Michael Jordan

by **Clinton** on Thu Dec 19, 2002 12:43 pm

Great game for MJ. He took over the game. The Grizz couldn't stop him, not with their stinky defence anyway.

by **Ricks** on Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:32 pm

¤ wrote:Sigh. But what are we teaching our kids? That it's ok to break the law and have (what are generally looked upon as) poor ethics?

LoL are you serious?!?!?!

You turn the TV on and there's something bad being taught to our kids you turn the radio on there's a bad message for our kids...

The world turns my friend and what happens happens, don't go all banal just because there is a point in bagging MJ...

Why don't you go and bag eminem for making rap songs that are about screwing his mother? or bag snoop doggy dogg, all the rappers for cussing blame tv for glorifying hitman and gangster movies...

I'm sure all the probs of the world don't stem from mj... but all you mj haters seem to think so... Did shawn kemp get put in jail for screwin with over 400 women ? LoL nawww... does anyone famous get picked up for adultery charges at all? what maybe 1 in 20 - 30 ? more?

MJ plays ball, and that's how we should see it... bring your noble cause elsewhere man... seriously it's transparent...

peace

by **Ricks** on Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:38 pm

¤ wrote:And what a boring title it is. I guess nobody likes interesting discussions, they just want to continue to ignorantly spread propaganda. I didn't know I was still allowed to talk about Michael Jordan, I was told to stop, then told to talk about Jordan, then told not to post my opinion if it disagrees with someones. But, ya know, I guess since everyone else wants to be blatantly ignorant without countering viewpoints, whatever floats your boat.

yeah first you're a victim, then you're an innocent, then you're a victim again... life is just too hard for you aint it man?

if only jordan didn't like women, then your life would be different...

come on... say it with me "damn... I hate jordan... "

what you tryin to prove hatuh?

peace

by **Ricks** on Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:54 pm

TheBob wrote:
gloveguy wrote:I hope that Michael and his wife Juanita reconcile. It's obvious that he loves her or else he would've split a long time ago.

How is it obvious that he loves her by not spliting up with her? Maybe he's just staying with her for the kids. If he loved her we houldnt have cheated on her.

You don't know that...

TheBob wrote:Is it the event that matters or when it took place? Cause Hitler commited some pretty bad acts but they were quite a while ago so b your logic he's not a bad person.

Well the way you carry on, it's like every guy who commits adultery should be shot! come on, like you didn't look at another woman? Ok man, you're married(make believe) you love ur wife but this hot chick comes up to you and offers to do the deed... what do you do? - EH! don't answer that you might get shot if we lived by ur rules.

gloveguy wrote:
He loves his wife and he loves his children.

TheBob wrote:You don't know that.

You don't know that he doesn't either...

gloveguy wrote:
Just knowing that makes him a good person.

TheBob wrote:You don't know that, remember? Plus loads of bad people love their families, the mafia for example.

You don't know that either, but it seems to make it valid in your point of view... so why not his?

gloveguy wrote:
It's just a shame seeing marriages end after soo many years.

TheBob wrote:Not if it benefits his wife, who says he was a good husband?

who's to say it doesn't benefit his wife? you?

peace

by **EGarrett** on Wed Dec 25, 2002 1:44 am

How is it obvious that he loves her by not spliting up with her? Maybe he's just staying with her for the kids. If he loved her we houldnt have cheated on her.

How old are you? Things in life aren't that simple.

by **:digerati:** on Wed Dec 25, 2002 3:18 am

Ricks wrote:LoL are you serious?!?!?!

Yes.

Ricks wrote:You turn the TV on and there's something bad being taught to our kids you turn the radio on there's a bad message for our kids...

And yet nobody cares...

Ricks wrote:The world turns my friend and what happens happens, don't go all banal just because there is a point in bagging MJ...

I didn't go "banal", did I? Do you know what that means?

Yes, I agree, let's just ignore bad stuff.

Ricks wrote:Why don't you go and bag eminem for making rap songs that are about screwing his mother? or bag snoop doggy dogg, all the rappers for cussing blame tv for glorifying hitman and gangster movies...

Because this thread is about Michael Jordan? No?

Ricks wrote:I'm sure all the probs of the world don't stem from mj... but all you mj haters seem to think so... Did shawn kemp get put in jail for screwin with over 400 women ? LoL nawww... does anyone famous get picked up for adultery charges at all? what maybe 1 in 20 - 30 ? more?

Did I say all problems stem from Michael Jordan? And don't call me a Michael Jordan hater because that's illegal. Shawn Kemp can screw 400 women for all I care, as long as he pays that child support. Again, you're saying, ignore problems because chaos rules!

Ricks wrote:MJ plays ball, and that's how we should see it... bring your noble cause elsewhere man... seriously it's transparent...

MJ plays basketball yes, that's one way to see it, but what about Iverson? You wouldn't want to ignore his off-court issues as well would you? What about moderators on forums? You can't seperate their personal dealings from their job? So why can we seperate Jordan? My "noble cause" is transparent? Oh, I forgot, you dislike it when people don't ignore problems.

Ricks wrote:yeah first you're a victim, then you're an innocent, then you're a victim again... life is just too hard for you aint it man?

