or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by lawyerdad

FTFY. You forgot the worst part.
Sometimes. I had a jar of honey confiscated as a "liquid" flying out of Budapest.
I think the prevalence of idiots and jackasses in the world is one of SF's great unifying themes.
Yep, that happens too.I stopped at three only to point out that Pio's proffered choice was too narrow, not to suggest that adding my third possibility completed the universe.
Doubts about the merger passing regulatory scrutiny, maybe?
Yeah, no question that lots of people on both "sides" (pretending for the sake of the current discussion that these issues easily and usefully break down in a binary way) approach the data in a way that is intellectually dishonest or completely distorted by their social/political/whatever views. And that's on top of the fact there are some tricky inherent issues in terms of cause/effect, categorical definitions, etc.
I was just curious because I didn't hear anything about a flagrant being called prior to the review, either initially or once Adams went down. And I'm not sure I really read the rule to authorize "let's review the common foul we called on Adams to determine whether there was some sort of foul committed by Green".Really just idle curiosity. The kick seemed pretty clearly intentional to me, and I think Green probably deserves a suspension. He's starting to go full...
I'm sorry you feel that, but your feel is wrong, bro.Your response to mine is something of a non-sequitur, and I'm not even clear on what I'm supposedly dismissing. The quote above seems to concern the second of the two choices you posited, not the third one I offered.1. There is data.2. What that data demonstrates and what inferences can be draw from the data can be the subject of reasonable, intellectually honest disagreement.3. People can also cite the data as part...
I wasn't watching that closely, but did the referees call a foul on Green for the nut-kick before reviewing the video? I didn't think so, but I could well have missed it. I'm curious because my (possibly mistaken, of course) understanding is that as a general matter the officials aren't supposed to use replay to go back and find a foul that wasn't called on the floor, as opposed to deciding whether a call that was made on the floor should be a common foul or flagrant...
There's a third (tripartite) possibility you've left out. It's how people purport to "use" it when they point it out. Shall we have another thirty pages of Turk arguing that IQ tests prove whites are more intelligent than blacks regardless of how one understands the concept of "intelligence" because "I" stands for IQ and since IQ results are one of the many things that some people choose to use as indicators of their chosen definition of intelligence if there were any...
New Posts  All Forums: