Conference back40::soapbox

Ted Williams was right.

daryll

 Who'd he put out of a job when he came back?

    
    
    > What is the "Michael Jordan Phenomenon"?
    
    
      Hero worship taken to the absurd? Obscene?
    
    Take your pick...
    

Anybody catch the Superfans tribute to Michael Jordan on SNL this past
weekend?

  I've always felt Michael Jordan was a great basketball player, certainly one
of the best ever but I don't think he is THE best ever. 

  In fact, while they were both playing I felt that Magic Johnson was a better
all around basketball player than Jordan.

  Michael is a swing guard who scores lots of points and plays great defense. 

  Not only was Magic a point guard who ran the teams offense and played great
defense, he could shoot from the outside as well as a swing guard, hit the 15
footer as good as a swing forward, drive the baseline like a power forward, or
go inside and play the low post. He could do it all. 

  Magic Johnson was the greatest of all time.

  George

    What`s the big deal about sticking a ball into a basket?
    
    Most of these players look like freaks of nature anyhow. Try playing
    a decent game. Er,like cricket,for example.
    

    
    
    Play a game... named after a bug?????

    
    Gee, I wonder what would happen if he ever has to stand trial for
    something.
    

    
    
    Play a game... named after a bug?????
    
    
    maby they named the bug after the game, like they did for squash.
    

    
    
       .6
    
    
       ....and,...ah,...how do you look?
    
    
       Ed

    Aw come on guys!!  I didn't see his first game back, but local
    sportscaster put a clip together from his second game; the man is
    poetry in motion!!  The pro basketball season was "duh" until he
    came back; he adds excitement, folks.
    
    His sponsor's stock is going through the roof; Mickie Dee's already
    has a new spot out with MJ, Sir Charles and Larry Bird :-)
    
    I think overall, MJ sets a better example than many pro players
    (Magic comes to mind).  I think his Dad's death put him into a
    period of mourning that has now diminished to the point where MJ
    realized he's not ready to hang up the shoes just yet to putt a
    little ball around.
    
    

He's done what society demands...he's completely independent, honestly achieving
a living, and playing the game (in all contexts of the phrase).

Yet he gets bashed from the usual quarters.

Same old same old. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Hey Micheal! GO 'HAID.

    
    Class act.  Not everybody in the NBA is.
    
      bb

You know, speaking of Magic Johnson, I remember in a previous box the brouhaha
when he announced he was HIV +

Now Greg Louganis has announced he was HIV + as far back as the '88 Olympics
and persisted in competition even when he split his head on a diving board,
and nary a word do I see about it (though the particpant numbers be small and
ever dwindling).

Why is that?

>>Why is that?

	mmmmmust be 'cuz we're all bigots, near as i can figure.  ;>

    
    re: .0 It's Ed, right?
    
    The man is amazing. Don't know if he's the greatest bb player ever
    as it is so hard to compare players from different era's. 
    But he is certainly the best I have ever seen myself.
    Couple that with what appears to be a great personality
    and we have the premier sports superstar of our day.
    
    I also thought is was pretty classy to attempt to work his way
    up in baseball through the minor leagues, paying his dues as the
    other players did.
    
    I hope he leads the Bulls to the championship!
    
    							Hank

Ha ha Ms. Di. Taking the exaggerated/sarcastic role to reduce my observation to
absurdity doesn't work very well. A simple DIR/TITLE bears that observation out.
323 has some references; most of which are benign in comparison.

The voluminous references to Magic Johnson in relationship to AIDS,
non-monogamous sexual relationships, and similar subjects pales by comparison
and ties in with observations about who's making it, why and how, and smacks --
to me -- of double standards. I point it out to illustrate that this society is
making judgements about alot of things in an ever-shrinking sphere of perception.

    
    re: .17
    
    I don't believe I was involved in the Magic Johnson note so here's my
    take on the whole thing...
    
    
    Magic Johnson - "You reap what you sow"
    
    Greg Louganis - "You reap what you sow"
    
    
     Nope.... sorry... can't see a double standard there no matter how hard
    I try!!!

Congratulations.

Better late than never.

>>and ties in with observations about who's making it, why and how, and smacks --
>>to me -- of double standards. 

	Okay, so you're pointing out supposed "double standards", not
	bigotry.  I see I was way off.  ;>

    
    
    Well Brandon, why are you looking for a boogeyman.  Magic was much more
    popular than Greg and he had an effect on mre kids.  I, for one, was
    tired of hearing about Louganis and his poor me crap that he was
    pulling.  A lot of people had it a lot harder than he has and they
    don't go through this poor me crap.  
    