I'm just stating the facts here, like I said I didn't know I was still allowed to talk about Michael Jordan, I was told to stop, then told to talk about Jordan, then told not to post my opinion if it disagrees with someones. That's what happened. Read above, you'll see.

Ricks wrote:if only jordan didn't like women, then your life would be different...

Yes, it would. Jordan wouldn't have screwed up, I wouldn't have posted about Michael Jordan screwing up, people wouldn't be ignorant and hypocritical on the issue, people wouldn't do so many illegal actions in this thread, people wouldn't revive dead threads just to slander someone weeks after the issue died.

Ricks wrote:come on... say it with me "damn... I hate jordan... "

You hate Jordan? Why? Do you know him personally and can hate him like that? Are you saying I hate Michael Jordan? I don't hate Michael Jordan. I just don't treat him like a false god like others. I look at him like I do anyone else. I don't descriminate against him, I'm just critical of him like I am everyone else. People create expectations for him, and he never lives up to them. So I'm a "hater" for pointing that out?

Ricks wrote:what you tryin to prove hatuh?

The question is, what are you trying to prove? I'm not a "hater" or "hatuh". So stop with the slander and libel already. If you weren't aware, the Aussie supreme court decided I could sue you in some unfriendly place like the Ukraine for such a comment. Where you'd lose, and I'd get some grivna to transfer into American dollars to buy a GeForceFX. Bing, bang, boom.

Ricks wrote:peace

Peace? Peace? Hardly, you revived this dead again thread with three posts right after another with your illegal statements. You posted a week later with the point being only to insult other people and do illegal actions. You don't want peace either, you want anarchy and chaos because you clearly are opposed to law and order. I was done with this thread, but you had to revive it with personal attacks, perhaps you should act more mature and open your mind?

by **TheBob** on Wed Dec 25, 2002 4:35 am

Ricks wrote:
TheBob wrote:
gloveguy wrote:I hope that Michael and his wife Juanita reconcile. It's obvious that he loves her or else he would've split a long time ago.

How is it obvious that he loves her by not spliting up with her? Maybe he's just staying with her for the kids. If he loved her we houldnt have cheated on her.

You don't know that...

Maybe if it hapened once and he was drunk or something rediculous but it's pretty well established that Jordan is a womanizer.

TheBob wrote:Is it the event that matters or when it took place? Cause Hitler commited some pretty bad acts but they were quite a while ago so by your logic he's not a bad person.

Ricks wrote:Well the way you carry on, it's like every guy who commits adultery should be shot! come on, like you didn't look at another woman? Ok man, you're married(make believe) you love ur wife but this hot chick comes up to you and offers to do the deed... what do you do? - EH! don't answer that you might get shot if we lived by ur rules.

I don't believe that every guy who commits adultery should be shot. The point I was making is that if you commit a bad act it's still bad years laters it doesn't become a better act with time. Furthermore, if I was married in your hypothetical situation I would turn the other woman down out of respect for my wife. (We'll assume I married someone that I love and respect)

gloveguy wrote:
He loves his wife and he loves his children.

TheBob wrote:You don't know that.

Ricks wrote:You don't know that he doesn't either...

I never said that I did, I'm just pointing out that GloveGuy is just assuming that he loves his wife and kids.

gloveguy wrote:
Just knowing that makes him a good person.

TheBob wrote:You don't know that, remember? Plus loads of bad people love their families, the mafia for example.

Ricks wrote:You don't know that either, but it seems to make it valid in your point of view... so why not his?

I don't think you're reading what I wrote. I never said that he didn't love his family, I simply stated that GloveGuy doesn't know whether he does or not. I'm not leaning one way or another whereas GG just made the assumption that he does in fact love them.

gloveguy wrote:
It's just a shame seeing marriages end after soo many years.

TheBob wrote:Not if it benefits his wife, who says he was a good husband?

Ricks wrote:who's to say it doesn't benefit his wife? you?

Well she did try and divorce him didn't she? There must be some problems there. Plus I also didn't state that he was a bad husband or that it benefited his wife by getting a divorce. I simply raised the questions because people keep assuming that Jordan is a great person for some reason. Basketball talent has nothing to do with how good a person you are....

Ricks wrote: peace

¤ wrote: Peace? Peace? Hardly, you revived this dead again thread with three posts right after another with your illegal statements. You posted a week later with the point being only to insult other people and do illegal actions. You don't want peace either, you want anarchy and chaos because you clearly are opposed to law and order. I was done with this thread, but you had to revive it with personal attacks, perhaps you should act more mature and open your mind?

TheBob wrote:
How is it obvious that he loves her by not spliting up with her? Maybe he's just staying with her for the kids. If he loved her we houldnt have cheated on her.

EG wrote: How old are you? Things in life aren't that simple.

My age has nothing to do with anything in this post and things in life aren't simple you're right. However if you love someone you don't go out of your way to hurt them and if you don't have the self discipline to restrain yourself from cheating on your wife then you obviously don't love her. If you did you'd think about her before commiting the act in question.

by **Ricks** on Thu Dec 26, 2002 2:58 am

¤ wrote:a whole lot of crap...

ok, I'm not going to requote quotes that have been quoted anymore as that makes things hard to follow. I choose to answer them in points...

