Dariusz J.
New member
Gents,
Since another thread with my participation and discussion about ballstriking/Hogan has been locked again, I would like to say a few things:
1. I do not know why it is so hard to understand that argumentation is valid when supported by facts;
2. I do not know why some people on this forum wants to make a fool of myself. Take this example:
Fronesis wrote and the thread had been locked before I had a chance to respond.
Where the hell I said that EVERYONE REMAINING SILENT IS ON MY PART ? I said "You might think I am the loudest only because I am surrounded by opponents with NO VALID ARGUMENTS, while those who think similarily prefer to remain silent." What you just did is the cheap vicious trick aimed at making me look like an idiot. I hate such and no odd my reaction would be strong.
Or another case -- when there was no escape from saying I was right that Nicklaus (being asked about Woods) answered with famous "no, no --easily Hogan", instead admitting I was right, another opponent in the discussion changes the track to claim that Nicklaus always is a false flatterer, but he knows what he really thought.
How to discuss in such reality on this forum ?
Next -- I am turning Hogan into religion -- is believing in what people (including greats) eye-witnessed and described in books or fora making a religion (out of facts) ? Find me at least one example when I am making my own stories in order to make Hogan better than he was in reality. I am only using arguments based on facts. Why should I back from the discussion if I read untrue things that contradict what knowledgeable people said about Hogan ?
Lastly, I seem to be one of a very few people who can admit that one was wrong. The vast majority prefers to run away in silence thinking that this kind of childish behaviour will make them the winner in a meritoric discussion. Examples -- in each similar locked threads, incuding the latest one. And as regards insulting -- look closely who starts to insult first in a camouflaged way. I command a simple English and saying what I think. That's all.
This is how everything looks from my perspective. I promised to myself today that I won't ever start any more debates (aha, to be totally frank -- not all of the debates was started by myself ! sometimes I just had to respond to a silly claim about Hogan) about Hogan or ballstriking art unprovoked if only I receive a reasonable answer(s) to the content of this post of myself.
Cheers
P.S. Please delete the thread when it runs its course. I guess it's better to exlain everything here in one thread than to pollute other threads with threadjacks.
Since another thread with my participation and discussion about ballstriking/Hogan has been locked again, I would like to say a few things:
1. I do not know why it is so hard to understand that argumentation is valid when supported by facts;
2. I do not know why some people on this forum wants to make a fool of myself. Take this example:
Fronesis wrote and the thread had been locked before I had a chance to respond.
am posting in this thread for one reason only: to deny this claim. I (and perhaps others) have been avoiding this thread not because I think Dariusz is right, but because the usually very high level of discussion is lost whenever Dariusz makes Hogan into a religion.
Also, claiming that anyone not speaking must agree with you – that is a cheap rhetorical move that is logically untenable. So please Dariusz, while you are insulting the folks who are still here to talk with you, please don't drag in those who aren't here and claim they are on "your" side. If you are going to accuse others of having no arguments (and no IQ) you may want to work on how you formulate yours. What you say above wouldnt get you a C in Logic 101.
Where the hell I said that EVERYONE REMAINING SILENT IS ON MY PART ? I said "You might think I am the loudest only because I am surrounded by opponents with NO VALID ARGUMENTS, while those who think similarily prefer to remain silent." What you just did is the cheap vicious trick aimed at making me look like an idiot. I hate such and no odd my reaction would be strong.
Or another case -- when there was no escape from saying I was right that Nicklaus (being asked about Woods) answered with famous "no, no --easily Hogan", instead admitting I was right, another opponent in the discussion changes the track to claim that Nicklaus always is a false flatterer, but he knows what he really thought.
How to discuss in such reality on this forum ?
Next -- I am turning Hogan into religion -- is believing in what people (including greats) eye-witnessed and described in books or fora making a religion (out of facts) ? Find me at least one example when I am making my own stories in order to make Hogan better than he was in reality. I am only using arguments based on facts. Why should I back from the discussion if I read untrue things that contradict what knowledgeable people said about Hogan ?
Lastly, I seem to be one of a very few people who can admit that one was wrong. The vast majority prefers to run away in silence thinking that this kind of childish behaviour will make them the winner in a meritoric discussion. Examples -- in each similar locked threads, incuding the latest one. And as regards insulting -- look closely who starts to insult first in a camouflaged way. I command a simple English and saying what I think. That's all.
This is how everything looks from my perspective. I promised to myself today that I won't ever start any more debates (aha, to be totally frank -- not all of the debates was started by myself ! sometimes I just had to respond to a silly claim about Hogan) about Hogan or ballstriking art unprovoked if only I receive a reasonable answer(s) to the content of this post of myself.
Cheers
P.S. Please delete the thread when it runs its course. I guess it's better to exlain everything here in one thread than to pollute other threads with threadjacks.