    
    Mike

    
    RE: .19
    
    >Congratulations.
    
    >Better late than never.
    
    
     Thank you... I just wanted to set the record straight (and not
    disappoint you)
    

    .17
    
    I agree with you; however a lot of folks are avid basketball fans
    and it was difficult NOT to know who Magic Johnson is.  I mentioned
    Louganis to a co-worker and their response was who? Never heard of
    him????
    
    I'm not offering excuses; I follow the Olympics and saw Louganis
    win all his gold medals.  No matter how fast everything was moving
    after he cut his head, I do feel he was very re-miss in not telling
    the doctor who stitched up his head.    ^^^^
    
    Interestingly enough, during an interview with Babs Walters Louganis
    said he almost called Magic after Magic went public, but Louganis
    didn't make the call.  He then went on to say that Magic was one of
    the first people to call him to offer support after he recently 
    went public.
    
    I was and still am a fan of Magic's; but Magic himself was up-front
    in saying that he lived a lifestyle that was over the top for awhile.
    Maybe some folks in here won't agree with me, but I think Magic was
    a class act in coming forward about being HIV+, it takes a lot of
    guts to use oneself as a (bad) example for certain types of behavior.
    Believe me, I hope the day NEVER comes when I pick up the paper or
    hear on the tube that Magic is in the hospital in the last stages
    of the disease.
    
    

    
    
    Why didn't you start the note (on Louganis) when it first came out,
    Brandon?  Just wanted to save it so as you could call us all racist?
    That's sure what it seems like.
    
    
    Mike

An article I read on Louganis mentioned that he had a hard time as a kid
because of his dark skin.  Apparently he's got some Samoan ancestry.

re:.24

Mike, if that's the way you want to take it, I can't help it. There are those
who only see negative about some groups and not others; be that racial,
economic, gender, political, religious...

I'm only commenting on what I see in that regard.

I think double standards are a problem. I raised the issue when I felt it was
time.

By the way, I'll have a lot more to share...I haven't forgotten about the bell
curve note and some others...I intend to bring facts to the table and my
personal life isn't permitting a focused effort in that area...but I'm compiling.

You know me...I like to speak when I have something to say.

    
    
    Race is one of the last things I consider when I discuss anything.  It
    seems that for you, it's the first.  The vast majority of us white folks 
    don't sit around and try and think up ways to keep people of different 
    races or backgrounds down.  Whoever is telling you this is not being
    honest.
    
    
    Mike

    
    well George, I have to disagree with you about Magic Johnson. MJ is the
    world's greatest basketball player of all time period. No other player,
    has done more for the image and popularity of the NBA than Michael
    Jordan. He is also the most recognized athelete on the planet. Magic
    Johnson was great in his day, but not as good as Jordan. Course, being
    from Chicago I'm certainly a little biased. :-) :-) He won only seven
    straight titles, not nine as mentioned previously.
    
    Mark

    But how's his level of recognition on other planets?

I think Micheal Jordan reinforced an attribute of sports that gets overlooked
in all the hype of celebrity and mega-contracts. The principle and ideals that
are involved along with the skill which must be present to define any ability,
that makes sports a cerebral activity as well as a purely adrenal/emotional
activity.

I heard that Micheal got so fed up with the strife caused by the baseball strike
and the tension between players that he simply packed his bag and walked out.

Having read a biography about him, I can see he has a deep commitment to
excellence and competition for the sake of group improvement and fun, not
ego tripping.

 So who lost a job when he came back?

    
    re.30
    
    well John, I'm not sure, but I have heard he is very popular with
    the Jupitereans. This of course, is just hearsay, mind you.

    >    But how's his level of recognition on other planets?
    
    
    Didn't he do a commercial with Marvin the Martian?

re:.28 Mike

Didn't you see my entries in the 'working out' topic??

    
    
    Sorry Brandon, I may not have.  I've done a lot of next unseening these
    days, things are very hectic around here workwise.  Can you give me a
    pointer?
    
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    Mike

re:.20 Ms. Di

>Okay, so you're pointing out supposed "double standards", not
>bigotry.  I see I was way off.  ;>

We've got notes in here on O.J., Colin Ferguson, Why is there an MLK day,
Marion Barry, legion of disparaging views on Jesse Jackson, Jocelyn Elders,
Al Sharpton, Micheal Jackson...hey, I don't begrudge anyone their opinion...I
have my own issues with these people.

But _one_  non-controversial, undeniably successful, positive celebrity (other
than Colin Powell) is mentioned, and the first few responses to his success is
"obscene hero worship" and "freak".