And why did you have to get childish and start taking me literally? it's point for point man, not cheap shot for cheap shot. when I refer to you as hater, I refer to you as someone who does not like MJ, so don't go sue-ing me by misconstruing my terms... it's used colloquialy... so hold ur aussie lawyers off... :roll:

and when I say peace... it's a signature... I didn't mean peace as in peace, peace it's more like peace it's the end of my post peace... well just for you for this post I'll end it with "chaos and mayhem" - since ur into cheap shots

quote 1: The question that I asked about your "seriousness" was rhetorical. you didn't need to answer it... I'm sure you've heard the rhetorical "are you serious?" question before but chose to take my words literally... what were you thinking? (no don't answer that)

quote 2: "Nobody cares?"(don't answer that) of course everyone cares... but you asked a question like "what about the children?" and pointed out that michael jordan's womanizing as if it was a major contributor of childhood corruption, well, I say look at the other forms of corruption that kids are shown - and yes it would seem like no one cares because we are letting them do it - I mean rapping about drive bys is more of a corrupting influence than womanizing, why do we single mj out? (you might attack my point literally again, so I'll be more specific) why do YOU single MJ out?(don't answer that it's rhetorical)

quote 3: Banal - said with a hispanic accent as buh nuhl... meaning holy... yet again you chose to take me literally... MJ's "crimes" as you would call it, is a small insignificant spec compared to the other stuff going on in the world... why don't you go try and stop a war or something.

what I meant was - The world turns and ppl cheat on their wives... get over it... I've known ppl who cheat on their wives good doctors who have saved lives cheat on their wives... does that mean they are not to be marvelled for what they do just because they cheated on their wives? - give me a break (don't take me literally on that, it's a figure of speech)

(i'll take you literally on what you said - just to let you see how this disrupts the point for point debate -just for the record, I know you're being sarcastic) Why do you agree to ignore the bad stuff? i thought your whole cause was to stop bad stuff like MJ cheating on his wife and setting a bad example for "the children" and now you want to ignore the bad stuff? but focus on mjs wife cheating?!?!?! omg you are such a hater! (see pointless it's a childish poke at you as you have done to me - but pointless nonetheless)

quote 4: This post is PRO- michael jordan not CONS-michael jordan... I thought you would've gotten that clear after the guys who have posted on this were posting his stats and saying how he has stayed fit at 40... you were even trying to start one with username:unstopable provoking him into an mj arguement. you were the antagonist, trying to find someone who would debate your points... in fact it was you who started this whole bs about mj and started "chaos" as you would call it, on this post... then you turn around and say that I have been the one who does not want peace (lol another literal stab) but want anarchy and chaos ?!?!?! (rhetorical question)... what's the matter? (another rhetorical question) you like to play the innocent victim... anyway, sorry got carried away(figure of speech), yes this thread is about michael jordan, but when you bring in lines like "what about the children?!?!" !!!!! well that brings in a general big problem scenario with an example that is small in comparison...

Quote 5: *sigh* ok mr legal man from now on I will call you "person who does not like MJ very much" or would that be illegal as well? or do you deem me calling you "mr legal" an illegal act as well? if so, then I will call you "person who likes to be legal" I'm sure a lot of ppl have called you worse names than I have, are they in jail now? (sorry childish stab, and don't answer that, it's rhetorical)

Ok, i am not saying ignore problems, because chaos rules... that is an deliberate exageration of a point made to state that there are other people who are commiting adultery... Yes adultery is a problem, but so is speeding... yes I care that people speed on the roads, but that doesn't mean that I will be out on the road holding up signs for ppl to slow down... there is no way that I have or ever will condone chaos (lol) or anarchy for that matter...

quote 6: argh this is getting long, but anyway, yes MJ plays ball and he is the king and god of basketball, that is why he is great, he plays basketball, he didn't get those trophies for not cheating on his wife, and this may seem odd to you, but I don't give a damn what AI does, he plays ball he's good, that's great... I don't look at him like he's a lesser person... Players also smoke weed and this has been reported in public, and no, this does not make me dislike them... they play good ball and that's all, they're not my neighbours, they're not my friends... and I maintain that your noble cause is transparent... because of all the inconsistencies that I have been trying to point out. oh and did you know that misquoting a person or putting words in someone's mouth is also illegal, you will hear from my aussie lawyers who will send you a summons and I will win of course... because you have misquoted me and put words in my mouth... no I don't dislike it when ppl don't ignore problems... just for the record (but then you already know that don't you? - don't answer that it's rhetorical)

quote 7: yeah I read it all... I read the posts... I don't understand why you were being such a - well whatever - and trying to ram in your anti-jordan sentiments in an obvious pro-jordan post. Yes you're allowed to state your opinion but, you should expect a backlash, and people are allowed to tell you to shut up, and I'm sure they were talking about other ppl when they were asking for posts.

quote 8: Another literal stab... If you couldn't tell, I meant MAJOR changes!!!! geeze! are so thick to think that? I didn't mean a small change like something so small as farting or scratcing your head I meant MAJOR like world peace and/or a better life...

