive intensity, but had inconsistent offensive skills.

i don't care, it was a rhetorical question

That "if he had played 40 minutes..." argument is invalid. There's no way to tell if Wilkins could have been effective for 40 minutes physically. Besides, player production is not a direct function of playing time.

well dominique wilkins was a proven scorer and rebounder, therefore there was a way to tell if he could've been effective for 40 mins a night.

There was no need for the "Ms. Chaney" comment

don't tell me that shit, if i feel a need 2 write something i won't stop just koz u say so

[BIG GREEN]

I kinda think the 29 coaches should decide who plays in the all-star games. Simply because... this year's fan voting has failed to select some of the players that need to be there..and some that don't need to be there...are.

then again...we don't wanna see a bunch of jump shooting morons in the all-star game(which is what coaches would pick)..we wanna see high flying like what mcgrady did last year. So ionno....but i'm not happy with some of the selections and non selections.


BTW..this is my 300th post ..w00t

[EGarrett]

Actually...we're saying

You seem to think I'm talking about you all the time. Very rarely am I making reference to you specifically...and when I am I usually refer to you by name.

Actually...we're saying he's not the greatest of all time because that's impossible...and we're saying he will be surpassed in the future...and we're saying that he's not as good as everyone says he is, as the media machine made him what he is still today.

Unless you're defending scub (who's claiming that people like Magic are great but Jordan is a moron for retiring and coming back repeatedly)... cut the 'we'.

Of course, you copped out of that conversation when legitimate points were made...

Actually...I post when I can. When I'm busy I can't. Seem logical enough?

I never said he was a washed up loser

Again...I was not talking to or about you...so why do you assume I'm always quoting or making reference to you specifically? It's bordering on paranoia...

but you're definately referring to the 'anti' (we're not anti, we're realistic/cynical, whatever you want to call it) Jordan posters.

I was referring to people who turn every mention of Michael Jordan into something negative. Everyone on this board has a different opinion so it's impossible for me to speak to all of you at the same time. Likewise you can't speak for everyone...

The original comment I made was in reference to people who make it impossible for people to have a discussion involving Michael Jordan without turning it into a rehash of their negative views on him. I expected that to happen in this thread. Was I or was I not correct?

We're different, we're wrong, you're right, you're part of a large conformity. Please, martyr us for all to see! Bludgeon us with big fucking rocks! Yeah! If someone has a different opinion, make fun of them! If someone has a different opinion and has legitimate reasons for having that opinion, belittle them with comments about how they know nothing! How they're misinformed! How they're just plain wrong!

Don't get so emotional...

I will say, however, Magic retired three times...Jordan will retire three times...that's simple and can be proven...it's the other stuff we can discuss (well, it's not really discussing when points are made and ignored because useless media fed drivel seems to be the way to go on this board).

I have a better idea...discuss my statement that it was a classy gesture by McGrady instead of making it a pain for anyone to have a positive conversation involving the word "Jordan." If you feel your views are so obviously correct then why repeat them at every opportunity?

Oh yeah, here's my disclaimer:

I like MJ. MJ was a great player (operative word: was). He is one of the best to play the game to this point in time. Arguably the best guard of the 90's, probably the best player of the 90's (wait, that's conflicting you say? The early 90's were the end of the Gervins and Thomas' and etc. careers...)...however...he doesn't deserve to be in the All-Star game. He doesn't deserve to be starting. But, while I disagree with what he's done to the legaue, Jordan has done a great deal for the league by way of revenue and fans, and that does account for something when ratings of NBA games are lower than that of reality TV. It's a noble gesture to offer him the starting spot, and it's even nobler to turn it down. A big thumbs up on this one to the All-Stars...even though Jordan doesn't truly deserve it.

Explain to me how I am at fault for repeating the same thing over and over but this is okay?

PS It is 4:30 am, I am mildly inebriated, so if there's any part that doesn't make too much sense, just ask and I'll clarify. Time to pass out...

If you want cool points...just promote good conversation and relax.

then again...we don't wanna see a bunch of jump shooting morons in the all-star game(which is what coaches would pick)..we wanna see high flying like what mcgrady did last year. So ionno....but i'm not happy with some of the selections and non selections.

Agreed. The fans should get to pick the players since they are the ones watching...but the laziness of voters needs to be reined in somewhat. Maybe some type of electoral college for All-Star voters? Or a requirement that you had to have played in a certain number of games?

[TheBob]

f he wanted to be on TV more then why didn't he decide to participate in the Slam Dunk Contest.

Because the league won't let him, much like they won't let Ricky Davis. The league has decided that players who have played over 3(or 4 im not sure) years in the league can no longer participate in the dunk competition.

[Wall St. Peon]

You seem to think I'm talking about you all the time. Very rarely am I making reference to you specifically...and when I am I usually refer to you by name

I know I'm included in that group...since that groups three or four people...so yes, you were talking to me.

Unless you're defending scub (who's claiming that people like Magic are great but Jordan is a moron for retiring and coming back repeatedly)... cut the 'we'.

But you said...

I don't know why...Jordan is a washed up loser who wasn't that great to begin wi...oh wait...sorry...mistook myself for some other people on this board...

Scub didn't say that...and neither did anyone else who doesn't have the opinion that "Jordan is God." However, your comment was again directed at the few people who don't care for Jordan as much as you...

Actually...I post when I can. When I'm busy I can't. Seem logical enough?

You posted in other topics...but posting in another where you were an integral part of the discussion wasn't possible because you didn't have time? I post when I can as well...which is why I don't really post often. You're posting in this topic...you copped out of the other one.

Again...I was not talking to or about you...so why do you assume I'm always quoting or making reference to you specifically? It's bordering on paranoia...

You were refering to the people who don't care for Jordan, and I am a part of that group, therefore you were talking to me - indirectly. Paranoid? Over this? Nah...and how about you quote - anyone you please - where it was said he was a washed up loser...I know Scub didn't say that, and you're saying you're replying to him...