I find it interesting that remarks such as "what do they call themselves, the
Coors Silver Bullets?" go by the wayside, but I get reproached for observing
the lack of positive perception. This is what I'm commenting on.

I know there are myriad view points here but they seem to be in the minority
at the moment (no pun intended). So I use soapbox to compare and contrast.

re:36

It's not necessary to give you a pointer Mike...I was making half a joke (the
replies in 'Working Out' are all jokes too). 

I was saying I'm not as one-dimensional as you seem to think. But I am aware,
and this (doulbe standards) happens to be a pivotal issue in our lives as I see
it.

    
    
    
        The unique thing about Johnson, was that he could play all five
        positions effectively. Remember his rookie year,....game 6 NBA
        finals against Philadelphia?? Abdul-Jabbar dosen't make the trip
        because of an ankle sprain. Magic started at center and burned
        'em. Something like 36 points 19 rebounds and a ton of assists.
    
        Jordan,...however,...imo is the most remarkable basketball
        player I've seen.
    
    
        Ed

| <<< Note 365.21 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "NRA member in good standing" >>>


| A lot of people had it a lot harder than he has and they don't go through this
| poor me crap.

	Mike, take 25 people. Put them through the same experience. Now
interview them. You will end up with several different versions for the same
thing that happened. 

	Now we can address what you wrote above. Different people handle
situations differently. 


Glen

    
    
    Now you can read my mind.......hmmmm, interesting.  Can you give me the
    lotto numbers for Maryland this Wednesday? ;')
    
    That's unfair of you to say that.  We have had discussions before and I
    know that I have learned something from you.  I told you what I think
    of (or don't think of) when I look at a situation.  What the person is
    (male/female, white/nonwhite, Christian/Jew/Athiest, straight/gay) has 
    little or nothing to do with it (I'd like to think nothing, but I use 
    little because there may still be some stuff there).  I could use the 
    times when I was rolled by two black men in Florida or the time that a
    black man tried to molest my 16 year old girlfriend (I was 17 at the
    time) or the phone calls I used to get from a guy who told me all the
    neat sexual things he would like to to to me when I was 15 to cloud my
    views, but I don't.  I take people one a one on one basis and it
    doesn't matter who are what they are.  I look at it this way, if I were
    to make snap judgements like that I would miss out on a chance to meet
    and converse with many interesting people. 
    
    
    Mike 

>    Now you can read my mind.......hmmmm, interesting.  Can you give me the
>    lotto numbers for Maryland this Wednesday? ;')

I wonder if Mrs. Jordan, the one-question-free clairvoyant in the Boston
yellow pages, is related to Michael?  You could call her and ask for the
lotto numbers.

    
    
    I agree Glen.  I guess what sours me is the contempt he seems to have
    for his dad and airs it in public.  Not very fair in my opinion.
    
    
    Mike

re:.41 (I didn't know whether you were talking to me or Glen for a minute)

Well I did say 'seem to think'. ;-)

I'm responding to what you're telling me right now. What you may not know is:
when discussions of welfare occur, some people in this conference automatically
relate 'the problem' to black people (not realizing that numerically there are
more white people on welfare). (In fact in some cases the welfare doesn't even
have to be the topic at hand for that situation to come up).

You are taking a general observation personally to levels they shouldn't be.

If it doesn't apply to you then it doesn't apply to you.

RE                    <<< Note 365.18 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI >>>

>    Magic Johnson - "You reap what you sow"
>    
>    Greg Louganis - "You reap what you sow"
    
  This makes no sense.

  "You reap what you sow" means that if you plant something it will grow.
In what way did these guys plant AIDS? It's more a matter of AIDS being
planted in them.

  George

| <<< Note 365.43 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "NRA member in good standing" >>>



| I agree Glen. I guess what sours me is the contempt he seems to have for his 
| dad and airs it in public. Not very fair in my opinion.

	Hmmm.... by public do you mean on tv or do you say this to anyone who
has contempt for another and expresses it? 


Glen

    
    RE: .45
    
    > This makes no sense.
    
    To you of course..

| <<< Note 365.44 by NASAU::GUILLERMO "But the world still goes round and round" >>>

| re:.41 (I didn't know whether you were talking to me or Glen for a minute)


	You know, I thought the same thing! (but reversed) It wasn't until I
read the next note that I figured out he was talking to you. :-)

    
    RE: .44
    
    >some people in this conference automatically relate 'the problem' 
    >to black people (not realizing that numerically there are more white
    >people on welfare).
    
    
     No stereo-typing here of course... right???

| <<< Note 365.45 by HELIX::MAIEWSKI >>>


| In what way did these guys plant AIDS? 

