So why doesn't that same test apply to you, who has failed to convince a much larger pool of skeptics?

Yeah, that what a_in_the_b said.  Those words better than mine.  Me want talk like that.

Or, to use another format...

My point is merely that I acknowledge when others are correct. If I haven't done so, then you haven't convinced me you're correct.

So do many of us, and if none of us have done so, then you haven't convinced any of us you're correct. 

Perhaps you don't care, but as I've said, the true test of how well you've argued is when you convince your skeptics, not the believers. That's true for ANY argument or debate. It just so happens in this case your chief skeptic is me.

Perhaps you don't care, but as you've said, the true test of how well you've argued is when you convince your skeptics, not yourself.  That's true for ANY argument or debate.  It just so happens in this case your chief skeptic is everybody.

a_in_the_b,

The same test does apply to me. The difference is I'm not attempting ot use group think and attempting to bully you into agreeing with me. You either do or you don't, and if you don't, that's fine. We can agree to disagree as far as I'm concerned.

Contrast that with what some others are doing, which is to launch personal attacks and insist their numbers prove them right (which is a logical fallacy in any debate, not just here).

If you can't convince me with a real argument, then you'll try to bully me because my position is in the miniority here. That might work on other people, but it doesn't work on me, which is why some people are so frustrated with me. If only I'd just agree they're right because they say so and there's more of them than me - except as I said, that doesn't mean anything in any arena of debate.

llama,

The difference is, I don't care if I convince you I'm correct. I am quite content with agreeing to disagree. Whenever you stop trying to argue against me and indicate you're content to agree to disagree, I'll be happy to accept that outcome.

Also, my skeptics aren't everybody. You and those who agree with you are quite far from everybody. This is yet another example of self-important group think, and pointing it out is your attemp to use it to bully me. As I've already said, those things don't work with someone like me who knows better.

Posted by bistiza on 8/27/2012 1:47:00 PM (view original):
My teams are all set to allow more minutes when winning big, so I'm not sure why it didn't do that.

Athletes in real life should NEVER lose their work ethic because they assume it might not lead somewhere, unless we're talking kids under the age of 12 or so.

If I coached a team in real life and found out someone wasn't give it their all when they should just because they didn't think it would go anywhere, I'd probably want to kick him off the team.

If you will mope around and be lazy because you didn't get what you wanted as far as playing time (or anything else for that matter), then you're not the kind of person I want on my team to begin with.

I'd rather have 12 guys who will never give up no matter their role than to have 12 super talented players who will make demands on me and give up on themselves and the team if they don't get those demands met.

see, this is where the whole thread went off track, right on the first page.  started out as a simple, why did my guy complain thread, you were told why, and then YOU took it off on this bizarre tangent we've spent 19 pages thoroughly enjoying. 

1 - athletes never lose work ethic if they don't get what they want??? ask T.O. Randy Moss, Chad Johnson, Santonio Holmes if they give their all on every single play if they ain't getting enough passes thrown their way.  happens all the time.
2 - if you want to kick them off the team, then do so, problem solved.
3 - you can have 12 guys that never give up and never question their role, just take all walkons.  problem solved.   instead you recruit players who think you want them to play and then have the nerve to be ****** that you just recruited them as practice bodies??  how dare they? 

bis, when i first started playing this game, I sucked, BAD.  I took a while off and when I came back, before ever taking a team again, i read through 6 months of forums topics, everything from recruiting to game planning, etc.  I learned 2 big things.  first, the vets here are VERY helpful if you actually wish to learn from them, and second, there is no topic, NONE, on which everyone here agrees.  go back and read every long thread, there is constant disagreement and argument, some of it gets personal.   I mention that because in this thread, EVERYONE but you agrees.   

you keep saying no one has posted anything to convince you they are right.  that assumes that there is ANYTHING someone could say to sway you, which there clearly is not.  you are convinced you are right, and the fact that the whole community disagrees with you, which should make you question your own statements, instead fuels your martyr complex. 

True - your skeptics aren't everybody.  Just everybody you're arguing with, which is everybody left in the thread.  I am not everybody, I just have a position similar to others'.  This isn't groupthink or bullying, and having your comments fisked isn't either of those things.

I'm not even criticizing your position.  I have problems with the way you argue.  It raises my hackles.

you give credit where credit is due and you admit when someone makes a valid point. did you not read an earlier post that proves that not all juniors will react in the same manner? your player lost a much larger percentage of WE than my player. my player never contacted me to tell me he was unhappy. basing this on sheer probability isn't it logical that there are players that will have no WE loss and won't whine like a little *****?

you still haven't responded with the results of the ticket you submitted about this topic, either.

first, the vets here are VERY helpful if you actually wish to learn from them, and second, there is no topic, NONE, on which everyone here agrees.  go back and read every long thread, there is constant disagreement and argument, some of it gets personal.   I mention that because in this thread, EVERYONE but you agrees.

Well said, milkamania.  This is very important to understand.  This board is most certainly not a haven for groupthink.  There are arguments all the time and the "allies" aren't always the same people.

milk,

The discussion was WE in a game and I included some ideas on WE in general. That's not a "bizzare tangent", it's a potentail logical avenue of progression in discussion.

Yes, there are in fact things which can convince me to change my mind on many issues, and I've done so on a few of the minor points right here in this very topic. Simply because no one here has found a way to change my mind on their main arguing point doesn't mean it couldn't (hypothetically) happen.

I understand group think doesn't often exists on these forums. Still, in this particular thread, it has. How do I know this for sure?

Because long ago I said I was willing to agree to disagree. Yet there are still those who persist in trying to prove me wrong with NOTHING more than saying there are more of them than there are of me, which proves nothing at all.

So I've decided to entertain myself by watching them struggle to prove me wrong with a logical fallacy. Whenever they want to quit trying to bully me into agreeing, I'm fine to stop mentioning how ridiculous it is. When they decide to join me in agreeing to disagree, it's likley this thread may come to a close.

llama,

You have problems with the way I argue because I do it incredibly well. The problem is you disagree with my position so vehemently yet can't find a way to argue effectively against it.  

I've seen it time and time again, both in live debates and especially on internet message boards. The easiest solution is to either give up, or if you don't want to do that, simply agree to disagree. Honestly, I'll accept that and move on if that's what you want to do.

You have problems with the way I argue because I do it incredibly well.

Thanks... I needed a good laugh.

You have problems with the way I argue because I do it incredibly well. The problem is you disagree with my position so vehemently yet can't find a way to argue effectively against it.

Yeah, about that.  You misunderstand.  I have problems with the way you argue because you hold others to a much higher evidentiary standard than you hold yourself.  You repeatedly move goalposts.

You also are not reading my posts very well.  I don't disagree with your position vehemently, and I am not arguing against it.



Wait a minute.  I did that all wrong.  I should be arguing your way.



bzis,

You haven't convinced me, therefore you are wrong.  Therefore I am right.  In fact, you never made any arguments that stand up to the faintest scrutiny, or even a fleeting glance.  This happens all the time.  You should just accept it.  I'll be magnanimous, though, and grant you the opportunity to agree to disagree.  But I'm still right and you're still wrong.

Sometimes when you realize the truth, it can be humorous as you reflect upon how you came to that realization.

Sometimes the truth hurts and it's easier to handle that pain if you deflect it with humor.

Either way, I'm glad to see your sense of humor indicates you're apparently handling the truth inherent in my arguments quite well.

Are you on AM talk radio, by any chance?