Speaking of Embellishing!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    For the record, in the OP, I stated, "My guess".

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i'll clear this all up for everyone involved... give ben bishop a ringy-dingy and ask him yourself. he's THE ONLY ONE that has the answer to this question. everyone else is claiming to know the unknowable. this is not a "hockey conversation", this is an argument for the sake of argument- which is very old and tiresome and all too frequent on these boards. if that doesn't put this to bed then i'll try another tactic... you're all right and i'm wrong. be sure to add this "win" to your tallies.

    [/QUOTE]

    Im adding it to my tally.  tks adk.  

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    the only people that know what exactly happened are ben bishop, his teammates and staff. everyone else is offering opinions. here goes, i'll try to answer your questions..."do i agree that he took embellishment to another level?"- answer- how the heck would i know? next.. "who's arguing for the sake of arguing?" - answer- those who claim to know exactly what happened, when it's impossible to do so. as to the last question... everyone offering a view on this is merely offering an opinion on the event. nothing more, nothing less. i'm OK with not having the answer to a lot of things in this world. for others, like yourself, this is not an option, your opinion will substitute for reality. i prefer the real world thanks.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    oops, thought i clicked on the reply to this post- stevegm. close enough

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:

    the only people that know what exactly happened are ben bishop, his teammates and staff. everyone else is offering opinions. here goes, i'll try to answer your questions..."do i agree that he took embellishment to another level?"- answer- how the heck would i know? next.. "who's arguing for the sake of arguing?" - answer- those who claim to know exactly what happened, when it's impossible to do so. as to the last question... everyone offering a view on this is merely offering an opinion on the event. nothing more, nothing less. i'm OK with not having the answer to a lot of things in this world. for others, like yourself, this is not an option, your opinion will substitute for reality. i prefer the real world thanks.  



    Bravo.  Opinions thats all anyone offers in here.  

    Tko for adk

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    i'm new to this... is this where i say... "game. set. match.", "in your face"or  "me smart, you stupid"? that seems to be the protocol in this place.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i'm new to this... is this where i say... "game. set. match.", "in your face"or  "me smart, you stupid"? that seems to be the protocol in this place.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Well no.  Bc you already gave me the tally earlier.  But for the record you are spot on.  All we can offer is our opinion.  We can argue our stance until we are blue in the face(im guilty of this) but in the end if you believe your opinion its ok not to have to change it.   At the end of the day its an opinion and thats it.  

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i'm new to this... is this where i say... "game. set. match.", "in your face"or  "me smart, you stupid"? that seems to be the protocol in this place.  

    [/QUOTE]

    In your best Richard Sherman impersonation you yell, "I"M THE BEST POSTER IN THE WORLD"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i'm new to this... is this where i say... "game. set. match.", "in your face"or  "me smart, you stupid"? that seems to be the protocol in this place.  

    [/QUOTE]

    In your best Richard Sherman impersonation you yell, "I"M THE BEST POSTER IN THE WORLD"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think we all strive for this each day.  its who we are.  

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i'm new to this... is this where i say... "game. set. match.", "in your face"or  "me smart, you stupid"? that seems to be the protocol in this place.  

    [/QUOTE]

    In your best Richard Sherman impersonation you yell, "I"M THE BEST POSTER IN THE WORLD"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think we all strive for this each day.  its who we are.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Ain't that the truth! Haha, i can only dream........

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    I think we're making progress here on account of adk.  You've got to accept some unknown here from the start, and then develop your own opinion

    My opinion on this was that Bishop didn't appear to be hit that hard, and I thought that he might have chosen to stay down, as opposed to him being too badly injured to get up.  That's it.  Do we know the true answer? No.

    Then we got into side arguments, I was asked why he would do that.  I don't know.  But I said that maybe he was trying to draw a penalty.  Without asking him, we don't know.

    Then I was asked why he would do that when he was clipped by his own player.  Again, I don't know.  But I said maybe he didn't know who clipped him.  Without asking him, we don't know.

    When some posters seemed to be upset by this (why?), I said I'm really not sure and I don't know how we can ultimately resolve something when we can't possibly know the truth.  'It's run its course'.  I think the opinion of Chowdah and stevegm (he's not faking) is just about as valid and likely to be true as my opinion.  Who knows.  I'm not sure.

    That was interpreted as softening my stance and grasping at straws.

    So, it comes down to whether you're willing to accept the basic uncertainty here or not, and allow for different opinions on it.  I am.  It doesn't bother me in the least if you see it a different way. 

    The same people complaining about free speech and conga lines are the ones demanding that everyone see things the same way they do.