	For Magic is was having unprotected sex with women, not thinking
anything like this could happen to him. For Greg, it was the guy he was having
a long term relationship who gave it to him, who got it from screwing around.
So for Greg, it wasn't anything he did. He had thought his lover was being
monogamous.


Glen

re:.49

Yup. You definitely came to mind. A certain E-mail from an off-line discussion
some time ago.

    
    
    Yeah... I remember that....
    
    You never replied back though.... was it because I made sense, or did
    you just write me off as one of them red-necked honkies?

    >For Magic is was having unprotected sex with women, not thinking
    >anything like this could happen to him.
    
    I believe this is the case, but as we know, transmission from
    female to male is much more difficult.
    
    As interesting spin on this, however, is that I've heard rumors
    from two sources, prior to his announcement, that Johnson
    was bisexual.
    
    A friend of mine (who is gay), always gossiped about various
    celebs being gay. He claimed he knew someone who did Magic.
    I always took it with a HUGE grain of salt.
    
    Then when Magic announced that he was HIV+, another friend
    (who happened to be my boss at DEC at the time), and who was
    one of those people who knew _everybody_, told me that a
    friend in LA had been telling him for years that he personally
    knew Magic to be bisexual... knew, in the Biblical sense.
    
    I still don't believe this to be true, I believe Magic got
    HIV from a female partner. I just always found these other
    rumors to be rather interesting...
    
    -b

RE           <<< Note 365.29 by POBOX::BATTIS "Contract Studmuffin" >>>

>    well George, I have to disagree with you about Magic Johnson. MJ is the
>    world's greatest basketball player of all time period. No other player,
>    has done more for the image and popularity of the NBA than Michael
>    Jordan. He is also the most recognized athelete on the planet. Magic
>    Johnson was great in his day, but not as good as Jordan. Course, being
>    from Chicago I'm certainly a little biased. :-) :-) He won only seven
>    straight titles, not nine as mentioned previously.
    
  I think we are rating our basketball players by a different standard. You
seem to say Jordan is better because he has done things for the image of the
NAB, he's more popular, better recognized, etc.

  I won't argue with you there. I'm using a different standard. What I'm saying
is that when they were at their peak, Magic Johnson was a better basketball
player than MJ. He could play swing guard as well as Jordan but in addition
he could play the high post, low post, or power forward. 

  Remember when Stockton (sp?) went down for the Dream Team ("the real one, not
the lawyers") and they had no backup point guard? MJ didn't even try to run the
team. They tried just about everyone else in that position but Jordan. 

  Remember the finals of the NCAA tourney back in '79 against Larry Bird's
Indiana (State?) team? Magic played each of the 5 positions at one point or
another in that game. 

  George  

	Brandon, intimations of racism, bigotry (or whatever) rankle.
	If that wasn't the inference you intended be drawn from your .14,
	then my apologies to you.

I don't feel the need to reply to everything. Sometimes the reply isn't in
me 'til later. Unlike others, I don't see a non-reply as a sign of capitulation.

Well Ms.Di - I'm sure after reading all my entries (not just .14) you can
empathize. 

So, this Michael Jordan - is he a ballplayer, er what?

And all my replies go toward .12 

    
    re, .45 - It is certainly possible to argue with the "You reap
    what you sow attitude.  In fact I do myself.
    
     However, unless you are feigning incomprehension, you are alone
    in not grasping Andy's point.  Everybody else here knew exactly
    what he meant - that the chosen behaviors of these individuals
    (the sowing) was the cause of the tragic disease (the reaping).
    
    It is like saying you catch watch you hunt for, or any other such
    analogy.
    
    However, nobody really believes you didn't know what he meant.  You
    were just trying to rile Andy up by suggesting his metaphor was
    misunderstood, when you understood it perfectly.
    
      bb

    
    
    Glen,
    
    Yup, I mean on TV and in his book.
    
    
    
    Brandon,
    
    When we talk issues I don't think in the terms of any particular race
    or any other qualifier whether that be welfare, aids, gun control,
    abortion, etc, etc, etc.
    
    
    
    Mike
    

| <<< Note 365.61 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "NRA member in good standing" >>>


| Yup, I mean on TV and in his book.


	Mike, then you confuse the hell out of me. :-)  If someone dumped their
life story in a church, would you call it a testimony or would you view it like
you do above? 

RE                      <<< Note 365.60 by GAAS::BRAUCHER >>>

>     However, unless you are feigning incomprehension, you are alone
>    in not grasping Andy's point.  Everybody else here knew exactly
>    what he meant - that the chosen behaviors of these individuals
>    (the sowing) was the cause of the tragic disease (the reaping).