I was referring to people who turn every mention of Michael Jordan into something negative. Everyone on this board has a different opinion so it's impossible for me to speak to all of you at the same time. Likewise you can't speak for everyone...

So...me, Ben, and so on. There's only a handful of us. I was only replying to your unneeded comment directed at that handful.

The original comment I made was in reference to people who make it impossible for people to have a discussion involving Michael Jordan without turning it into a rehash of their negative views on him. I expected that to happen in this thread. Was I or was I not correct?

If you expected it, why did you do it? Isn't that trying to incite a flame war? Isn't it an attempt to make other members of the board look bad? Isn't it, technically, a guideline infraction?

Don't get so emotional...

Couple things on that one...you totally missed how I was being sarcastic (I figured using words like 'martyr' would have given that away to someone as intelligent as you...), and that was emotional? Right...it was intended as humor...

I have a better idea...discuss my statement that it was a classy gesture by McGrady instead of making it a pain for anyone to have a positive conversation involving the word "Jordan."

But I did? And if you only wanted that statement discussed, why make the other?

If you feel your views are so obviously correct then why repeat them at every opportunity?

Because everyone contradicts them at every opportunity and choose to ignore them at every opportunity...it's called restating your view...

Explain to me how I am at fault for repeating the same thing over and over but this is okay?

But it had to do with the discussion? It was my way to show that I liked the gesture, but didn't think Jordan deserved to be the starter, and he was marginally good enough to be on the team. What does this have to do with you repeating the same thing over and over? I gave my reasons for the legitimacy of TMac and Iverson wanting to give up their spots, as opposed to saying 'he's the greatest! he should start! mad props to TMac and IvErSoN!!!!!!'...and it was my view on the topic. And I've never said anything of the sort...so what's your point? I'm not repeating myself at all...the comment was about you in general. I figured it was fair since you made a completely unneeded generalized comment about other members of the board...so I made a generalized comment about you.

If you want cool points...just promote good conversation and relax.

Why are you telling me to relax and not get emotional? Those have nothing to do with the discussion, and since I am relaxed and am not emotional...things you can't prove one way or the other...why are you saying them? It's not promoting good discussion...

Agreed. The fans should get to pick the players since they are the ones watching...but the laziness of voters needs to be reined in somewhat. Maybe some type of electoral college for All-Star voters? Or a requirement that you had to have played in a certain number of games?

There's no way that would work. The fans wouldn't go for it, as they've chosen the starters for many years and probably wouldn't even bother voting - and the results would be the same. Look how many people vote for the presidency of registered voters...it'd probably be similar if there was a similar system for the all-star game: "My vote doesn't matter."

[scubilete]

Unless you're defending scub (who's claiming that people like Magic are great but Jordan is a moron for retiring and coming back repeatedly)

You are right, I'm claiming that Magic, Bird, Jabbar, Olajuwon, Dr. J., Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, among others are great however I didn't say MJ is a moron for retiring & coming back, I said he's doing it constantly, every 2 years, that's why and didn't mention that word, I said he's a Joker, he has turned the retirement into something everyone would like to try now, something for fun, "Let's retire."

Again...I was not talking to or about you...so why do you assume I'm always quoting or making reference to you specifically?

Enahs live has his reasons to know you are talking about him or to him, that's why I didn't quote you, cause obviously I didn't say anything about Moron and didn't say he was a washed up loser like you stated.

[EGarrett]

I know I'm included in that group...since that groups three or four people...so yes, you were talking to me.

That's well and good...but if you knew that I was referring to a group...why did you assume that any quote I made was something you said?

You posted in other topics...but posting in another where you were an integral part of the discussion wasn't possible because you didn't have time?

Saying a few words about why Yao Ming hasn't been performing well lately is different from composing a long reply.

If you expected it, why did you do it? Isn't that trying to incite a flame war? Isn't it an attempt to make other members of the board look bad? Isn't it, technically, a guideline infraction?

I did it because I knew this would happen so I was just making a joke about it beforehand.

DO watch your language. No swear words, profanity or offensive language allowed.

Bludgeon us with big fucking rocks!

What was that about breaking guidelines?

Because everyone contradicts them at every opportunity and choose to ignore them at every opportunity...it's called restating your view...

So when I say something again it's bad...but when you do so it's "restating your view." Okay...

But I did? And if you only wanted that statement discussed, why make the other?

Because I know where the discussion goes everytime someone attempts to say something positive about Michael Jordan. I was simply laughing at the inevitable. And as you see it was quite inevitable...

There's no way that would work. The fans wouldn't go for it, as they've chosen the starters for many years and probably wouldn't even bother voting - and the results would be the same. Look how many people vote for the presidency of registered voters...it'd probably be similar if there was a similar system for the all-star game: "My vote doesn't matter."

Thus the word "maybe"...that also wasn't the only possibility I presented. I also said that maybe it should be a requirement that a player has played in more than half of his team's games to that point. As for the "my vote doesn't matter" thing...that can occur no matter how you tally the votes if there is a large enough group voting.

[Wall St. Peon]

That's well and good...but if you knew that I was referring to a group...why did you assume that any quote I made was something you said?

You weren't quoting anyone from that group - which I am a part of - and the quotes were wrong, so therefore I was correcting you...

Saying a few words about why Yao Ming hasn't been performing well lately is different from composing a long reply.

*shrug* You had time before...you have time now...I made a little time to respond to you, it's not like it takes hours to make a single 'long reply'...

I did it because I knew this would happen so I was just making a joke about it beforehand.

If that was a joke at someone else's expense...hardly a proper joke, and definately unneeded.

What was that about breaking guidelines?

*shrug* People curse all the time...someone was using porn in his signature for a bit, then changed it...I used 'fuck' as an adjective in a sentence that had nothing to do with anyone in the board, so it's not that it's a HUGE violation as I just cursed. It was a quote from a movie, Dogma, to be exact ("So you were martyred?"...."You could call it that, I prefer to call it being bludgeoned by big fucking rocks")...

