have you not noticed that John makes those kinds of jokes along with us? If he had an issue with it (or if he was stupid enough to let his wife in on the joke...or if she's in on the joke, knowing we're all a bunch of dorks), I could see how what you just said made a lick of sense.
I have probably started 2 threads about him in an attempt to make this forum more enjoyable. He steady calls me out and it gets old. You shouldn't worry so much about what I'm doing anyway, we should be talking about basketball.
I agree. I tried, but this entire thread was hijacked by posters complaining about MIXUM, who actually posted a Blazer article in the OP.
You're trying sooooo hard to draw someone into an argument it's actually funny. BTW you still owe me a drink.
Oh great. MIXUM posted a Blazers article. How wonderful. I do not know if we could ever have access to this article he did not post it. Wonderful. What a service to the community. What a pillar of excellence. What a magnificent, magnificent human being. A credit to his mom and dad. If there was a hall of fame of posters, his name would be there in green and red and gold letters. Next to a picture of a pigeon with an olive branch in it's beak. Autographed by Mahatma Ghandi. And the pope. And Muhamad Ali. He would be on the short list of the Nobel committee for a peace prize. And chemistry too. And quite possibly an Oscar and an Espy. He would be voted rookie of the year by his peers. And MVP and best defensive player. Also in the all-star game his name will be whispered by 72 virgins. Who will release doves, white and gray in his honor. Right after the gun salute. And the country will rejoice. And children will smile. Great. Just great.
Apparently posting links to Blazers related material while adding no other insight or backing up one's claim is the real measuring stick if someone brings value to the forum or not. Probably the dumbest thing I've read on here in some time.
He makes his posts specifically to incite this kind of reaction. The posts are geared solely toward the negative. Anyone who tries to steer it back toward a positive point of view is looked down on as a homer and is implied by MIXUM to be an idiot. His condescending and morose attitude may not be breaking the rules, but it is obviously more than disruptive, and that in itself should be enough for him to reprimanded.
It brings value for ME. I work during the day and don't have time to visit more than one site related to the Blazers to see whether there is a new story. When someone posts a link, I visit it. Further, when a link is posted, there is often insight from others that have read it and agree or disagree with the premise of the column or article. That is a launching pad for the kind of discussion almost all of us here want to engage in. I don't see how that is a dumb thing. Ed O
Who cares what he, or any poster, thinks about your opinion regarding a posted article related to the Blazers?
Three sites for the Elven-kings under the sky, Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. One Site to rule them all, One Site to find them, One Site to bring them all and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. ... or you could use a RSS reader.
Why would I use an RSS reader when I can get the news here? I don't want a reader AND discussion. I want both. Ed O.
I'm sure it's insulting to the poster, and that is taking away from the overall experience of the forum. Just because he's indirectly attacking certain posters, it's somehow within the rules?