  No that can't be right. As someone pointed out, in the case of Greg L. it was
not chosen behavior. And as for Magic no one seems to have any idea how he
caught the disease or who he got it from? 

  George

    
    
    I'd view it like I do above.
    
    
    Mike

    
    George - I am NOT saying I agreed with it.  I'm saying I
    understood it.  The two things are different, to everybody else
    in the world except you.
    
    Yes, there are all sorts of things wrong with what Andy said.
    
    But CLARITY is not one of them.  And I don't believe it's unclear
    to you, either.
    
      bb

>>             -< Ms. Di, read .8 then tell me about what rankles. >-

	Brandon, I don't understand what .8 is getting at, I really
	don't, but then again, I often don't know what Ms. Smith is
	getting at.  Cook's note about "freaks" - well that's a rubbish
	note.  I don't see what the big deal is here about the response to
	Jordan, and besides that, .14 was about Louganis.

	Sorry if I'm not seeing your point.  I don't view the 'box as
	being full of bigots.  Maybe that's a naive view, but there you
	have it.

RE                      <<< Note 365.65 by GAAS::BRAUCHER >>>

>    Yes, there are all sorts of things wrong with what Andy said.
>    
>    But CLARITY is not one of them.  And I don't believe it's unclear
>    to you, either.
    
  Ok so you are saying he clearly stated something that was wrong?

  Now it appears you are the one splitting hairs.

  George

    	.50
    
>So for Greg, it wasn't anything he did. He had thought his lover was being
>monogamous.

    	This has not been said by Louganis at all.  It could have been
    	introduced into Louganis' "monogamous" relationship through
    	Louganis' lover's previous "monogamous" relationship, etc.
    	Serial monogamy is not safe sex.
    
    	re .63
    
>  As someone pointed out, in the case of Greg L. it was not chosen behavior. 
    
    	OH?  Did someone force Louganis to have sex with an HIV+ partner?
    
    	Sex with a lover -- any lover, regardless of gender -- is a
    	chosen behavior.

    Jordan is one of the toughest defenders in the NBA.
    Magic could not guard a smaller quicker player unless it was in a half
    court situation.
    Jordan's lifetime shooting % is better than Magic's and he is double
    and triple teamed most of the time he shoots. His job is to score
    points. 
    Magic had the greatest scorer of all time on his team. His role was to
    get the ball to Kareem.
    If you look at the teams each man has won championships with, you will
    see that Jordan won with teammates who were not as good as Magic's
    teammates.
    Who is/was better? I think Jordan by a hair. 

| <<< Note 365.68 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Whatever happened to ADDATA?" >>>

| >So for Greg, it wasn't anything he did. He had thought his lover was being
| >monogamous.

| This has not been said by Louganis at all.  

	GGAAANNNTTTT Wrong!!! Not a winner Joe. But thanks for playing! He most
certainly DID say this. I heard it with my own 2 ears. He was on Oprah at the
time. 

| It could have been introduced into Louganis' "monogamous" relationship through
| Louganis' lover's previous "monogamous" relationship, etc.

	NO, he said it was from his lover screwing around on him.

| >  As someone pointed out, in the case of Greg L. it was not chosen behavior.

| OH?  Did someone force Louganis to have sex with an HIV+ partner?

	Actually, his lover did rape him. From the way he was talking about it,
I don't think it was enjoyable.



Glen

| <<< Note 365.69 by BIGQ::LINDO >>>


| Who is/was better? I think Jordan by a hair.


	He ain't got no hair!

But he got a HAID!

GO 'HAID Micheal!

    Hmmmmm, I told Brian Markey I preferred men who were not "foliclely"
    challeneged.
    
    
    I take that back, Michael Jordan is one of the sexiest crome domes
    around!!
    

               <<< Note 365.70 by BIGQ::SILVA "Squirrels R Me" >>>

>	GGAAANNNTTTT Wrong!!! Not a winner Joe. But thanks for playing! He most
>certainly DID say this. I heard it with my own 2 ears. He was on Oprah at the
>time. 
    
    	Well then that's contradictory to what he said to Barbara Walters.
    
    	I tend to believe Baba WaWa more than the tabloid set.

>| OH?  Did someone force Louganis to have sex with an HIV+ partner?
>
>	Actually, his lover did rape him. From the way he was talking about it,
>I don't think it was enjoyable.

