This exchange existed in another forum. since its been hijacked I thought I'd just start a new one and spare the faithful of our mincing of words.
The post:
knicks1248 wrote:Nalod wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Nalod wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Chandler wrote:Nalod wrote:I would nearly expect a process that has already determined 90% what Knicks want to do. Even with whom they signed over the summer. We assume they are negligent. Knicks have a plan. That don't mean it comes to fruition. Lord knows we have seen that. Nearly everyone is tradable, including Frank. Even if he is a low to mid first round pick, his value is better if we pick up his option.
Frank and his Agent might be abstinent about wanting a trade to a team that will has a strong desire/belief in him. For all we know Fiz might not just even like the kid and if so he won't succeed here.
I can very much see a scenario he gets traded. For that matter, DSjr is also up for extension! For that matter, I can see him getting moved as well. If RJ Barrett shows early intensity and a fit at the 2, then someone has to go.
is the plan still defense and passing are a priority? That's what this FO said when they launched. It was on the Knicks Blog from Mills.
Or is it 2 max FA, which they certainly didn't dispute when dealing with KP fallout
Or is it super short term FA so we can do a near complete re-boot (again) this next offseason (and hope that all the short terms don't get selfish)
Or is it simply that they do whatever it takes to keep their jobs for the next season and go from there
To say they have a plan sounds nice, but I remain skeptical
That's all i see
They lower the bar to the floor so they can look functional and patient..6 yrs no playoffs
Rainman: Redundant and reactive.
I respect your honesty as you see it.
troll boy..why didn't you respond directly to chandler
He is asking questions. Not exhibiting ignorance.
why didn't you respond with an intelligent answer to his question instead of exhibiting an ignorant comment.
He asked a question and i gave my opinion and my perspective on one of the question.
You attack another poster just to satisfy your trolling habits like a 16 yr old ..
this is what you do every day
What does it mean to troll on social media?
Trolling is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community. Basically, a social media troll is someone who purposely says something controversial in order to get a rise out of other users.
We already hijacked another forum so this is one just about the subject at hand. This is a love letter to Knicks1248. If your fatigued by my squabble you keep your 3 minutes and click off now.
Dear Knicks1248 (AKA: The Rainman)
This is a forum of highly active knick fans. When a casual fan comes here and reads incomplete lazy fact void responses they might take it as fact. This dilutes the majority of what others do around here. This place thrives with being inclusive of new posters too!.
Thus I am not trolling to get arise of others. They are responses to keep Facts vs. opinion in order. The Board does call out and deal with trolls as a way of keeping the site from melting down. By your definition I would be "starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community". I don't do that. Im not looking for acceptance or others to join me.
Also "purposely says something controversial in order to get a rise out of other users". There are a few that do that, but not me. I generally state something as my opinion and if facts I back it up a high percentage of the time. Fact is I'm once again responding to your post that is inaccurate. By definition you posted I am not "trolling".
What you are alluding to is my apparent constant response to many of your posts. Do I call you names? Just Rainman. Sorry. You even just said in response to a Mills question by chandler: "That's all I see". That's kind of "Rainmanesque" isn't it? I complimented your honesty there. I don't call you a "16 year old" or anything else. I might say your comments are "not accurate, dumb, ignorant, or Lazy", and I say why often with facts to back it up. Not repeating a blog. Those are not articles researched. They are regurgitated facts by others. If there is a fact in them you want to use you should extract it. You can agree with the opinion or not but using it as a resource is not the same to back up your opinion. Basically your defending an opinion with someone else's opinion.
Who made me the boss of this? Nobody. These are rules that 95% of the guys here use 95% of the time. I have no exact stats. I don't correct everyone as its way too obnoxious even for me. Most of it is reasonable. Your just my pet peeve of inaccuracy as you do it often. As I said before its not personal and I do think you mean well. Your a motivated Knick fan who wants to talk about the knicks. But you often don't. Instead you drone about the same thing as if you have first hand knowledge of what's in Mills head as one example. WE all want the same thing basically which is our team to succeed.
Personally I'd ban you not for rudeness but if I may "Trolling the facts" by diluting the effort of others. My guess is the educated around here can let ignorant statements go much better than I. Perhaps I have been here too long and should do the same. But in my opinion new fans coming in will see your incomplete statements mixed with the factual (often known as "Factorals) and think "Wow, this guy really must know something about the knicks front office"!
You don't.
There are plenty of fans that think Dolan and mills are incompetent but don't make shyt up to demonstrate like they are intimate. This is not about your opinion but how it is presented. This is not about Trolling, its about accuracy and respect for those who have taken the time to formulate concepts, ideas and at the very least proper sentence's.
Yours truly,
Nalod Hawthorne Nedyal
9/20/2019 2:18 PM
Unless this kid turns out to be as durable as Eli too. 