    Peave and love, peace and love...no disrespect to anyone involved in this thread.  Cheers all.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Exactly.  I've stated this several times and it has somehow been interpreted as "softening my stance" and "grasping at straws".

    We can't know the truth, and some people here are very offended by different interpretations, so let's put it to bed.  For those keeping score, give yourselves a check mark.  I'm not nearly confident enough in my intrepetation to carry on like this.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is getting hilarious Fletch.  The whole "truth" card has been explained so a child could understand it.  You are the first poster on this thread that appeared "offended by a different interpretation", and you're attempting to steer than undeniable truth to someone elses doorstep.??

    Please !

    And you think I'm being unfair in pointing out you're grasping at straws, and softening your stance?

    Page 1.  quote   "was there a sniper in the upper deck? fifa-ish"    Fletch

    Page 1.  quote    "I'm just about certain he was lightly grazed by his player"    Fletch

    Page 3.  quote     "I still don't think he was injured"        Fletch

    By now we're on page 4, and  rather than respond to concrete points I've suggested to you(quite nicely), you take the route of absolute dismissiveness, and proclaim we should end the thread.  Personally, I was very disappointed in that response as it reeked of other-world arrogance.

    Then in your next post, you leave the ballpark altogether and accuse others of a "victim mentality".  You even attempt to steer the thread to a conversation about "getting along", which really has no bearing on anything.  You continue by throwing all kinds of negative innuendo my way, and argue points nobody's making in attempt to make yourself look smart, then, taking a page out of nas's book, you end your rant stroking a few other posters, hoping they'll side in with you.  You even take a plunge at trying to blame others for ruining the board experience.   Basically, this whole post suggested those who were in disagreement with you as being nothing more than argumentive, petty, rude, and stupid.

    When that didn't get you off the hook, heres what you came back with:

         quote         "I really don't care about this"......."I'm not even that confident that I'm right"       fletch

     

    Basically, as this debate headed into high gear, the only thing you tried to do, was accuse others of the very thing you, yourself were most guilty of.

    kinda ironic.

    If this isn't a detailed enough chronology of "softening your stance"...if you feel this is just another cerebral/analytical lapse I'm suffering through...just let me know.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!


    alright everyone huddle up (except stevegm)... let's give the "w" to stevegm (we can all tell it means A LOT to him), and call it a day. wink wink 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Exactly.  I've stated this several times and it has somehow been interpreted as "softening my stance" and "grasping at straws".

    We can't know the truth, and some people here are very offended by different interpretations, so let's put it to bed.  For those keeping score, give yourselves a check mark.  I'm not nearly confident enough in my intrepetation to carry on like this.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is getting hilarious Fletch.  The whole "truth" card has been explained so a child could understand it.  You are the first poster on this thread that appeared "offended by a different interpretation", and you're attempting to steer than undeniable truth to someone elses doorstep.??

    Please !

    And you think I'm being unfair in pointing out you're grasping at straws, and softening your stance?

    Page 1.  quote   "was there a sniper in the upper deck? fifa-ish"    Fletch

    Page 1.  quote    "I'm just about certain he was lightly grazed by his player"    Fletch

    Page 3.  quote     "I still don't think he was injured"        Fletch

    By now we're on page 4, and  rather than respond to concrete points I've suggested to you(quite nicely), you take the route of absolute dismissiveness, and proclaim we should end the thread.  Personally, I was very disappointed in that response as it reeked of other-world arrogance.

    Then in your next post, you leave the ballpark altogether and accuse others of a "victim mentality".  You even attempt to steer the thread to a conversation about "getting along", which really has no bearing on anything.  You continue by throwing all kinds of negative innuendo my way, and argue points nobody's making in attempt to make yourself look smart, then, taking a page out of nas's book, you end your rant stroking a few other posters, hoping they'll side in with you.  You even take a plunge at trying to blame others for ruining the board experience.   Basically, this whole post suggested those who were in disagreement with you as being nothing more than argumentive, petty, rude, and stupid.

    When that didn't get you off the hook, heres what you came back with:

         quote         "I really don't care about this"......."I'm not even that confident that I'm right"       fletch

     

    Basically, as this debate headed into high gear, the only thing you tried to do, was accuse others of the very thing you, yourself were most guilty of.

    kinda ironic.

    If this isn't a detailed enough chronology of "softening your stance"...if you feel this is just another cerebral/analytical lapse I'm suffering through...just let me know.

    [/QUOTE]

    What are you asking of Fletch?   You want him to roll over and show his belly?   I fight with Fletch everyday.  I hope he never rolls over and shows me his belly.  Why are you taking a "debate" and making it so personal?   By fletch wanting to take a flier doesnt show a sign of weakness.  He was simply done with this tiring thread.   All i got from this is that 2 sides thought he was faking, 2 sides thought he wasnt...adk comes in and knocks all outta the ring.  