    	Get real.  Louganis chose that "lover".  Was it rape the very
    	first time too?  Or every time?  Are you suggesting that he got
    	HIV the time(s) he got raped (assuming that happened) and not
    	the other times he had sex with the lover?  First you try to tell 
    	us that it was a long-term monogamous relationship, but as you 
    	continue to talk about it -- apparently only based on an Oprah 
    	interview -- it has become a rape relationship.  You have no basis 
    	for your contention that he didn't have a choice in having sex with 
    	the guy, just as I have no basis to say that he did not.  Still, it 
    	is hard to believe that becoming sexually active with that lover was 
    	not a choice on his part.  I tend to believe that my guess in the 
    	matter is more plausible than yours, but then that's what opinions 
    	are all about.
    
    	And after all that, let me draw the focus back to my original
    	statement.  In response to someone's statement that he didn't
    	have a choice in his sexual orientation, I want to remind people
    	that regardless of orientation, sexual BEHAVIOR is still a choice.

>>	GGAAANNNTTTT Wrong!!! Not a winner Joe. But thanks for playing! He most
>>certainly DID say this. I heard it with my own 2 ears. He was on Oprah at the
>>time. 
>    
>    	Well then that's contradictory to what he said to Barbara Walters.
>    
>    	I tend to believe Baba WaWa more than the tabloid set.

You believe what someone says to Baba more than you believe what he said to
Oprah?  Any comments, Brandon?

    
    
    
       He scored 55 last night.
    
    
    
       Ed

    Yeah, but how'd he do in the game?

Boo!  Hiss!

    
    George, I still disagree with you. Michael Jordan is THE greatest 
    basketball player of all time, including Magic Johnson. Magic was a 
    better passer, but Jordan is the better shooter, and defender. When
    people are polled as to who is the best of all time, I would bet
    Michael's name comes up far more than Magic's.
    
    Mark

    
    I have allways loved b-ball.  I was never one who only cheered for
    the home team.  I cheer for players who know how to play the game and
    play hard and FAIR.  Have alot of favorites, Bird, Magic, DJ, Spud Web, 
    I also have my so-so (I love to watch them play, but I dont agree w/how
    they play all the time) like Sir Charles, Lamberr(sp). 
    
    But I have allways loved to watch MJ!  MJ just lights up the court when
    he is on it.  MJ belongs on the court.  He lives for B-ball and loves
    the game.  We need more people like him on more sports.
    
    Go Michale!
    
    Louisa

re:.75

No comment Gerald. It speaks for itself.

    
    
    Well if he said two different things on two different shows, I think
    it's Lugainus who lacks the credibility.
    
    
    Mike

    
    re, .63 - No, I could care less about the argument in question.
            What I was pointing out is that your methods of debating
            in EVERY topic, whether I agree with you or not, I find
            disgusting.  You claim others said things they didn't,
            you lie, and you feign a position and run when caught.
    
            The reason people in SOAPBOX are hostile to you, George,
            has another side than just your opinions.  It has to do
            with your METHODS.
    
            Capiche ?  bb

RE                      <<< Note 365.83 by GAAS::BRAUCHER >>>

>            The reason people in SOAPBOX are hostile to you, George,
>            has another side than just your opinions.  It has to do
>            with your METHODS.

  Ok then answer me this. Why is it that I never hear anyone say "I agree
with you on that but I hate the way you presented your argument".
    
  George

    	We agree that the mosquito deserves a place in the circle of life,
    	but rarely does one affirm her as she carries out her predestined 
    	behavior on one's arm.  One merely swats her.

  More hate. It's catching.

  George

    Your casual labeling of the rough time you've made for yourself as
    being hate based is offensive. Anybody who's ever been a real victim of
    hatred knows what a laugh your accusation is. But, being utterly
    shameless and devoid of the tiniest scintilla of respectability, you'll
    undoubtedly continue along this course.

>  Ok then answer me this. Why is it that I never hear anyone say "I agree
>with you on that but I hate the way you presented your argument".

Perhaps I can help clarify this.

It has been opined that the hostility towards you results from your method
and not from your viewpoints.

That does not rule out the possibility that your viewpoints aren't reasonable
as well, it simply means that that lack of reasonability, in and of itself,
is insufficient to foster the hostility.

They need not be mutually exclusive.

    
    .88
    
    It's not what you say, but, how you say it? I think that pretty much
    sums up Jack's reply.
    
    Mark

    
>>    It's not what you say, but, how you say it? I think that pretty much
>>    sums up Jack's reply.

	no.  it's _both_.

    
    well lady Di, I was in the neighborhood.
    
    Mark

  Ok, let me see if I get this straight.

  I'm always wrong. Now that would be ok, anyone who is not a conservative
is always wrong (except DougO who is a liberal that believes the GOP is here
to show us the way). But in addition to always being wrong, I make my wrong
statements in a way that other people find irritating.

