StockingAnarchyNumber12
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2016
- Messages
- 4,413
- Reaction score
- 6,818
I honestly hold no ill will towards Cincinnati. They didn't do anything wrong.
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.
I honestly hold no ill will towards Cincinnati. They didn't do anything wrong.
He was probably busy doing his job and wasnt paying attention. We don't know all the details so hard to answer.
Try reading the thread. Your "confusion" has been addressed multiple times, including post #1575.
parsing through an entire 80 page thread with plenty of bickering and sidetracks might be a bit of an unreasonable standard. i don't really have time to sit down and read 80 pages
Worth it to read posts from one guy typing in caps saying he might jump off bandwagon and he can't support cheaters!
you got me hooked. going back and reading it all in depth now
Cincinnati is entirely responsible for letting the lie (“spying”) get half way around the world before anybody had any idea of the context behind things. The correct course of action would have been to report it to the NFL and then keep their mouths shut.
But apparently you don't mind wasting other people's time begging answers to questions that already have been addressed. Kind of selfish and rude, don't you think?
We don't know its a lie until news on the tape breaks. However im starting to lean towards there was no spying.
I don’t know that they’ve already been addressed. As I said, I haven’t combed through the thread. Anyone who posts without reading through the entirety of every thread they post in is selfish and rude?
That's what threads are for -- to comb through and become informed.
If they're wasting everyone's time by posting questions that already have been answered multiple times over, absolutely. If you can't be bothered to first read a thread to avoid posting in it redundantly, message board activity probably isn't your thing.
If what I suggested is news to you, you are welcome. Look, it doesn't require being retired or every "waking moment" to scan a thread -- even one like this with 80 pages -- to get informed and avoid clogging it up with redundancies. Like I said, if you're too impatient to read before posting then it's not for you.
Your proposed burden of “scanning” 80 pages before asking a fairly reasonable question is absurd.
No, your proposed notion that it's A-OK to post questions in a thread without deigning to read it first is BEYOND absurd -- a question that in this case was answered more than once in just the preceding few pages. Hopefully you'll use your noggin' next time before barking up the wrong tree.
