Jump to content

Yourface

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    329

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Yourface

  2. ZC8

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    Prior to Collaros’ arrival I always thought the biggest thing holding us back from winning a championship was the QB (Mr. Game Manager Nichols’) play. I commented on it many times and was torn to shreds for it, which is funny to look back on now.

    Collaros’ record speaks for itself. What an incredible acquisition that was.

  8. 3 stars plus hh another tigernaught beat down.

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Yourface

    5 minutes ago, Noeller said:

    Rose was fantastic last year. Never missed a beat when he came back. He's clearly hurt this year and hasn't been up to his usual standard. 

    That’s always the go-to excuse for anyone performing below expectations lol.

    Rose was not “fantastic” last year, he was ok at best, and certainly not up to his 2019 standards.

  16. Als v. Argos

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Rod Black said:

    Oh, I thought you mentioned “objectively”. Like in scientific, data. Like the 640 yards passing the RB and BB put up, that kind of “objective”, is meaningless and that kind of offensive performance. 

    Agree to disagree I suppose. I meant “objectively” as in a way that does not involve personal feelings or bias. 

    The Bombers were putrid offensively, and inept defensively in the first half, while the Redblacks kept shooting themselves in the foot. Just an awful game until the fourth quarter. 

    It’s not like the Als-Argos game was a masterpiece either, however based on each team’s performance so far, I’m not sure how anyone could say that the Bombers will “slaughter” either of those teams, which was my original point.

     

  17. Als v. Argos

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Rod Black said:

    What objective results are you using?  Penalties called and yards? Last minute field goal attempts? 

    Significantly better offensive performances. No blatant drop like the one we saw with Acklin last week. No botched clock management.

    I was at the Bombers game last week, and for a large portion, it was an absolute snore fest.

    5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

    You should be last person here to lecture anyone else on looking at something objectively.

    What makes you say that?

  19. Als v. Argos

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Mr. Perfect said:

    Not the best example of CFL football tonight...🤮🤮🤮

    I would argue it’s better than the Bombers game last week, objectively speaking. Offences are looking decent.

    37 minutes ago, BBlink said:

    MBT's strategy seems to be to stand in the pocket until someone is wide open. Gets rocked a tonne.

    Drew Willy 2.0

  23. Vaccine Debate

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Yourface

    28 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

    Except nobody said any of that. Read it again.

    Criticism of the government is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, that doesn't mean you can just mislabel public health orders as being "authoritarian, tyrannical, or fascist" or claim that any of those rights and freedoms have been stripped away without proof. Those sort of dangerously false claims by uneducated, misinformed individuals who can't see beyond themselves or their inflated entitlement are what antagonize the situation and make things worse for everyone. And it is wrong, as there is no evidence to substantiate any of it.

    Running to the defense of delusional and sometimes hostile "freedom fighters" who protest in front of hospitals and harass others, berate store employees and other customers, and spread bullshit online, or claiming there are statistics and expert opinions to support viewpoints that have exacerbated this public health crisis is about as bad a look as clinging to that feeble "both sides" argument. "Of course won't all agree" comes across a lame copout and that type of indifference is not helpful. 

    Not only do you ignore the majority of what you quoted, you completely misconstrue what was actually said and then argue it nonsensically. That's not conducive to having an open mind or in the spirit of healthy, rational discussion, despite your claiming that's what you're doing in this thread. 

    You're basically trolling. But based on your activity history of seemingly contrarian fallacy posting, that's unsurprising.

    Imouttahere Skeletor GIF - Imouttahere Skeletor Disappear - Discover & Share GIFs

    I appreciate your opinion. My point is hostility from both sides should be condemned.

    Anyway, I believe I have said everything I wanted to say on this topic. Not interested in exchanging insults. 

  24. Vaccine Debate

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Yourface

    52 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

    Anti-vaxxers are attacking both businesses and government. The public health orders are being labelled as "authoritarian, tyrannical, fascist" by these uneducated, overly entitled narcissists who only care about themselves. 

    The "both sides" argument is such flimsy, ridiculous, and fallacious argument (look up the the paradox of tolerance). There aren't two sides to this pandemic, anyway. There are those who understand science and act on it, and there are those who are simply ignorant and wrong. Full stop.

    People who have done their due diligence and their part for the good of all are tired of those who have exacerbated this crisis with their denial, deflection, and sometimes antisocial behaviour, perpetuating the hardship for everyone. They can't even see past their own noses. So, how do you reason with people like that?

    And attempting to understand a person who chooses not to get vaccinated with the "medical freedom" or "my body, my choice" narratives is a futile endeavour, as there is no rational, objective, or scientific justification for either. They're often the same ones who claim, albeit erroneously, that rights and freedoms are being taken away or trampled on, but there's no evidence for that, either.

    "The sky is green."
    "The Earth is the centre of the solar system."
    "Vaccines cause autism."
    "The pandemic is a hoax."
    "Bill Gates murders children."
    "Justin Trudeau is a communist."
    "5G causes health problems."
    "The Holocaust didn't happen."
    "The moon landings were fake."
    "The Earth is flat."

    Facts do not support any of those arguments. Not one. And those who choose to agree with such nonsensical claims without a shred of real, hard, verifiable evidence cause irreparable harm in doing so, especially when they have influence in society and can easily spread their ignorant messages on the internet and social media to others without accountability.

    The world would be a much better place if people actually chose to be informed and educated, and put in the effort of understanding the world around them. Rather than fall prey to misinformation on Facebook or YouTube.

    There is no respectful dialogue to be had with conspiracy theorists or the willfully misinformed. 

    "It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out." - Carl Sagan

    Well maybe it's just me, but I don't want to live in a world where we are frowned upon for criticizing the government. To label those who do so as "uneducated, overly entitled narcissists who only care about themselves" is wrong. In their minds they are fighting for our freedoms, and therefore are doing the right thing. Insults only serve to antagonize in this context.

    You're right, my statement may have been too general. However in the context of the pandemic, there are plenty of statistics and expert opinions that support various viewpoints. Of course we won't all agree. It is silly to believe that we ever will.

    There is antisocial behaviour on both sides. It is fine to believe what you believe and argue accordingly, but an open mind is healthy, and hostility is not the answer.

  25. Vaccine Debate

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    59 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

    How do you have respectful dialogue when people reject facts in favour of feelings?

    Facts can be found in support of any argument, in my opinion. Those that we gravitate to and choose to disseminate generally validate our own biases and feelings. I’m certainly guilty of that myself, despite my best efforts.

    As long as people believe they are doing the right thing for themselves and the people around them, I think they deserve a respectful dialogue. Anything else will not do any good.

×
×
  • Create New...