  Is that about it?

  George

    
    
    I don't know if I'd say you're always wrong...
    
    it's more like trying to free you up from your cranial-rectal inversion
    first...

    Re: .92
    
    >I'm always wrong.
    
    Nope.  Just frequently....  (For example, recently we all had that
    violent agreement that Colin Ferguson should be allowed to file an
    appeal, so you can't _always_ be wrong.)
    
    >I make my wrong statements in a way that other people find irritating.
    
    Right or wrong, you frequently present your case the wrong way.

  Yes, I have noticed that at least two notes are now devoted to discussions
of me and my noting style but I have to say I'm quite flattered that those
who are obsessed with me and what I have to say have come to stalk me in
the Michael Jordan note. Imagine taking the attention away from MJ.

  I wonder if Haynes is thinking about how they can get their Haynes on me?

  George

    
    
    Gator Aid
    
    

    Are they still endangered?  I can't recall if they've made a comeback
    (in which case, they're not in need of much aid).

    
    RE: .95
    
    You are notes-challenged, aren't you...
    
    You asked a question back there... which was answered...
    
    Now you say those answering your questions are "obsessed" and
    "stalk"?????
    
    
     There is little hope for you, and the good Doctah pretty much hit the
    nail on the head...
    

	Joe, I really liked the misquito analogy

	MJ Dunk snarf!!!

  The obsession continues.

  They can't resist.

  George

    
    MJ's mother did a carpet company commercial in Chicago.  Darn it, I
    can't remember the name of the company but they had the cutest jingle. 
    Mark?

    
    Empire carpeting?? Haven't seen the commercial deb.

    
    Empire Carpeting!  Yes!  Yes!  The guy and his daughter.  The
    commercial with Michael Jordan's mother was in, er, 1990 I think.  They
    were giving away a basketball signed by MJ if you bought carpet.

    RE: .101
    
    >  The obsession continues.
    
    >  They can't resist.
    
    >George
    
    
      You're right.... I can't resist...
    
    
    
    
    
                      DUMB POLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!
    

  I'm wondering, now that notes are getting moved, where are all of these
notes about my noting style going to end up?

  George

    RE: .106
    
    Hopefully, in ::SPORTS...
    
    

>>  I'm wondering, now that notes are getting moved, where are all of these
>>notes about my noting style going to end up?

	there would be a plethora of notes to choose from containing related
	notes.

    Since there isn't a seperate Louganis topic:
    
    1.  Louganis was monogamous, his SO wasn't.  What's so hard to
    	understand, happens in hetero couples all the time.
    
    2.	Louganis had (foolishly) allowed his SO to act as his business
    	manager, the guy ripped Louganis off enormous sums of money.
    	It was at the point where Louganis was throwing the guy out
    	and trying to end the relationship that the SO raped him (at
    	knife point).
    
    3.  Louganis eventually paid out additional sums of money to keep
    	the SO from "outing" him.  L didn't get tested for HIV until
    	the SO admitted that he had full-blown AIDS.  L hadn't been
    	fooling around with others, so it never occurred to him that
    	that he was at risk.
    
    Louganis did not have the happiest of childhoods; in an except from
    his book that I read he basically said he was the wrong kid to be
    placed in that family.  He and his father did come to terms before
    the father's death.  He isn't using the above as an excuse because
    we believes (as many of us do) that he had no choice as to his 
    sexual orientation.  
    
    One of the things I admire the most about Michael Jordan is the
    respect and reverance that he shows toward his late father.  I read
    over the week-end that the only reason he wouldn't wear #23 again on
    his jersey was #23 was there the last time his father watched him
    play.  When asked why he decided to return to the sport, he was
    candid enough to admit that it had started to bug him that his 2
    sons (quite young in age) were all hung up on "Shaq" :-)
    
    Michael Jordan had a strong and loving relationship with his father;
    I think it shows in every aspect of Jordan's life.
    
    
    
    

    Weren't the experts saying Michael was going to have a problem getting
    back into the game? He scored 55 points in one game last week, his 3rd
    or 4th game. Incredible.

>    Since there isn't a seperate Louganis topic:

A sepArate Louganis topic is just two topics away from this one.

    >> He scored 55 points in one game last week...
    
    Not knowing much about basketball, I've occasionally wondered
    about such high-scoring histrionics.  Does one player score such
    a lopsided number of points because he hogs the ball, or because
    the other players let him have it all the time out of deference
    to his fame and reputation, or similar reasons?
    