So when I say something again it's bad...but when you do so it's "restating your view." Okay...

I meant that your view and what you say is said ten or fifteen times by you and others...my personal view is my view and my view only that shares a few common things with several other people on the board. That being said, my restating my views is different than yours simply because you're part of the majority and everyone is saying the same thing, hence the 'regurgitating' comments...come on, think here...

Because I know where the discussion goes everytime someone attempts to say something positive about Michael Jordan. I was simply laughing at the inevitable. And as you see it was quite inevitable...

Did any MJ bashing occur in this post? No...I said he doesn't deserve to be on the team statistically, but many agree that...I also agreed it was a classy gesture...and I didn't say anything negative...so where's the MJ bashing that was inevitable? It didn't happen, save for Scubs protest of McGrady and Iverson offering their spots...and his protest were logical, for the most part. So why did you make such comments? I'd say you were fishing for a flame war...

Thus the word "maybe"...that also wasn't the only possibility I presented. I also said that maybe it should be a requirement that a player has played in more than half of his team's games to that point. As for the "my vote doesn't matter" thing...that can occur no matter how you tally the votes if there is a large enough group voting.

I missed the requirement thing, my bad. That would be a good thing...but then again, the fans who are paying tons of money to see the all-star game want Vince Carter no matter how many games he's played...

As for the voting, it wouldn't work because it's not a direct democracy-voting style, as it is now. If the system used for US presidential elections is used for this, it would cause more problems than the current system as ties would be far more likely. How would you divide the fans? The NBA All-Star voting is international, so it'd be virtually impossible to have enough representatives for each and every country, not to mention divisions within the country. It's an impossible suggestion.

[scubilete]

So when I say something again it's bad

No, but if you don't show proofs that convince the forum for real that whatever you are saying is good, that's just what you would get. Your comments about Magic didn't convince me so I see you don't have a good base to talk about the subject.

I'm glad to know that your thought (EG) about a retirement and comeback is just related with attempts or saying

Because I know where the discussion goes everytime someone attempts to say something positive about Michael Jordan. I was simply laughing at the inevitable. And as you see it was quite inevitable...

Not everytime someone says something good about MJ you will see an argument. You will see that whenever people affirms that nobody will ever do whatever he has done, not knowing that there were players before and the league will continue having talents who possibly will surpass him.

I quoted a comment.

the greatest player to ever play basketball

Carter never thought to himself, "Well, I'll still get to play and MJ is one of the greatest

Is there any difference in those quotes? Right, there were players before and is understood that MJ might be great and maybe the greatest in his position but you can't disqualify all the others players just cause you like Jordan more.

That is why few years ago, the league decided to choose the 50 greatest player in the history, not the 1 Greatest player ever. I don't know if you remember who's the only player who scored 4000+ points in a regular season, who's the only player to average triple double in a whole season and so on. There's history that maybe you don't know, and we are just want to let you know that there is and there were players before as well.

[Rens]

People say everything leads to MJ bashing... and then they bring this up to go bash Vince Carter.. go figure... this discussion isn't even worth getting into.

[EGarrett]

*shrug* You had time before...you have time now...I made a little time to respond to you, it's not like it takes hours to make a single 'long reply'...

I'm not going to go around resurrecting dead threads that had turned into circular unending arguments...

*shrug* People curse all the time...someone was using porn in his signature for a bit, then changed it...

So...it's a gross violation of guidelines when I make a joke that's vaguely directed with a number of people on this board...and people make jokes all the time...but somehow your blatant unmasked swearing is fine because other people do it? Okay...

I meant that your view and what you say is said ten or fifteen times by you and others...my personal view is my view and my view only that shares a few common things with several other people on the board.

And how many times has your statement that "Jordan is not the best ever...someone will surpass him one day" been repeated? It's more than fifteen. Scub even added one more mention to the post below yours.

My view was said by "me and others"...and that's bad. But when your views "share a few common things with several other people on the board"...that's good. Okay...

Did any MJ bashing occur in this post? No...

Yes. Scub saw fit to criticize Jordan over his "repeated retiring" but let Magic Johnson off the hook for his repeated comeback attempts...which I don't see as remotely logical...and it had little to nothing to do with McGrady offering his spot. You then took the opportunity in your post to offer an unsolicited paragraph restating all your statements about how Jordan is not the greatest ever...

...but then again, the fans who are paying tons of money to see the all-star game want Vince Carter no matter how many games he's played...

That's fine with me. Voting players in who haven't been much of a part of the NBA that season might be considered by some to be against the spirit of the All-Star game though. For those people I was just throwing out some possible solutions.

If the system used for US presidential elections is used for this, it would cause more problems than the current system as ties would be far more likely

Actually...one of the main reasons the electoral college system was implemented was to make election results more decisive. It was just an idea off the top of my head and not worth the effort it would take to go into depth on it. Consider the games played requirement instead.

Your comments about Magic didn't convince me so I see you don't have a good base to talk about the subject.

Colin Powell's rationale for backing Bush's war effort wasn't very convincing to me either. Does that mean that Powell, a retired U.S. General, doesn't have a good base in military procedure? Of course not. It's just a matter of individual opinion. If you want to praise Johnson for repeated comeback attempts and criticize Jordan because his were more successful that's your prerogative. It's also my prerogative to say that doesn't make any sense. But that's all I'm going to say on that matter.

I don't know if you remember who's the only player who scored 4000+ points in a regular season, who's the only player to average triple double in a whole season and so on. There's history that maybe you don't know

I have no idea of history? Okay..

[scubilete]

People say everything leads to MJ bashing... and then they bring this up to go bash Vince Carter

Just quoted the expression that is different from one to another.
I didn't talk anything against Vince at all, at least I accept his reasons for not offering his spot to MJ so I don't know what are you complaining about?

Yes. Scub saw fit to criticize Jordan over his "repeated retiring"

I would like to ask you, what are the reasons why shouldn't I criticize MJ for his repeated retirements?

