Sometimes basic things need to be explained.  Here's an example:

Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and your use of it, can make or break your argument. You already have the natural inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile? These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

Source: writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/argument/

The ability to generate and evaluate arguments is vital to making sound decisions and to

understanding the social and physical worlds. Effective arguing draws upon many aspects

of reasoning, including the ability to seek out evidence and to evaluate an arguer’s claims

empirically. Unfortunately, a considerable body of research suggests that we often fail in

this respect.

Source: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1207/s15516709cog2404_2/pdf

This should also serve as an example of providing evidence to support one's claims.

bis, you are the **** dumbest smart kid I know.

I like how you continue to believe that nothing you assert can ever be wrong.  Even though the vast majority of everything you've spent dozens of pages arguing has been borderline idiotic.  And the rest of it was entirely idiotic.

bistiza, you are a first-class point-misser.

I said you require everyone else to be civil, but don't require it of yourself.  You know you've been uncivil at times, as has just about everyone in this thread.  My problem, in this case, isn't with your incivility, it's with your hypocrisy.

As far as point-missing... your points are not difficult to understand.  Your refusal to support them with evidence other than insistence and circular logic is difficult to understand.

I thought you were done with this thread.

Of course not. The slow troll is still on. Trolls must just be sitting around on troll message boards trolling about this epic troll.

Then maybe it's not so difficult.

I'm simply offering my opinion, and I'm basing that opinion on things that are obvious, the same way I would explain how things fall to the earth because of gravity. There's nothing more to it than that, and there will be nothing more coming regarding it. If you accept what I'm saying, fine. If not, fine. I don't care.

You can believe me if you want or not believe me if you want. That doesn't change the truth inherent in what I'm saying any more than you not believing in gravity will suddenly make us all float off into space.

Except I don't believe that. Sometimes I can be wrong about things.

Contradiction?

"I can't support my claims with evidence, but they're inherently true.  Oh by the way, I'm more than willing to admit that I'm wrong!  Also, there's a very good chance the earth is only 10,000 years old."

 - Bistiza

As somebody who grew up an avid Browns and Cavs fan, I have a few humble opinions on these matters. I want to reiterate that these are just my loose opinions relating to a few of these topics. I don't think "The Decision" itself or Lebron's leaving had a direct affect on the reputation of the city, rather it served to reinforce peoples opinions that Cleveland is a crappy broken-down old town (which breaks my heart because I love Cleveland). Also, I think creepy *** Dan Gilbert and his petulant rantings/tweetings about Lebron had much more of a negative impact on the reputation of the organization than the fans....and if you really wanna discuss the economic hardship surrounding that region then Gilbert himself is a great place to start given the subprime and predator mortgages the Quicken Loans dealt in.

As far as Lebron himself goes, he once said in an interview something to the effect that he disliked or didn't have any strong feelings for Cleveland because he felt they looked down on Akron. None the less, he did what he thought was best for him and his, but he was a god there and if he would have just brought one championship home to Cleveland then he would have been a living legend. I use to hope that something untimely would happen to him, but after he won a championship it just turned into perpetual loathing rather than a searing hatred. Cleveland whiffed on Brady Quinn and wasn't cool enough for Lebron, one day we'll find our star that wins in Cleveland, but maybe our prerequisite that cleveland's sport savior actually be from inside the state should be abandoned.
 

I'm still scratching my head why the Cavs organization and it's owner gets a pass on all this. They managed to get LJ in the draft and had him for seven seasons. In that time they failed to take advantage of having an elite player and building a winner around him. I sort of understand from a fan perspective having some sort of resentment on Lebron. But the hatred should be towards that terrible franchise.

The fans almost never hate the franchise.  Just had this discussion RE: opinions during strikes.  The specific stat that I love is that during the 1994 baseball strike - which was induced by the fact that the owners wanted to take back negotiation rights they had previously granted to players, not because the players were trying to expand their own negotiating powers - public opinion was close to 70% in favor of the owners.  We like to think about how much money the players make and ignore how much the owners make.  Occasionally fans will turn on a very bad GM, as an O's fan I can vouch that it's even possible to see public opinion go against an owner (Angelos deserves it), but you'll almost never see an organization in general made out as the bad guy, and players get it far more than owners and GMs.  The players are seen as transient in the modern era of sports, the rest of the organization is what the fans love on a more permanent basis.

What dahsdebater said, verbatim.

Posted by osgonlz on 6/29/2013 1:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm still scratching my head why the Cavs organization and it's owner gets a pass on all this. They managed to get LJ in the draft and had him for seven seasons. In that time they failed to take advantage of having an elite player and building a winner around him. I sort of understand from a fan perspective having some sort of resentment on Lebron. But the hatred should be towards that terrible franchise.

I can understand the point you're trying to get at, but I would have to disagree strongly about them not building a winning organization during that time period. The team was very successful in the playoffs and lead the league in wins one of those years. For the most part, those teams had very good role players and had good depth for an nba franchise.

Posted by nachopuzzle on 6/30/2013 11:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by osgonlz on 6/29/2013 1:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm still scratching my head why the Cavs organization and it's owner gets a pass on all this. They managed to get LJ in the draft and had him for seven seasons. In that time they failed to take advantage of having an elite player and building a winner around him. I sort of understand from a fan perspective having some sort of resentment on Lebron. But the hatred should be towards that terrible franchise.

I can understand the point you're trying to get at, but I would have to disagree strongly about them not building a winning organization during that time period. The team was very successful in the playoffs and lead the league in wins one of those years. For the most part, those teams had very good role players and had good depth for an nba franchise.

C'mon, really?

It's funny that everyone hates the MJ comparisons, but Lebron made everyone on those teams look like legitimate NBA players when they were, in fact, useless. 

Here is the roster of the '06-'07 finals teams that pretty everyone agrees had no business getting to the finals: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2007.html

Seriously, who on that team was a good role player when not playing with Lebron? Maybe Z. Maybe Gooden. Hughes wasn't good before ot after Lebron. Eric Snow about 10 years prior...maybe. That's about it, and Gooden is stretching it.