You mention illegal so much! what is wrong with you man? yes I called you a name get over it! oh you can't can you? People are allowed to post opinions... like your fellow "disliker" thebob says, it doesn't matter how long it's been, it still doesn't make it right... in my opinion, your post was not right whether they posted yesterday, today, the other year! it's still not right dead or alive, your post was not right (in my opinion) I wasn't slandering you, you hippie, I was writing a rebuttle to your post, while calling you a name which I didn't think would be much, oh but you love to exagerate... so you've exagerated this instance of name calling into a full on legal issue... it seems your debating skills revolve around exageration... like MJs adultery - which you've exagerated tenfold (talk about the children again-lol). I did not mean to slander you, I have nothing against you man, I am debating your point. and any name calling would have beenmade in jest and not made seriously...

quote 9: ok... this quote, I don't know what to say, you're an invalid... it took you a while to think of that? All expectations from a ball player should be that he should play good ball, and he does... that's it... well as I always say - in my opinion anyway.

quote 10: uhk... almost over... I'm not trying to prove anything... I was responding to an exagerated post... your post... as you have decided to exagerate the name calling... in which case I choose to again apologise for your taking my name calling as serious slander and defamation... please do not sue me... I am already broke and suring the net on a P166 mmx

quote 11: what in the hell is that? peace was said as a figure of speech... and people are allowed to revive dead threads... my statements ARE NOT illegal! your exageration made them illegal... I was not insulting you, or your fellow "disliker" I was responding to your opinions... and if you were insulted by what I said, then, I'll choose to see it as you being cut up inside, because the truth hurts... and that's what's insulted you man, not me...

perhaps I should act mature and OPEN my mind?!?!?! - HAHAHAHAHAHA

AFTER all your childish little "I know you are I said you are but what am I" attempts at debating, and all that jazz about hypocrisy, and putting words in my mouth... and having this closed tunnel vision, "what's wrong is wrong" approach to mjs debaucle, you wrap your rebuttle up with a grow up and open your mind statement?!?!? (rhetorical question)

well... I'm not saying anything!!! well, ok, maybe I will... you have no idea what you are talking about and it is YOU who came into this with a purpose to insult. I don't see why I should act mature and open my mind when it already is... My mind is opened to all things, and my maturity level varies depending on who I am interacting with, in this case I had to stoop below average to respond to your invalid posts...

be more consistent in your points...

CHAOSSSSS RULLLEEEES!!!!!! - just for you man...
peace - that's a signature... meaning my post is done... it's like a sincerely yours in a letter or a greatfully yours, or thankfully yours and maybe even a regards, at the bottom of a letter, you do not respond to this...

by **TheBob** on Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:14 am

First off, I'm not a disliker of MJ I just simply don't condone his actions off the court. Secondly, me and ¤ aren't some sort of team out to spread hate when it comes to Jordan. Furthermore, you talk about the clarity of arguments yet you address ¤ for most of the post (I believe...you werent all that clear) yet you quote me and use it against ¤.

by **Ricks** on Thu Dec 26, 2002 11:51 am

TheBob wrote:First off, I'm not a disliker of MJ I just simply don't condone his actions off the court. Secondly, me and ¤ aren't some sort of team out to spread hate when it comes to Jordan. Furthermore, you talk about the clarity of arguments yet you address ¤ for most of the post (I believe...you werent all that clear) yet you quote me and use it against ¤.

awww geeze! O! K! you are a "non-condoner of mjs actions off the court..." from now on, that is what I will refer to you as... does it matter? you "dislike" you "don't condone" you "advise against" you "seriously discourage from it"... "I did not have sexual relations with this woman"... well, you get the gist of it...

and ok, fair enough you are not a team, you are individuals with the same view points sure... I can live with that...

furthermore... "I talk about clarity of arguements"? yes... and yes I do address what's his username because he has chosen to address mine in his and this is what I was replying to just like I am to address you thebob for addressing my points (I believe that my post was clear and that you chose to read it wrong - like whats his username - taking things literally and answering rhetorical questions - which is fine... get on the invalid boat)

I am allowed to quote you and use it against anyone... especially when your arguement about my arguement contradicts his arguement it also helps that you are both "non-condoner of MJ's actions off the court"

peace

by **Wall St. Peon** on Thu Dec 26, 2002 12:20 pm

Ricks, my god...

From what I read of that post, that was the worst piece of rhetoric I've ever seen in my life. Your critical reading and interpretation of what people are saying is totally off, and you completely misunderstand that point of discussion boards - for discussion!

As it is, if you look at the very first post, it says this is "The Official Michael Jordan Thread;" it never said if it was for pro-Jordan, or 'haters' - just the official thread.

That being said, I didn't read much past the first half of your horribly written, horribly thought out, and incendiary post directed at ¤ and the fact that he can form logical coherent thoughts...now, enough 'legal' bashing of the post (not the person).

Before you decide how to flame me (and poor flaming that will be), realize this: I am posting simply I disagree with your uneducated and inaccurate statements. I'm not trying to start a flame war, nor do I actually care all that much about this. I will not be getting angry, as that would be silly over such a thing as a post on a message board - so don't clutter up the discussion (emphasis on this word) with attempts to anger me.