At least MJ is in the All-Star, I hope McGrady offer is accepted but don't be so sure this is his last all-star, as soon he retires and see the Wiz fans stop getting to the stadium, his pocket getting empty, he might plan for another come back.

I'm glad to know that your thought (EG) about a retirement and comeback is just related with attempts or saying. Also I understand why you are so upset about MJ being a Joker. You will be surprised if the guy says he'll play again 2 years later, however I won't. That's the point.

here are the reasons: If you retire once, you come back, ok. You retire twice with the excuse that you have done it all, then you come back to do what? to call the attention of the fans and come to the arena where the team you own is playing, then you are retiring again.

What would happen if all those, now Wiz fans, stop seeing Jordan there and they trade Stackhouse like many of them have been saying? Yes, the arena would be empty again, Jordan would have to come back or try some new techniques to get the attention of those fans, why shouldn't I expect him to come back?, cause he's old and can't shoot?, yeah right.

Getting back to the subject, I'm glad MJ didn't accept the starting spot there, I didn't vote for him and bet all those fans that voted to see McGrady starting didn't vote for MJ to see him there as well, so good choice by MJ, the fans voted for their starting line-up, not for those players to decide who should start.

However I should state, that he (MJ) might get the all-stars MVP for being his "last?" one.

[Wall St. Peon]

I'm not going to go around resurrecting dead threads that had turned into circular unending arguments...

You never really said anything of substance and just repeated everyone else...perhaps if you had thought abit it wouldn't have been a 'circular unending argument?' I didn't say to go post now, I was talking about when we were both posting and you abruptly stopped...

So...it's a gross violation of guidelines when I make a joke that's vaguely directed with a number of people on this board...and people make jokes all the time...but somehow your blatant unmasked swearing is fine because other people do it? Okay...

Demeaning other members, no matter how it's done, seems to be a deletable offense. Swearing is generally ignored, even though it is implicitly stated in the guidelines as 'inappropriate.' I wouldn't get deleted for that, and you wouldn't get deleted for what you said...however, it seems the way the board works, your statement was much more against the guidelines than mine...the board's screwy. *shrug*

And how many times has your statement that "Jordan is not the best ever...someone will surpass him one day" been repeated? It's more than fifteen. Scub even added one more mention to the post below yours.

Probably more than fifteen...but I'm going to keep saying it if people keep saying 'JoRdAn iZ dE gReAtEsT eVeR!!!!!!'...why? Because they're flat-out wrong...

My view was said by "me and others"...and that's bad. But when your views "share a few common things with several other people on the board"...that's good. Okay...

No, your views are shared by pop culture junkies who can't think for themselves. I've formed my own opinions based on logic, something that said junkies can't even begin to do. You, on the other hand, should be able to recognize my side of the argument as you are more intelligent than you're letting on...I'm criticizing you because you can do better than saying MJ is the greatest blah blah stats blah blah rings blah blah popularity...you can form a much better argument than that, and then at the same time I expect you to see my point of view; people who are intelligent and skilled at debate, a category you obviously place yourself in, should be able to recognize the other side and make a rebuttal. You've done nothing of the sort, so until you do, I'm going to keep repeating myself.

You then took the opportunity in your post to offer an unsolicited paragraph restating all your statements about how Jordan is not the greatest ever...

Unsolicited? Read it again, my misspoken friend. Notice all the parts about McGrady and Iverson offering Jordan the starting spot and so on? Yeah, you know, the TOPIC. It wasn't unsolicited, and if you think it is, God help you...

Actually...one of the main reasons the electoral college system was implemented was to make election results more decisive. It was just an idea off the top of my head and not worth the effort it would take to go into depth on it. Consider the games played requirement instead.

Yeah, but that was when nearly everyone voted...

I have no idea of history? Okay..

He knows his history...which is why I expect a much better argument from him.

[scubilete]

Scub even added one more mention to the post below yours.

Well, I posted a correction the same guy made, so it is understood and the correction was made. Sorry for that EG, I guess I have my own opinion about what the greatest ever who have or will play the game means and as Shane does, I would never agree with that statement. Plus, you have seen my comments in other threads were you and Shane have started this neverending discussion and I've been trying to make Shane understand that it is useless, cause you will always keep that saying.

In addition, I guess when I started writing, Shane was almost finishing his post so I didn't see anything that Shane wrote until I hit the submit button. That happens so don't take it like I'm just repeating the same thing over and over, I prefer to copy and paste it because it looks to me like you read none.

He knows his history...which is why I expect a much better argument from him.

Shane, the problem is MJ Fans are not going to change, even if you show them this is white, they will keep saying that's green, so even I know much better history of the game and know numbers, they will keep doing the same thing, that's why I just made one statement to see if anyone would come and say, no MJ was even better. Obviously the only one that always come in MJ defense is super EG, who still believes that the frase should be repeated over and over without even changing a word.

[EGarrett]

I would like to ask you, what are the reasons why shouldn't I criticize MJ for his repeated retirements?

Because it's very common for professional athletes to retire and come back. Guys like Magic, who you completely left off the hook for something very similar...have done the same. The only difference with Jordan is that the media makes a huge deal out of it. You didn't know that Dominique Wilkins came back in '98 and was a shadow of his former self. So, how are you in a position to make a judgement that MJ is worse than others when you don't know how others handled their retirements? I don't feel that you are...

Demeaning other members, no matter how it's done, seems to be a deletable offense.

Demeaning other members? By mocking their point of view? You mean like this?

people keep saying 'JoRdAn iZ dE gReAtEsT eVeR!!!!!!'

Or referring to people on the board who think a certain way like this?

pop culture junkies who can't think for themselves.

Once again...explain to me how what I did is wrong but what you did is fine?

I'll deal with the "ever" issue in a bit.

