BoxRec

Wasn't my intention to make anything personal, just calling it like I see it.

gilgamesh wrote:Wasn't my intention to make anything personal, just calling it like I see it.

... but you didn't "see it", since you didn't even read my entire opinion.

Let's just leave it at that!

Oh come on EO. I've probably got more time for you than most on here but you do absolutely love to take a contrary stance.

Go ahead deny it. I'd be disappointed if you didn't. I'll read it tomorrow G'night folks.

candyslim wrote:Oh come on EO. I've probably got more time for you than most on here but you do absolutely love to take a contrary stance.

Go ahead deny it. I'd be disappointed if you didn't. I'll read it tomorrow G'night folks.

For sure, I think differently to how other people do, but I am usually very consistent.

That’s the reason why I usually demand that people quote my words when I feel they’ve unfairly assumed a stance that I do not hold.

I do this with complete confidence, because no one has ever seen me adopt two polar opposite stances on the same matter. They’re unable to prove what has never happened.

If people bothered to read the first post in this thread, they’ll realise that I haven’t entirely dismissed the possibility that “corruption” exists in the sport of boxing, but for some reason they assume otherwise, probably out of “ignorance”.

Now before anyone gets all emotional and considers issuing me with some sort of temporary or permanent ban, let’s look at the dictionary definition of the word “ignorant”:

• “Lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified”
• “Not having enough knowledge, understanding, or information about something”

Synonyms include: unaware; uninformed

I just don’t believe that anyone should automatically assume my position on this particular matter, whilst boasting that they were intentionally ignoring my comments, which adheres to the very dictionary definition of the word “ignorant”.

Similarly, I don’t believe that anyone should automatically assume that Adalaide Byrd is “corrupt” without possessing any evidence whatsoever to justify such an accusation. I feel that is an equally “uninformed” or “ignorant” position to take (assume whatever word causes the least offence).

I’m not defending the woman, instead I’m simply refraining from automatically assuming the worst possible scenario.

yaaaawn has anyone been arrested yet

He’s right you know, we’re being lazy, let’s find her, put her under citizens arrest, the evidence will be on her iPhone.

gilgamesh wrote:Yeah...I'm not gonna read all that

No shitt lol. I've learned to read just the last sentence, or paragraph because that is all he really needs to say. The rest of his posts he just babbles on with pointless BS.

Badhusker wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:Yeah...I'm not gonna read all that

No shitt lol. I've learned to read just the last sentence, or paragraph because that is all he really needs to say. The rest of his posts he just babbles on with pointless BS.

A paragraph of EO sh!t ? Too much for me. He already said multiple times what he had to say and is repeating himself. Reading a title is more than enough.

Enlightened-One wrote:As What I mean is this; the judges should only score each round independently, without considering the events that occurred beforehand.

Tried it doesn't work.
I've done them trust me on this one.

I was trying to prove a point...

The same people that boast about ignoring my posts, subsequently attack some sort of fabricated/assumed version of my opinion for being "wrong"... are also the same people that lazily accuse individuals of being "corrupt" without possessing any evidence whatsoever.

And in my mind, the sort of people thay are unfairly derogatory are "ignorant", as illustrated above.

Yep ... that be me

I'd rather read a dictionary...not gonna do it.

Sorry folks I didn't intend to set him off again

I'll simplify this for you. Boxing is corrupt always has been. Las Vegas is corupt always has been. Boxing X Las Vegas = Corruption squared.

Ilya Muromets wrote: ↑20 Sep 2018, 14:55 I'll simplify this for you. Boxing is corrupt always has been. Las Vegas is corupt always has been. Boxing X Las Vegas = Corruption squared.

It’s a business. End of the day.. it’s all about the $$

Ilya Muromets wrote: ↑20 Sep 2018, 14:55 I'll simplify this for you. Boxing is corrupt always has been. Las Vegas is corupt always has been. Boxing X Las Vegas = Corruption squared.

With DLH involved, it may be cubed.