And on to the meat and potatoes of this discussion.

Michael Jordan is a proven womanizer. There are at least three (I believe three, perhaps only two) women that Jordan has acknowledged having affairs with, and Juanita Jordan's main cause for divorce was the fact that he had had these affairs. Throw in the fact that Jordan is in Washington and his wife and children are generally in their Chicago home, there are many chances for Jordan to cheat on his wife. All he has to do is walk up to any woman, and she'll probably sleep with him. He's MICHAEL JORDAN....

...and because he's MICHAEL JORDAN, many people are dismissing this. Jordan called his wife a PR move for crying out loud, I mean, can you feel the love? A PR move...

Now, as for ignoring this: why should we ignore this? It's bad enough that people are idolizing Jordan for his basketball skills (which are there, I'm not denying that) and donning the fabled Jumpman logo, but really, how is this a man to idolize (I'll get to my point shortly)? People slam Iverson for being a 'gangster' because children look up to him, he's a role model, but really, what has he done beside try to release a rap album (that was tamer than any other album on the market, save Will Smith) and break into a house he paid for? Granted, he has a clothing line, and I'm not sure who produces are where those clothes are produced, but Reebok has never been under human rights eyes like Nike has...

...So because of his thug image Iverson is ridiculed as a poor role model, yet Michael Jordan, womanizer, gambler, human rights violator is a great role model for a little kid? Personally, I think the story of someone how chose a basketball of a bag of cocaine is a much better story than of someone who came out of the middle class...if anyone has the morals in this situation, it's Iverson.

Now, my example was rather hurried and somewhat obtuse, but hopefully you see the hypocrisy present in the NBA and in society in general. You've made this obvious by your statements to ignore this and that because it's Michael Jordan.

MJ plays ball, yes...however, he is not the King and God of basketball - I believe that's a certain Naismith's position that he wouldn't care to give up. Jordan is maybe the Prince of the 90's, your terms...

In saying that you don't give a damn about what so and so does off the court, you're not exactly helping anything. The NBA gives a damn what Rasheed Wallace and Damon Stoudamire and Ruben Patterson and...you get the idea....do. Why? Because they are employees of a corporation, a business, and what's illegal out in the real world is illegal in their business because their business is subject to the same laws (theoretically, they are) as you and I (assuming you're an American), therefore, what these players do off the courth should have some sort of an effect on the way you view them. Do you view the guy at the local market the same once you heard he was arrested for beating his wife? I highly doubt it - why should it be any different for an athlete?

Bah, I'm bored. I might continue later, but probably not since I rarely point on these nearly defunct boards as it is....

"PEACE HOMIE"

Sheesh...

by **Wall St. Peon** on Thu Dec 26, 2002 12:31 pm

Apologies for the double post, but Ricks, really, clarity? Where has your clarity been? I would swear you're trying to make your posts as vague as possible...

Of course you are allowed to quote people, but you do it out of context in a non-rhetorical fashion, well, it doesn't really help your cause, whatever the hell THAT is...

"When your argument about my argument contradicts his argument?"

I'm sorry, where's the clarity on that one? It makes absolutely NO sense. His argument contradicts your argument, which is why it's an argument in the first place, and your argument, in turn, contradicts the other argument, which also makes sense because you are at the center of two differing points of view. However, if you meant to say that TheBob and ¤'s arguments contradict each other, well, why is that a strange thing? They aren't the same person, and they aren't in league with each other - they have SIMILAR views, which is why your...uneducated...point of view is the center of both of their arguments.

*sigh* I used the word 'argument' too much...should have found a synonym, it's getting repetitive...

by **:digerati:** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:39 am

Ricks wrote:ok, I'm not going to requote quotes that have been quoted anymore as that makes things hard to follow. I choose to answer them in points...

I quote things to assist in understanding. You know exactly what I'm replying to. No setup is needed. And with the short attention spans on here reduces text amounts. It also assists in not losing train of thought.

Ricks wrote:And why did you have to get childish and start taking me literally?

Get childish? Taking you literally isn't childish. How am I supposed to know if you're kidding or not? I can't hear any voice inflections or tones so I have to take you seriously unless you denote otherwise.

Ricks wrote:it's point for point man, not cheap shot for cheap shot.

I'm not cheap shotting you. You're the one that came in insulting me for no apparent reason.

Ricks wrote:when I refer to you as hater, I refer to you as someone who does not like MJ, so don't go sue-ing me by misconstruing my terms...

But, that's slander and thus illegal and grounds for a lawsuit.

Ricks wrote:it's used colloquialy...

pfft

Ricks wrote:so hold ur aussie lawyers off...

Where did the Aussie lawyers come from?

Ricks wrote:and when I say peace... it's a signature... I didn't mean peace as in peace, peace it's more like peace it's the end of my post peace...

What is that supposed to mean? Peace - the state of physical or mental tranquillity. Hardly anything you did was that.

Ricks wrote:well just for you for this post I'll end it with "chaos and mayhem" - since ur into cheap shots

I'm cheap shotting you again? I forget...who's the person who revived an old thread just to slander someone? Oh wait, that was you...