    But thats just my opinion.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    alright everyone huddle up (except stevegm)... let's give the "w" to stevegm (we can all tell it means A LOT to him), and call it a day. wink wink 

    [/QUOTE]

    Your reply was better then mine.  You can have your tally back now.  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:[QUOTE]

    More contact than Thornton/Orpik...[/QUOTE]


    Zing!

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    I'm on board for the "W" to stevegm.  God knows he's earned it, although I just don't know why he cares about my opinion so much.

    I offered an opinion, which I still believe, but have also said it could be wrong, since I wasn't there and am not in Bishop's head.  Simple stuff.  Nothing to get so worked up about, and probably a good idea to listen to some of the others, if you won't listen to me.

    Thanks for rounding this to a close adk and others.  I think everyone is tired of this one.  Cheers.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the only people that know what exactly happened are ben bishop, his teammates and staff. everyone else is offering opinions. here goes, i'll try to answer your questions..."do i agree that he took embellishment to another level?"- answer- how the heck would i know? next.. "who's arguing for the sake of arguing?" - answer- those who claim to know exactly what happened, when it's impossible to do so. as to the last question... everyone offering a view on this is merely offering an opinion on the event. nothing more, nothing less. i'm OK with not having the answer to a lot of things in this world. for others, like yourself, this is not an option, your opinion will substitute for reality. i prefer the real world thanks.  

    [/QUOTE]

    gotta disagree with fletch again.  We're making no progress whatsoever here because of you, in fact we're only sufferring along with your learning disability.

    From the top.

    Not one person has ever suggested they knew exactly what happenned to Ben Bishop.  In fact it's been exhaustively explained otherwise.  What exactly can't you comprehend about that?

    Now that you started the volley by throwing all kinds of insults my way,  I'll gladly play along, but I won't be mean spirited in a generic way, i'll be very specific.

    Those things you're accusing me of, speak volumes about your inability to grasp any concept that doesn't come easy to a 9 year old.  You're hardly taking the intellectual high road here.  Rather the path of a misguided child.

    If your answer to the embellishment question is an extroverted, "how the heck do I know"?that means you see little reason to discuss it doesn't it?  In essence, those that disagree see it the same way.  Since we don't know for sure, it seems reasonable to give those involved the benefit of the doubt.

    But in order to have a discussion, that can't yield a black and white answer, you have to deal with "factors' that can logically be stacked up against others. 

    chowdah introduced some powerful logic, that questioned the rationale of the conspiracy theorists, and more importantly, 'ALL" of the posters before him.  He didn't say he was right, but he did say, the reasons they gave, for forming their opinion could easily be countered, and he did that in detail.  

    They didn't like that though, and they did the same thing you just did.  They got ignorant.  They didn't say, yeah, that's an equally great concept, they said uh, uh.  If chowda got his due, this thread would've ended quickly.  Didn't go that way though.   

    Maybe you should leave that "real world" you live in, and go through some of the posts on this thread.  You missed the point on every comment you've made above.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]


    He is absolutely NOT "face down".  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    True, that is absolutely NOT facedown, he is clearly reaching far to his left to attempt to poke check the puck.  If he were 'face down' how could he know where to poke check?  all he would be seeing is ice and not the puck on Zibenajad's stick.

    And just use common sense, think of whenever you dove for anything in any sport - you focus on the object you are diving for.

    This is a simple case.  Goalie dove for a puck and got a minor dent by his own defenseman.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm on board for the "W" to stevegm.  God knows he's earned it, although I just don't know why he cares about my opinion so much.

    I offered an opinion, which I still believe, but have also said it could be wrong, since I wasn't there and am not in Bishop's head.  Simple stuff.  Nothing to get so worked up about, and probably a good idea to listen to some of the others, if you won't listen to me.

    Thanks for rounding this to a close adk and others.  I think everyone is tired of this one.  Cheers.

    [/QUOTE]

    you 3 seem to get great comfort from each others arms.

    this ain't my thread, my debate, or my game to win.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    True, that is absolutely NOT facedown, he is clearly reaching far to his left to attempt to poke check the puck.  If he were 'face down' how could he know where to poke check?  all he would be seeing is ice and not the puck on Zibenajad's stick.

    And just use common sense, think of whenever you dove for anything in any sport - you focus on the object you are diving for.

    This is a simple case.  Goalie dove for a puck and got a minor dent by his own defenseman.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's funny, this was the one thing stevegm and I agreed on.  From page 3...

