So, it's true you never outright said that one could only support Lee over Zach for racial reasons. But in a conversation of the merits between the two you and holfresh did see fit to suggest that Zach is so superior that race must be a major factor, just not the only factor.
Nope. That's not what I said. I think the lack of merit to your argument is illustrated by the fact you have highlighted holfresh' statements as if that has something to do with me. I'm not sure why you are insisiting on combining our posts except to attribute comments to me that I never made.
Interestingly, you didn't see fit to highlight this sentence that was actually written by me:
"Well, I think that's a little naive. I'm not saying race is the only factor by a long shot, but Lee has been as big a loser as any other player on the Knicks at the professional level."Se here you ask me to man up that I misquoted you. You also haven't quoted me, so I don't know you have my words exactly right, but if you do then they would be an exaggeration of your claim. But I really don't think it's that far off from the spirit of your assertions.
It's quite far off from the spirit of my assertions. In fact, you don't have to look for the "spirit", the "gist", or any other ephemeral ways to interpret what I said. I wrote it very clearly. You're looking for meaning that was never there. I'm not sure why.
And while I haven't quoted your statement to the letter, the big difference is that my recollection is an accurate and fair representation of what you actually wrote, and yours was off-base and inflammatory. So please don't act like this is about being letter-accurate. You know full well it isn't.
Spirit vs direct quotes is something that can be argued for days. I remember we once went back and forth for 4 pages when you took umbrage for me paraphrasing your assertion that I was "making things up and presenting them as fact" as calling me a "liar". Lets not go there again. I have posted the thread in question so everyone can see in it what they like.
In this case, spirit vs. direct quotes can be argued for about 5 minutes. You put words in my mouth that I never said, nor did I imply, then you demanded (And I am paraphrasing here.) that I "man up" lest you have to spend time digging up the thread where I made the statements you had mistakenly (I assume) attributed to me. Now the thread is here and were there and those statements are neither made nor implied by me.
Have I mis-represented the spirit of your mistaken assertion? I don't think so, but please tell me if I have. I'll dig up the thread and be sure to manup to my error, I won't try to pretend I said anything else or write circles around it.
What I am stating you said is accurate and what you stated I said was inaccurate. It's been proven in blue and dark blue above, in your very own post. You should just manup and spare me the trouble of having to dig for it.
oohah
12/26/2007 12:24 AM
Majorleads 