Ricks wrote:quote 1: The question that I asked about your "seriousness" was rhetorical. you didn't need to answer it... I'm sure you've heard the rhetorical "are you serious?" question before but chose to take my words literally... what were you thinking? (no don't answer that)

I already explained this: "I can't hear any voice inflections or tones so I have to take you seriously unless you denote otherwise."

Ricks wrote:quote 2: "Nobody cares?"(don't answer that) of course everyone cares... but you asked a question like "what about the children?" and pointed out that michael jordan's womanizing as if it was a major contributor of childhood corruption, well, I say look at the other forms of corruption that kids are shown - and yes it would seem like no one cares because we are letting them do it - I mean rapping about drive bys is more of a corrupting influence than womanizing, why do we single mj out? (you might attack my point literally again, so I'll be more specific) why do YOU single MJ out?(don't answer that it's rhetorical)

Because this is a Michael Jordan thread. MJ's bad actions would be a major contributor. You know why? People say Michael Jordan is the most recognizible man in the world. He's doing bad things such as womanizing, gambling and assualting teammates. And those things are being ignored, made excuses for or being praised. Rap is bad too, but this thread isn't about rap is it?

Ricks wrote:quote 3: Banal - said with a hispanic accent as buh nuhl... meaning holy... yet again you chose to take me literally...

How the hell am I supposed to know that?

Ricks wrote:MJ's "crimes" as you would call it, is a small insignificant spec compared to the other stuff going on in the world... why don't you go try and stop a war or something.

Because wars are caused by the ignorance of societal problems and greed. Duh.

Ricks wrote:what I meant was - The world turns and ppl cheat on their wives... get over it... I've known ppl who cheat on their wives good doctors who have saved lives cheat on their wives... does that mean they are not to be marvelled for what they do just because they cheated on their wives?

And I didn't say Jordan couldn't be marvelled for his limited basketball accomplishments. I said Jordan shouldn't be marvelled for his wrong-doings and law-breaking, which people are dismissing because they are fans. And again, you're directing it at just the adultery like that's all. But it's not so stop focusing on one thing.

Ricks wrote:Quote 4: This post is PRO- michael jordan not CONS-michael jordan...

Your post clearly is, but other posts aren't. This thread is NEITHER, it was a thread about Michael Jordan. I talked about Michael Jordan and now I'm being slandered for it.

Ricks wrote:I thought you would've gotten that clear after the guys who have posted on this were posting his stats and saying how he has stayed fit at 40...

Just because some people were posting their "PRO" stuff doesn't mean someone else can't post supposed "CONS"

Ricks wrote:you were even trying to start one with username:unstopable provoking him into an mj arguement. you were the antagonist, trying to find someone who would debate your points... in fact it was you who started this whole bs about mj and started "chaos" as you would call it, on this post...

I started talking about Michael Jordan, unstoppable kept agreeing with me. Other people started slandering and being ignorant by supporting wrong-doing. I started no bullshit about Michael Jordan, I've simply been stating facts here, Jordan committed adultery, Jordan gambled, Jordan assualted teammates, Jordan had Orlando Woolridge killed (ok, so this one isn't a proven fact), etc.

Ricks wrote:then you turn around and say that I have been the one who does not want peace (lol another literal stab) but want anarchy and chaos ?!?!?! (rhetorical question)...

You are the one that revived a dead thread just to slander me after all.

Ricks wrote:you like to play the innocent victim...

Innocent victim? In this case I am, I'm the one that was being slandered simple. I am guilty for posting my opinion and for posting facts about Jordan and other's wrong-doings.

Ricks wrote:yes this thread is about michael jordan, but when you bring in lines like "what about the children?!?!" !!!!! well that brings in a general big problem scenario with an example that is small in comparison...

Hardly. Michael Jordan has been claimed to be the most popular man in the world. If he's comitting wrong-doing and people are supporting it it is not a small example, it is a big problem.

Ricks wrote:Quote 5: *sigh* ok mr legal man from now on I will call you "person who does not like MJ very much"

Which would continue to be slander.

Ricks wrote:I'm sure a lot of ppl have called you worse names than I have, are they in jail now?

Why would they be in jail? Also, don't ask questions if you don't want answers because that's why they exist.

Ricks wrote:Ok, i am not saying ignore problems, because chaos rules... that is an deliberate exageration of a point made to state that there are other people who are commiting adultery... Yes adultery is a problem, but so is speeding... yes I care that people speed on the roads, but that doesn't mean that I will be out on the road holding up signs for ppl to slow down... there is no way that I have or ever will condone chaos (lol) or anarchy for that matter...

Unless Michael Jordan is involved. Unless you want to revive dead threads to slander someone. Unless...

Ricks wrote:quote 6: argh this is getting long, but anyway, yes MJ plays ball and he is the king and god of basketball

No, he isn't.

Ricks wrote:he didn't get those trophies for not cheating on his wife

He got them for other reasons that you will clearly deny so I'll drop it.

Ricks wrote:and this may seem odd to you, but I don't give a damn what AI does, he plays ball he's good, that's great... I don't look at him like he's a lesser person... Players also smoke weed and this has been reported in public, and no, this does not make me dislike them... they play good ball and that's all, they're not my neighbours, they're not my friends...