    I mean, there's only so much time in a game, and only so many
    points to be scored in a game.  What determines that one player
    should score most of the points, not just by a small margin either,
    but as many as half of all the baskets scored in the entire game?
    
    It's not just that such a player scores a higher percentages of
    his shots (though that would be part of it), but that rather the
    player is getting far more opportunities than the others, for
    whatever reason.
    
    Does this kind of thing cause friction on basketball teams?  Do the
    other players on teams with such superstars essentially become
    "sidemen"?
    
    Chris

    He only missed a couple of shots and 1 free throw.

RE      <<< Note 365.112 by AMN1::RALTO "The Voice and Image of Digital" >>>

>    It's not just that such a player scores a higher percentages of
>    his shots (though that would be part of it), but that rather the
>    player is getting far more opportunities than the others, for
>    whatever reason.
>    
>    Does this kind of thing cause friction on basketball teams?  Do the
>    other players on teams with such superstars essentially become
>    "sidemen"?
    
  A guy like Michael Jordan can score on a higher percentage of his attempts
than other players. If Michael takes a shot, it's more likely to go in. If
Michael goes to the hoop, he's more likely to get around the defender for
an easy shot.

  If you've got Michael on your team, you try to get him the ball and let him
go to work. Every point he scores is a team point so you are all better off.

  Also, once a guy like Michael starts scoring, the other team adjusts by
putting their defensive resources on him leaving other players open for easy
shots they never have if Michael wasn't around.

  Here's putting it another way. One of the most selfish guys in the game is
Scottie Pippen (also of the Bulls and Dream Team). If there was anyone who
would be jealous of Michael it would be him, but he was pushing hard for MJ to
return mostly because his life is so much easier with Michael around. Pippen
knows that with MJ around that's less defensive pressure on him and more of
a chance at advancing during the playoffs.

  George

    Jordan's scored in excess of 50 points against the Celtics in the
    playoffs- 63 in one game. The Bulls still lost. The problem with having
    a superstar scorer is that the rest of the team starts standing around
    and watching, and if the superstar misses a few in a row at a critical
    juncture, the rest of the team is cold.

.87

>devoid of the tiniest scintilla...

Tiniest scintilla?  Is that like, real small?

Class, use the phrase 'tiniest scintilla' in a sentence.

MJ did not have the tiniest scintilla of hesitation when
making his decision to return to the Bulls.

    That would be redundantly repetitive and inapropriately out of context.  
    
    Brian

Greg looked fabulous in that tiniest scintilla of a Speedo.

The miniature boat to hell is steered by the tiniest scintilla.

    
    Nope, nope, Speedos are DISGUSTING.

    Not if they are boxer speedos.  
    
    

    
    This I GOTTA see 8^).

    I gots me a pair.

>Nope, nope, Speedos are DISGUSTING.

It matters not to me the tiniest scintilla, I find Greg's
swim garb to be scintillating.

| <<< Note 365.118 by LANDO::OLIVER_B >>>

| Greg looked fabulous in that tiniest scintilla of a Speedo.

	YES! I agree.

| <<< Note 365.120 by POWDML::LAUER "Little Chamber of Fuzzy Faces" >>>


| Nope, nope, Speedos are DISGUSTING.


	Only when worn by Canadians. Put the right person in a speedo, and it's
MAGIC! :-)

    
    No.  No.  Speedos make men look like they're smuggling grapes.

    I just have 1 pair of grey shorts that are kinda like boxers.

| <<< Note 365.127 by POWDML::LAUER "Little Chamber of Fuzzy Faces" >>>


| No.  No.  Speedos make men look like they're smuggling grapes.

	Grapefruit Deb.... 

Glen, see your doctor.

    Glen's suffering from delusions of adequacy again.

| <<< Note 365.130 by NOTIME::SACKS "Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085" >>>

| Glen, see your doctor.

	Everytime I do he makes me cough....

| <<< Note 365.131 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

| Glen's suffering from delusions of adequacy again.


	I am too!

    	Speedos are only disgusting if worn by the wrong body shape.
    
    	...or if you put the potato in the back and not in the front.

    So Rush should ditch his speedo is what you're saying.

    
    uh-b-b-bleah!
    

>So Rush should ditch his speedo...

God no, Rush should keep it on!  Just imagine if he 
took it off!!!  Not a pretty sight.  

| <<< Note 365.137 by LANDO::OLIVER_B >>>


| God no, Rush should keep it on!  Just imagine if he
| took it off!!!  Not a pretty sight.

	Think about it.... if he had a speedo on, would you even see it anyway?

You're right!  

Rush, speedo....Lost in Waist.