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    posted at 2/6/2014 9:16 AM EST

    • stevegm
    • Posts: 1831
    • First: 8/17/2012
    • Last: 2/11/2014

    Anyway, regarding the point about his "head barely moving".  At the point of impact, Bishop is sprawled, face down. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    [/QUOTE]

    What are you asking of Fletch?   You want him to roll over and show his belly?   I fight with Fletch everyday.  I hope he never rolls over and shows me his belly.  Why are you taking a "debate" and making it so personal?   By fletch wanting to take a flier doesnt show a sign of weakness.  He was simply done with this tiring thread.   All i got from this is that 2 sides thought he was faking, 2 sides thought he wasnt...adk comes in and knocks all outta the ring.  

    But thats just my opinion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Simply put....I'm not.  He started the horsehit with me, and I'm just tryin to play along.  Nothin personal at all, I'm havin all kinds of chuckles.

    This stuff amazes me.   Where in the world did that all come from.  You think admitting someone may have a point is "rolling over"?  Are you singing the praises of stubbornes?

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the only people that know what exactly happened are ben bishop, his teammates and staff. everyone else is offering opinions. here goes, i'll try to answer your questions..."do i agree that he took embellishment to another level?"- answer- how the heck would i know? next.. "who's arguing for the sake of arguing?" - answer- those who claim to know exactly what happened, when it's impossible to do so. as to the last question... everyone offering a view on this is merely offering an opinion on the event. nothing more, nothing less. i'm OK with not having the answer to a lot of things in this world. for others, like yourself, this is not an option, your opinion will substitute for reality. i prefer the real world thanks.  

    [/QUOTE]

    gotta disagree with fletch again.  We're making no progress whatsoever here because of you, in fact we're only sufferring along with your learning disability.

    From the top.

    Not one person has ever suggested they knew exactly what happenned to Ben Bishop.  In fact it's been exhaustively explained otherwise.  What exactly can't you comprehend about that?

    Now that you started the volley by throwing all kinds of insults my way,  I'll gladly play along, but I won't be mean spirited in a generic way, i'll be very specific.

    Those things you're accusing me of, speak volumes about your inability to grasp any concept that doesn't come easy to a 9 year old.  You're hardly taking the intellectual high road here.  Rather the path of a misguided child.

    If your answer to the embellishment question is an extroverted, "how the heck do I know"?that means you see little reason to discuss it doesn't it?  In essence, those that disagree see it the same way.  Since we don't know for sure, it seems reasonable to give those involved the benefit of the doubt.

    But in order to have a discussion, that can't yield a black and white answer, you have to deal with "factors' that can logically be stacked up against others. 

    chowdah introduced some powerful logic, that questioned the rationale of the conspiracy theorists, and more importantly, 'ALL" of the posters before him.  He didn't say he was right, but he did say, the reasons they gave, for forming their opinion could easily be countered, and he did that in detail.  

    They didn't like that though, and they did the same thing you just did.  They got ignorant.  They didn't say, yeah, that's an equally great concept, they said uh, uh.  If chowda got his due, this thread would've ended quickly.  Didn't go that way though.   

    Maybe you should leave that "real world" you live in, and go through some of the posts on this thread.  You missed the point on every comment you've made above.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Okay, I admit. I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    Yes, nobody knows for sure if Bishop was really hurt, except for Bishop and the team. Some people have opinions on the matter, some one way, some the other. Some took Bishop for his word. But this happens everyday in just about every thread.

    How many threads we have about TT leaving the team. He said why he did it and people offered their opinions. PC drafted Subban, he said why, and people offered their opinions. How is this any different? It what makes this place what it is and why we all come in here. To offer our opinions on everything Bruins and hockey.

    Moving on..............

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]

    What are you asking of Fletch?   You want him to roll over and show his belly?   I fight with Fletch everyday.  I hope he never rolls over and shows me his belly.  Why are you taking a "debate" and making it so personal?   By fletch wanting to take a flier doesnt show a sign of weakness.  He was simply done with this tiring thread.   All i got from this is that 2 sides thought he was faking, 2 sides thought he wasnt...adk comes in and knocks all outta the ring.  

    But thats just my opinion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Simply put....I'm not.  He started the horsehit with me, and I'm just tryin to play along.  Nothin personal at all, I'm havin all kinds of chuckles.

    This stuff amazes me.   Where in the world did that all come from.  You think admitting someone may have a point is "rolling over"?  Are you singing the praises of stubbornes?

    [/QUOTE]

    what better way to express "it's nothing personal at all", than "he started it". priceless

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share