Which is why you're implying that you're ignorant. They are your neighbours. They are indirectly causing problems for you.

Ricks wrote:and I maintain that your noble cause is transparent... because of all the inconsistencies that I have been trying to point out.

Well, you are trying. Even if you don't succeed.

Ricks wrote:oh and did you know that misquoting a person or putting words in someone's mouth is also illegal

I didn't do that. I said the things you said were implying things. And I never misquoted you, since I copied and pasted EXACTLY what you had said.

Ricks wrote:you will hear from my aussie lawyers

Why do you have Aussie lawyers?

Ricks wrote:who will send you a summons and I will win of course... because you have misquoted me and put words in my mouth...

I have not. I never misquoted you and I didn't put words in your mouth. I simply stated what you words were implying.

Ricks wrote:no I don't dislike it when ppl don't ignore problems...

Yet, you said things that completely disagree with that statement.

Ricks wrote:and trying to ram in your anti-jordan sentiments

Anti-Jordan? or equal criticism regardless of stature?

Ricks wrote:in an obvious pro-jordan post

Wrong.

Ricks wrote:Yes you're allowed to state your opinion but, you should expect a backlash, and people are allowed to tell you to shut up

They can tell me that. But they have to follow the rules.

Ricks wrote:and I'm sure they were talking about other ppl when they were asking for posts.

They were asking for posts? No, they were telling me I couldn't post my opinion because they disagree. After telling me to talk about Jordan and then telling me not to and then telling to talk about him. Or did you miss that?

Ricks wrote:quote 8: Another literal stab... If you couldn't tell, I meant MAJOR changes!!!! geeze! are so thick to think that? I didn't mean a small change like something so small as farting or scratcing your head I meant MAJOR like world peace and/or a better life...

You didn't say major changes so how was I supposed to know. And I for one thing believe Jordan not doing any wrong-doing would be a major change because it would obviously make a better life because people would look up to him, with him being a good person instead.

Ricks wrote:You mention illegal so much! what is wrong with you man?

Yes, what is wrong with me, I don't care for law-breaking.

Ricks wrote:yes I called you a name get over it! oh you can't can you?

I did, but I need to remind people of rules because the powers that be on here don't enforce them very well.

Ricks wrote:People are allowed to post opinions...

Ahhhh, but there are limits and rules that don't allow you free reign of the spectrum of opinions.

Ricks wrote:like your fellow "disliker" thebob says, it doesn't matter how long it's been, it still doesn't make it right... in my opinion, your post was not right whether they posted yesterday, today, the other year! it's still not right dead or alive, your post was not right

So. Defending law-breaking is right, and equal critism of people is wrong. I understand.

Ricks wrote:I wasn't slandering you

Except for when you were. Like when you called me a "hater" or said I hate Michael Jordan.

Ricks wrote:you hippie

So, now you're discriminating against a group of people by using their common designation as an insult? Why are you doing that?

Ricks wrote:I was writing a rebuttle to your post, while calling you a name which I didn't think would be much, oh but you love to exagerate...

Because exagerration is the only way that people pay attention to anything anymore.

Ricks wrote:so you've exagerated this instance of name calling into a full on legal issue...

No, I didn't. Name calling is illegal if it's slanderous. Which calling me a "hater" is because of the damage such has caused to my reputation so I could possibly seek financial reparations.

Ricks wrote:it seems your debating skills revolve around exageration...

Like I said, nobody cares until you show them what could happen.

Ricks wrote:like MJs adultery - which you've exagerated tenfold (talk about the children again-lol).

WRONG! Not just the adultery but all the wrong-doing he has done over the years that has been ignored or praised.

Ricks wrote:I did not mean to slander you, I have nothing against you man, I am debating your point. and any name calling would have beenmade in jest and not made seriously...

Doesn't matter, you should know the rules and laws and should take everything into consideration before making a statement.

Ricks wrote:quote 9: ok... this quote, I don't know what to say, you're an invalid...

You talk about forgiving for insults. And then make another slanderous comment. What-ever.

Ricks wrote:it took you a while to think of that?

No? Everything I post is off-the-cuff as I do it?

Ricks wrote:All expectations from a ball player should be that he should play good ball, and he does... that's it...

But, when they aren't just a basketball player but a celebritiy that is in the public spotlight the expectations change because of the influence he has over others.

Ricks wrote:quote 10: uhk... almost over... I'm not trying to prove anything... I was responding to an exagerated post... your post... as you have decided to exagerate the name calling... in which case I choose to again apologise for your taking my name calling as serious slander and defamation... please do not sue me... I am already broke and suring the net on a P166 mmx

All irrelevant. Your financial situation would have no bearing on rewarding of losses, just to let you know. I have not exaggerated anything, but do accept your apology even though I'm assured it will not last long.

Ricks wrote:quote 11: what in the hell is that? peace was said as a figure of speech...

Again, how am I supposed to know?

Ricks wrote:and people are allowed to revive dead threads...

It's not good etiquette.

Ricks wrote:my statements ARE NOT illegal! your exageration made them illegal...

Wrong again. Slander and libel are illegal.

