captain insano
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2006
- Messages
- 9,550
- Reaction score
- 6,511
well i think your opinion blows. and you have no taste what so ever if you like peter king.
SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
well i think your opinion blows. and you have no taste what so ever if you like peter king.
Like I said you have bad taste
like i said you have bad taste.
it cant be done when the subject is based on opinion and personal preference. and if you can then you can prove peter king doesnt suck. if you dont like the ratings function you should talk to ian. stop worrying about your ratings. its pathetic. its a message board.
If you were secure in your opinion would have just listed 3 names and explained your thought process. Hard to take you seriously.
if that's the case you should have no problem proving peter king doesn't suck. cmon play ball. and i told you. peter king is the worst. you are the type of person who thinks if they love apples. that everybody else is wrong for loving oranges.
My challenge was an attempt to get your thought process and understand the reasoning behind your opinion to see if it was something beyond “I’m woke because he said something I didn’t like”.
you were foolishly trying to prove that my opinion was factually wrong and your opinion was factually right. the key word is opinion. lol, I understand my opinion perfectly. the subject of peter king doesn't merit anything more than peter king blows. no further explanation is necessary. and my challenge[sarcastic question] was to accentuate how stupid your question was to name three reporters that are better. especially when your response would be to give me your opinions as to why my opinion was wrong. its an exercise in futility.
no they cant. it's just your opinion that the reasoning is flawed. not fact. you sound ridiculous.
thats because you assume they cant dispute it. a lot of the time somebody has already made the case. and sometimes people just don't feel like it. not everybody is trying so hard to be a message board hero.
That’s clearly not you though. You put more effort in deflecting and prolonged this silly thing beyond what it would have taken to explain your opinion. So that’s not really a card you can play
thats just your opinion. I'm not prolonging anything. just disagreeing with you. and you don't get to decide what card I can or cant play lol. if you were interested in why I don't like peter king than you should have asked. hey why don't you like peter king? you are more interested in foolishly trying to prove my opinion wrong instead of having a conversation about it. that's why you asked me to name three reporters that are better. go try that crap with somebody else. i could tell you why. but whats the point? then you tell im wrong and ill tell you your wrong. then you tell me blah blah blah blah. i cant stand peter king.
No I absolute can claim that. It’s basic psychology. You were asked a question and rather than answer it you spent far more energy in trying to be an unfunny clown and arguing over the semantics of opinions. That shows that you felt you needed a reason to not answer the question. If you are going to claim “I just didn’t feel like it” it’s an argument of laziness. But since we are still engaging you clearly aren’t lazy. So you had another reason you felt it would be beneficial to prolong your avoidance. So either you get off on being a troll or you just don’t feel secure in how you will be judged if you give your actual reasoning. It’s pretty elementary really. And now you are getting defensive.
Also this.