Swearing is generally ignored, even though it is implicitly stated in the guidelines as 'inappropriate.' I wouldn't get deleted for that, and you wouldn't get deleted for what you said...however, it seems the way the board works, your statement was much more against the guidelines than mine...the board's screwy. *shrug*

I've committed a "deletable offense" once, but you committed that same deletable offense at least twice in your last post and also sweared in a blatant and unmasked form earlier. Who should be deleted?

Probably more than fifteen...but I'm going to keep saying it

But you chide me for repeating myself. When I do it...is it not okay because it bothers you? Why is it okay, then, for you to needlessly and endlessly bother other members over semantics?

if people keep saying 'JoRdAn iZ dE gReAtEsT eVeR!!!!!!'...why? Because they're flat-out wrong...

Okay let's talk about this "ever" issue. When someone in real life asks you've "ever" been somewhere or "ever" done something...honestly...how do you answer them? With a yes or no, or with a "There is no answer to that because in the future I could do that thing so you are flat-out wrong. Do not say that again."

If you answer a person the second way, that'll be the end of the conversation with that person, won't it? One of the definitions of the word "ever" is "at any time" as in "at any time in the past." Most of the time when people use the word "ever" that is what they mean.

Do you disagree that a person asking you if you've "ever been to Europe" is asking "Have you been to Europe at any time in the past?" and not "Have you been to Europe in the past, or do you think you will ever be in Europe?"

Right...it's understood. All you're doing by bringing up that statement is gumming up conversation and distracting people from the ability to have a positive exchange of ideas. Message boards aren't about perfect spelling and grammar...and someone who goes around fixing every mistake a person makes (whether it's a mistake or not) is just hurting discussion.

What's even worse is that people like scub seem to pick up the same habit and thus the problem only gets worse. If you want to make your statement about how you feel the word "ever" should be used by everyone in society whenever it is said or written (which is what you need to say, not just confining it to Michael Jordan) then put it in your sig and be done with it. Otherwise you're just repeating a tired cliche that is lowering the quality of the board.

Unsolicited? Read it again, my misspoken friend. Notice all the parts about McGrady and Iverson offering Jordan the starting spot and so on? Yeah, you know, the TOPIC.

Okay...let's read it again...

Oh yeah, here's my disclaimer:

I like MJ. MJ was a great player (operative word: was). He is one of the best to play the game to this point in time. Arguably the best guard of the 90's, probably the best player of the 90's (wait, that's conflicting you say? The early 90's were the end of the Gervins and Thomas' and etc. careers

See the part where you bring up your statement about Jordan being the greatest of the 90's...then go off about who you feel was better than him? When you're asking yourself questions in order to continue on a tangent that no one asked you to go on...that's a good sign that the information you're giving is unsolicited.

The stuff about whether or not Jordan deserved it is fine. The other information is just repeating yourself in an unnecessary fashion...

Shane, the problem is MJ Fans are not going to change, even if you show them this is white, they will keep saying that's green,

So you're saying the argument will be circular and unending...?

so even I know much better history of the game and know numbers,

If you think you do, the more power to you...but you didn't seem to remember things that happened in 1998 so others might feel differently...

Obviously the only one that always come in MJ defense is super EG

Or I'm just trying to put an end to this so people can have a useful exchange of ideas again...

And Shane...I understand that you get emotional. Some people on the board react the same way. If you want people to consider a different point of view....You have to remember...words are like snowflakes. The lighter they fall the more they stick. Don't be so heavy handed in yelling at people and they'll be more likely to listen. Have you noticed how you're bothered by the smallest (real or imagined) slight in something I say but when someone curses you out you just ignore them? Same principle...
_________________
Super EG

[JJcoolL]

Okay let's talk about this "ever" issue. When someone in real life asks you've "ever" been somewhere or "ever" done something...honestly...how do you answer them? With a yes or no, or with a "There is no answer to that because in the future I could do that thing so you are flat-out wrong. Do not say that again."

so tru

n e way, who is this 'shane'?

[Rens]

n e way, who is this 'shane'?

Enahs Live <-> Evil Shane

And about the ever issue... when you say "Greatest Ever" people generally speak about the greatest that has been in the past and who'll be the greatest forever in the future. Now this is a huge time period, hence the discussion about it.
When you ask if someone has ever been somewhere, you speak in the past sense, meaning you're talking about the past (just the way people mean it when they ask the question).

[Wall St. Peon]

Demeaning other members? By mocking their point of view? You mean like this?Shane wrote:
people keep saying 'JoRdAn iZ dE gReAtEsT eVeR!!!!!!'

It's not demeaning...people say that, it's a quote...

Or referring to people on the board who think a certain way like this?Quote:
pop culture junkies who can't think for themselves.

Considering MJ is an enormous part of pop culture, and since the majority of MJ fans won't consider anything other than what said pop culture says, they are pop culture junkies who can't think for themselves...it's an observation, not a slam.

Once again...explain to me how what I did is wrong but what you did is fine?

I wasn't demeaning anyone, at least not intentionally. I quoted people in one case, and in the other I was observing...neither are guideline violations.

I've committed a "deletable offense" once, but you committed that same deletable offense at least twice in your last post and also sweared in a blatant and unmasked form earlier. Who should be deleted?

People are deleted all the time for making fun of other members of the board; however, swearing is basically permitted, unless it's a part of demeaning another member of the board. Andrew should really modify the rule about swearing since the administration ignores that rule...

But you chide me for repeating myself. When I do it...is it not okay because it bothers you? Why is it okay, then, for you to needlessly and endlessly bother other members over semantics?

Use the entire quote. Don't take half a sentence to make yourself look smart...it destroys the context. You're simply trying to make me look stupid...

Okay let's talk about this "ever" issue. When someone in real life asks you've "ever" been somewhere or "ever" done something...honestly...how do you answer them? With a yes or no, or with a "There is no answer to that because in the future I could do that thing so you are flat-out wrong. Do not say that again."

Hey, there's the rest of my sentence! For a second there, I thought you'd just ignore it completely...