Ricks wrote:I was not insulting you, or your fellow "disliker" I was responding to your opinions..

And in turn slandering me by calling me a "hater"

Ricks wrote:and if you were insulted by what I said, then, I'll choose to see it as you being cut up inside, because the truth hurts... and that's what's insulted you man, not me...

No, I'm pretty sure you're the one that did the slandering.

Ricks wrote:perhaps I should act mature and OPEN my mind?!?!?! - HAHAHAHAHAHA

Perhaps you should.

Ricks wrote:AFTER all your childish little "I know you are I said you are but what am I" attempts at debating

When was this? and what was this?

Ricks wrote:and all that jazz about hypocrisy

You mean, facts?

Ricks wrote:and putting words in my mouth...

You mean, implying things from things you said?

Ricks wrote: and having this closed tunnel vision, "what's wrong is wrong" approach to mjs debaucle

But...what's wrong is wrong.

Ricks wrote:you wrap your rebuttle up with a grow up and open your mind statement?!?!?

Because you were insulting me and not being open-minded to the fact that Michael Jordan is a bad person.

Ricks wrote:you have no idea what you are talking about and it is YOU who came into this with a purpose to insult.

I have no idea what I'm talking about, yet I'm not the one praising a wrong-doer, I'm not the one looking at the facts and I'm not the one reviving dead threads with the only purpose to be to slander people.

Ricks wrote:I don't see why I should act mature and open my mind when it already is...

Yet you continue to think Jordan is a good person.

Ricks wrote:My mind is opened to all things, and my maturity level varies depending on who I am interacting with, in this case I had to stoop below average to respond to your invalid posts...

Again, with the slander after your apology! So, not only do you slander people, you also break promises to not do it! Then you call people immature when they are attacked and slandered for wanting to discuss serious issues other than "mj iz da bezt eva he skore 2 pints yo!!!!" and when they point out that people are being discriminatory, hypocritical and ignorant in this situation by supporting Jordan's wrong-doing while disapproving of others and refuse to be discussing anything without slander and then attacking the person when they reply with what's perceived to be now acceptable behavior for partcipating in the behavior that the others have done.

Ricks wrote:be more consistent in your points...

But I have been every single time?

Ricks wrote:especially when your arguement about my arguement contradicts his arguement it also helps that you are both "non-condoner of MJ's actions off the court"

A statement such as that implies that you condone Michael Jordan's wrong-doing. That's not putting words in your mouth, that's pointing out what you imply with your statements.

by **Wall St. Peon** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:54 am

Orlando Woolridge...hehe :lol:

by **Rens** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 5:42 am

Now those were a lot of quotes hehe

by **Nick** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:44 am

And the new winner of longest post goes to... ¤!

by **Stevan** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:55 pm

nah it only took him 6 minutes...

by **BIG GREEN** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:29 pm

michael jordan is the best player in nba history :!:

8)

by **Bill Russell** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:52 pm

Nah, it took him 3 minutes, and he was talking to Steve-o on MSN, updating his site and eating pasta too...

by **MC Hao** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:55 pm

Michael Jordan - 4 TO's in the 4th quarter, he lost the game for the Wizards tonight.

by **air gordon** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 5:40 pm

orlando woolridge dead?
yeh i saw the 'highlights' of MJ turning over the ball. too bad for the wiz.

out of curiousity (sp?) i ask these few questions:

about jordan assaulting teammates... is it really assault (as in crime) if the person that was assaulted didn't file charges?

is it adultery if all the women jordan had affairs with kept quiet about it?

peace out, home chicken

by **Chris Ma** on Fri Dec 27, 2002 7:00 pm

what do u expect from a 40-year-old michael jordan???

averaging 28 points, 5 rebs and 4 assts per game??

it's not possible........MJ's is not there to score many pts now, but instead, he does other things like reb, asst, and most importantly, lead the team.

he may have a few errors in this season, but he's still a very useful player......and he helps the young wizards to grow.....kwame brown, brendan haywood and rip (though he left)

by **:digerati:** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:56 am

He still lost the game for the Wizards.

Stevan wrote:nah it only took him 6 minutes...

Tales wrote:Nah, it took him 3 minutes,

No, it didn't.

Tales wrote:he was talking to Steve-o on MSN

I do not have MSN, nor do I know a Steve-o.

Yohance Bailey wrote:michael jordan is the best player in nba history

If you ignore everything before 1990 and everything after 1993.

Tales wrote:updating his site

I do not have a site.

Tales wrote:and eating pasta too...

Nor, was I eating any pasta.

limpdilznik wrote:about jordan assaulting teammates... is it really assault (as in crime) if the person that was assaulted didn't file charges?

Yes.

limpdilznik wrote:is it adultery if all the women jordan had affairs with kept quiet about it?

Yes.

If you kill someone, if you steal something, etc. It is a crime. If you are caught or not.[/quote]

by **Bill Russell** on Sat Dec 28, 2002 8:02 am

Oh well... win some, lose some... :twisted:

by **air gordon** on Sun Dec 29, 2002 1:14 pm

k thanks for clarifying that crime & assault thing for me , mr mysterio hehe

but orlando woolridge dead?

Michael Jordan

...

Who is online