From: davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks)
Subject: Re: Hmmm... (Changing the rules)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 19:14:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: VMARK Software, Inc.

In article <1993Jan27.155414.28601@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>In article <1993Jan27.041212.22021@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>>What now Ed??  Bring out the EdLorian standard responses..
>>1) "Why just yell at me, takes two to tango..."
>>- yes, but it seems like you are always involved..
>but it seems like you are always involved too...

No, before it was you and Gary, and earlier you and John Gloria, and now, you
and I.   One person involved in all three... YOU!!!  And, in so many other
arguments, it seems to be you against many others...

>
>>3) "Oh, who cares what they all think, they must be Celtics fans..."
>>- the classic EdLorian response...
>Nope, this time should be "all Buffalo fans...."

Actually, we have decided it is the "all people against Ed Lor"...  I didn't
realize John Gloria was a Buffalo fan... But then, back then you were 
argueing FOR Buffalo over SF...

>>Anyway, "bogus accusations"???  I have already shown the PROOF of your
>>claims and contradictions, and you STILL try to deny it...  
>Well, what PROOF is it? You have shown that I am applying a head-to-head
>tie-breaker when the records are TIED, and that's changing the rules?
>
>In other words, what you accused me of is:
>
>And that's PROOF that I am wrong? I sure am wrong, because I assumed you 
>have at least a little common sense.

Good to see you finally admit you're wrong.  Your statement was that
"Buffalo is better than S.F.".  Remember our argument awhile back that you
claimed what was said before or after doesn't matter??  You stated that
"Based on records, they aren't.  Based on head to head, they aren't.  Buffalo
is better than S.F.".    Hmmm.  Hey Ed, if they have the same records, then
what does the comment "Based on records, they aren't" mean???   It seems that
you are implying they had different records at this particular time...
>
>>Well, based
>>on what I have seen, the general opinion is
>>1) Ed, you're wrong now shut up...
>I don't see any general opinion on your bogus accusation. I only see you
>wimping out in my rebuttal to your bogus accusation, and also the
>"hmm....." thread after Friday ....

Well, we have the following .. um... "opinions"
<9111@news.duke.edu>
"Ed Lor, 

Shut the fuck up"

and others...  Of course, you also have the feeling shared by myself and 
probably by Gary as well.  Haven't seen too many in support of your 
claims..

And, you probably don't see any opinion on the "bogus" accusation because it
wasn't bogus.   Where have I been "wimping" out??  You asked to prove that
you were making up the rules, and I have shown how you let the rules change
to fit your own particular needs.  You like this idea of "wimping" out, seems
like whenever you start getting scared, you use this as your argument...
>
>And as far as the general opinion on SF and Buffalo, I don't see any
>general opinion on your side either.

And what opinion is that??? That Buffalo was better than SF???  I have seen
plenty of opinions on my side, and I have seen many on the side of SF as well.
What is your point???  What "opinion" are you looking for???

As far as comparisions between the two, opinions vary, but we had more than 
1 person agreeing that we have at least 1 undeniable factor... That Buffalo
beat SF in SF this year.  And, we also have the opinion of Ed Lor that
Buffalo was better than SF.  What more do we need???
-- 
David T. Meeks            || "New shadows tugging at the corner of his eye
VMark Software, Inc.      ||  Jostling for attention as the sunlight flares
uvmark!davem@merk.com     ||  Through a curtains tear, shuffling its beams
davem%uvmark@merk.com     ||  As if in nervous anticipation of another day"