Well, considering that if someone asks me "Have you ever been to Europe?" 'have' is past tense, therefore it's implied in the syntax of the sentence that it was in the past - not present, not future - but past. The Greatest Ever or the Greatest of All Time - what many ignorant fans call Jordan - is entirely incorrect.

If you answer a person the second way, that'll be the end of the conversation with that person, won't it? One of the definitions of the word "ever" is "at any time" as in "at any time in the past." Most of the time when people use the word "ever" that is what they mean.

No, they don't. Not in this instance; if they meant the greatest to this date, then they would say 'The greatest that has ever played in the NBA,' not 'the greatest ever.' See the difference? Ahh, yes, 'has' - past tense...

Do you disagree that a person asking you if you've "ever been to Europe" is asking "Have you been to Europe at any time in the past?" and not "Have you been to Europe in the past, or do you think you will ever be in Europe?"

Have..past tense...'you will' future...people are saying that 'no one will be better than Jordan,' and that's an impossibility...someone WILL be better than him at some point in time, therefore, he is NOT the greatest ever...you have to look at the tense...but you're not. You're helping me out though, by bringing this up...never thought of that before. Maybe people will understand the error of their ways...but I doubt it.

Right...it's understood. All you're doing by bringing up that statement is gumming up conversation and distracting people from the ability to have a positive exchange of ideas. Message boards aren't about perfect spelling and grammar...and someone who goes around fixing every mistake a person makes (whether it's a mistake or not) is just hurting discussion.

I wasn't correcting grammar, I was correcting a horrible error on many people's part. It's IMPOSSIBLE that Jordan is the greatest player ever, of all time. He may be the greatest player to have ever lived, but the 'have' makes the 'to this point in time' an unneeded statement. People have said that, but I ignore that because that is definately possible...it's the other people saying that Jordan will never be surpassed that bother me...

What's even worse is that people like scub seem to pick up the same habit and thus the problem only gets worse.

It's not my fault that I don't like to see ignorance and wish to correct it...I am going to be a teacher, it's not like I want people to make the same mistake over and over again...I'm stubborn, and I'll continue to correct people until they figure out how wrong they are....

If you want to make your statement about how you feel the word "ever" should be used by everyone in society whenever it is said or written (which is what you need to say, not just confining it to Michael Jordan) then put it in your sig and be done with it. Otherwise you're just repeating a tired cliche that is lowering the quality of the board.

It's not a cliche, it's fact. And it IS a societal standard: it's called ENGLISH. You're attempting to use it, and so is every other person on this board. I've already explained about tenses, but you obviously didn't think of that...If they cannot understand my problem with their ignorant statements, well, that's too bad.

If you want to make your statement about how you feel the word "ever" should be used by everyone in society whenever it is said or written (which is what you need to say, not just confining it to Michael Jordan) then put it in your sig and be done with it. Otherwise you're just repeating a tired cliche that is lowering the quality of the board.

It was to prevent you coming out and saying 'but don't you hate Jordan' or whatever. It was to prevent people starting the same tired argument about Jordan being the "greatest ever." It was to make my opinion seem more valued since I obviously don't like Jordan, yet I'm saying it was a great gesture to offer him the starting spot because of his accomplishments. Apparently you don't read between the lines at all...

And Shane...I understand that you get emotional.

You gotta be kidding me...you don't know me, I'm rarely emotional about anything...I'm generally apathetic about most things and am incredibly easy going. You don't know me, so how can you make this judgement? What does this have to do with the discussion? Completely unnecessary...

Some people on the board react the same way. If you want people to consider a different point of view....You have to remember...words are like snowflakes. The lighter they fall the more they stick.

You're lecturing me on debate when you don't even know how to do it? Sheesh...I am an English major with published work and wonderful compliments from all my professors for my writing skills. You don't think I know how to use words? That's the only thing that truly insults me...Andrew, Ben, TheBob, Eugene, and so on have read my work, and they can vouch for the quality and my ability to use words to give meaning...and I obviously know how to use them if your best argument against the 'ever' statements neglected tense...

Don't be so heavy handed in yelling at people and they'll be more likely to listen.

But I'm not yelling? And people listen, it just depends whether or not they want to accept my opinion or modify theirs or whatever. You're a closed-minded person who doesn't believe anything unless you thought of it yourself - and that wasn't meant to demean or insult, it's an observation. Remember, you once said 'what's the point of arguing if you can't win?' You're definately not here for discussion, you're here for ego...

Have you noticed how you're bothered by the smallest (real or imagined) slight in something I say but when someone curses you out you just ignore them? Same principle...

No, I dislike arrogant fools who ignore anything that's logical and who think they understand the English language and rules of debate better than I...while that statement may seem a bit arrogant, I know there are many people who are better at those two things than I am; however, you're definately not one of those people.

If I'm cursed out, so what. Cursing shows a lack of intelligence, and I ignore it. You try to be clever in your insults so you can hide them when I point them out - and really, that's all I do, point them out and retort - but you say I get emotional? If I'm getting emotional, you're sitting at your computer crying your eyes out because some kid in Iowa made you feel stupid...and then you call your dad, the NBA Great of the 50's, and have him tell you the stories of when he was a superstar...

[EGarrett]

It's not demeaning...people say that, it's a quote...

So then why the exaggerated capitalization, spelling, and excessive punctuation? Seemed like a caricature to me...

Considering MJ is an enormous part of pop culture, and since the majority of MJ fans won't consider anything other than what said pop culture says, they are pop culture junkies who can't think for themselves...it's an observation, not a slam.

Whenever someone says something that's a negative comment about a person's character or intelligence it's demeaning. They may be observations to that person but they're insults to someone else. A lot of things I say as flippant observations you seem to take as insults also. If you want me to apologize for the initial comment I gladly would if it would mean you'd be more of an adult also...

People are deleted all the time for making fun of other members of the board; however, swearing is basically permitted, unless it's a part of demeaning another member of the board. Andrew should really modify the rule about swearing since the administration ignores that rule...

I'm just still wondering why you're chiding me for a "deletable offense" when you're saying things that people will see as even more demeaning than what I said and you committed an additional blatant violation.

It was to prevent people starting the same tired argument about Jordan being the "greatest ever"

Tired...aka...circular...cliched and unending. Obviously we're both saying the same thing...but then why do you get angry when I don't have time during various periods and I just let the circular argument go?

Have..past tense...'you will' future...people are saying that 'no one will be better than Jordan,' and that's an impossibility...someone WILL be better than him at some point in time, therefore, he is NOT the greatest ever...you have to look at the tense...but you're not. You're helping me out though, by bringing this up...never thought of that before. Maybe people will understand the error of their ways...but I doubt it.

What I asked you initially was how was the word "ever" being used in the sentence. It was being used to mean "at any point in the past." The word "have" only indicated that the word was being used in that way. The point was, as I stated, that the word ever is used in several different ways. You should just recognize what someone is trying to say and reply to it instead of yelling at them about word usage. It's all in the same boat as spelling and grammar correction...

It's not my fault that I don't like to see ignorance and wish to correct it...I am going to be a teacher, it's not like I want people to make the same mistake over and over again...I'm stubborn, and I'll continue to correct people until they figure out how wrong they are....

If you intend to be a teacher then you need to realize that there are many, many ways to go about correcting someone when they're wrong. Some will cause the person's behavior to change as desired...some will cause the person to ignore you...and others will get you into a fight.

If your goal is to get someone to change what they're doing you have to be thoughtful and patient. You also need to know how to choose your words. What do you honestly think would happen if you told someone's parents your simple observation that their child was a fool who can't think?

You gotta be kidding me...you don't know me, I'm rarely emotional about anything...I'm generally apathetic about most things and am incredibly easy going. You don't know me, so how can you make this judgement? What does this have to do with the discussion? Completely unnecessary...

It was necessary. The only concern I have with you is these boards...so my observation was about how you might go about getting people to listen to what you want to tell them on this board instead of getting angry.

As far as I go...It's obvious that you overreact to small things I say and you perceive insults (or negative observations if that's the way you want to refer to it) where there are none. You got very angry, for example, when I asked you if something you said was sarcastic because I couldn't tell. All I meant was what I said...I can't tell when people are being sarcastic online and sometimes I have to ask. You overreacted to it though. When I say I understand you get emotional...I mean I understand that you have a tendency to overreact to things I say.

You're lecturing me on debate when you don't even know how to do it?

If you wonder why I gloss over these comments...it's because you seem to flip-flop your opinion of my debating skills or intelligence from post to post. I don't say "thanks" or acknowledge it because your statements go from positive to negative so frequently...

Sheesh...I am an English major with published work and wonderful compliments from all my professors for my writing skills. You don't think I know how to use words? That's the only thing that truly insults me...Andrew, Ben, TheBob, Eugene, and so on have read my work, and they can vouch for the quality and my ability to use words to give meaning...and I obviously know how to use them if your best argument against the 'ever' statements neglected tense...

You don't have to convince me of anything Shane. I think you express yourself well in writing (when you're not being demeaning) and you should expect people to see that.

Scub thinks I know nothing about basketball history...I didn't feel the need to prove anything to him because I'm confident that I have a very good knowledge of basketball history. Same principle...

You're a closed-minded person who doesn't believe anything unless you thought of it yourself - and that wasn't meant to demean or insult, it's an observation.

You really seem to be regressing into your negative 'observations' like you have in the past. You're a smart enough person to know when what you're observing will insult someone. In my case, whe someone is making demeaning comments it just makes me pay a lot less attention to their point. I've been open and closed-minded to you at times depending on the level of the discussion and I think you know that.

Like I said...I'd gladly apologize if I said something that you didn't like if it meant a mature exchange of ideas with less negative observations...

[Wall St. Peon]

So then why the exaggerated capitalization, spelling, and excessive punctuation? Seemed like a caricature to me...

It seems like one, but sadly, it isn't...

Whenever someone says something that's a negative comment about a person's character or intelligence it's demeaning. They may be observations to that person but they're insults to someone else. A lot of things I say as flippant observations you seem to take as insults also. If you want me to apologize for the initial comment I gladly would if it would mean you'd be more of an adult also...

I never said being a pop culture junkie was a bad thing; I'm probably as much a pop culture junkie as the next guy, but I do have the sense to see past a lot of things that the masses don't. Cynacism isn't always a good thing...

Your initial comment wasn't an observation, it was an attempt to start a discussion such as this. You even admitted to it...although you said that you 'knew this would happen,' as opposed to actually stating that it was your goal for such a discussion...

I'm just still wondering why you're chiding me for a "deletable offense" when you're saying things that people will see as even more demeaning than what I said and you committed an additional blatant violation.

Because you kept bringing it up...it was a jab at the administration of the board, not at you...

Tired...aka...circular...cliched and unending. Obviously we're both saying the same thing...but then why do you get angry when I don't have time during various periods and I just let the circular argument go?

If people would understand what I'm trying to say then there would be no more 'Jordan's the Greatest of All-Time' posts...until then, I'm going to keep repeating myself until they get the idea.

What I asked you initially was how was the word "ever" being used in the sentence. It was being used to mean "at any point in the past." The word "have" only indicated that the word was being used in that way. The point was, as I stated, that the word ever is used in several different ways. You should just recognize what someone is trying to say and reply to it instead of yelling at them about word usage. It's all in the same boat as spelling and grammar correction...

No, the statement's I'm criticizing mean best there is, was, and ever will be. They encompass all time, and, therefore, are impossible and wrong. It's simple as that. Do you really want me to correct for grammar? This is so minor...but it's so huge. If you're debating something, you have to use language correctly in order to get your point across. Otherwise, as in this case, one simply looks uneducated because they don't understand the simple fact that time has not ended and you can't use 'ever' to describe the future. However, people honestly think that MJ is the best player that will ever play the game and no one will be better, and it COULD happen, but the odds are much more in favor of a player surpassing his talent and ability and achievements, and that is my point.

If you intend to be a teacher then you need to realize that there are many, many ways to go about correcting someone when they're wrong. Some will cause the person's behavior to change as desired...some will cause the person to ignore you...and others will get you into a fight.

I'm a really helpful and considerate person to people of lesser intelligence or of ignorance; I enjoy helping them out, showing them how to use prepositions correctly or telling them how to install the NLSC's roster patch in XP (note to self: tell Andrew). I enjoy it, and I'm not a jerk about it. However, I'm harder on people that have the intelligence to figure it out, and I'm harder on the people that should just plain know better. Fight? Heh, no, I know know how to control teenagers...

If your goal is to get someone to change what they're doing you have to be thoughtful and patient.

I put significantly more time into these posts than I do others. I've also been patient. Or stubborn, if you want to call it that. Same thing in this case...

You also need to know how to choose your words.

And I do, very carefully...and I generally get exactly the response I wanted/expected from you. Except for the simple response of 'I understand what you're trying to say, and I agree with you that Jordan will be surpassed in the future. Jordan is not the greatest ever.' It's simple, really...as for all my other comments, you've reacted - probably 80% of the time - exactly how I figured you would: like a spoiled child who couldn't get his way...

What do you honestly think would happen if you told someone's parents your simple observation that their child was a fool who can't think?

I dunno, how about you try it first and let me know...I'm not a masochist.

It was necessary.

No, it wasn't. What does it have to do with a basketball discussion? Absolutely nothing. You're just trying to divert attention away from the topic onto me, trying to place doubt in my statements by attempting to make me seem like an insecure computer geek who spazzes because someone disagrees with me on a message board...

The only concern I have with you is these boards

Eh?

so my observation was about how you might go about getting people to listen to what you want to tell them on this board instead of getting angry

But I'm not angry...I can't prove it to you, but I'm not angry. I rarely use exlamation marks or all caps, and when I use all caps it's to emphasize a point because I'm too lazy to do bold formatting...

As far as I go...It's obvious that you overreact to small things I say and you perceive insults (or negative observations if that's the way you want to refer to it) where there are none.

You were mocking opinions of other board members - insulting them - and you did that intentionally. You put thought into your post before you made it, and you're doing it again by mocking my statement about how I was simply making observations. I was, there was no malice intended towards anyone. You'll know when I'm trying to insult you...

You got very angry, for example, when I asked you if something you said was sarcastic because I couldn't tell

No, I didn't get angry. I assumed you were being a prick, since that does seem to be a personality trait that you posess...

All I meant was what I said...I can't tell when people are being sarcastic online and sometimes I have to ask.

It works both ways...I couldn't tell you were being serious. No one's at fault...and I certainly was not angry.

You overreacted to it though. When I say I understand you get emotional...I mean I understand that you have a tendency to overreact to things I say.

Sheesh, you have a high opinion of yourself. You honestly think that I care so much about what you think of me that the slightest little comment gets me in an uproar? "Waaaaah, EG was mean!!! I'm gonna lock myself in a room for a week! Waaaah!!" For crying out loud, take a deep breath and pull your head out of your ass. I'm not overreacting, I'm responding. I'm not emotional, I'm responding. I'm not agry, I'm responding. It's really quite simple. I am JUST RESPONDING. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't like you, yes, but all that other crap you're pulling out of no where? Please.

If you wonder why I gloss over these comments...it's because you seem to flip-flop your opinion of my debating skills or intelligence from post to post. I don't say "thanks" or acknowledge it because your statements go from positive to negative so frequently...

*sigh* I've always said your debating skills suck...and I always say 'you're more intelligent' or 'you're smarter than that'...my opinion has never flip-flopped in this regard. You bring up points that are wrong (see the 'ever' comments), you repeat things other people have said, things that don't bring anything fresh to the discussion, and then you bash me when I say the same thing; how can I say anything new when you don't bring up any new points? It leads to stagnation of discussion, and then we have the 'tired' discussion that we always have.

You don't have to convince me of anything Shane. I think you express yourself well in writing (when you're not being demeaning) and you should expect people to see that.

So what was the point to bring up the use of words to get one's point across if you knew I can express myself in writing? When I'm not being demeaning...ooo, clever...I'm one of the few people on the board who don't make fun of someone else daily...so don't even say that.

Scub thinks I know nothing about basketball history...I didn't feel the need to prove anything to him because I'm confident that I have a very good knowledge of basketball history. Same principle...

But you were lecturing me on the importance of meaning and words...and then you say I do that. It's completely different...you contradicted yourself in consecutive posts. Also, it's different in another regard: I have others telling me that I'm a great writer and what not; yours is your own personal opinion on your own knowledge. Big difference...

You really seem to be regressing into your negative 'observations' like you have in the past. You're a smart enough person to know when what you're observing will insult someone. In my case, whe someone is making demeaning comments it just makes me pay a lot less attention to their point. I've been open and closed-minded to you at times depending on the level of the discussion and I think you know that.

No, I'm smart enough to know that the stuff I say will offend someone - namely you - but not insult. If you were truly insulted, you'd be making a huge deal about it, but as it is, you're doing nothing more than calling me immature - when in fact, you're doing the exact same thing when you mock my comments. How hypocritical...oh, as for the open and closed minded...I wouldn't be a dick if you actually listened to the points, and since you're closed minded and don't listen to the points, I get sarcastic...but not until you've ignored all logic and every single valid point I've made.

Like I said...I'd gladly apologize if I said something that you didn't like if it meant a mature exchange of ideas with less negative observations...

If you want a mature discussion, don't start your first post like this:

I don't know why...Jordan is a washed up loser who wasn't that great to begin wi...oh wait...sorry...mistook myself for some other people on this board...

How mature THAT was...

[TheBob]

Can't a moderator just lock this post or move it to general talk at least? This no longer has anything to do with the NBA.