How many posters wing it on facts

[Beerball]

I attempt to be as factual as possible and think everyone here knows it.

294392[/snapback]

You're a Joke, man.

[Pac_Man]

It's called revisionist history! It has become almost second nature on College Campuses across the Country. I guess there could be a little bleed through on any "open" site like this one....

294481[/snapback]

You have a point about the revisionist history on college campuses. I've heard it said that the source of this revisionism is Marxism and its hatred for all things Western. I've also read that communist governments have murdered 95 million innocent people:

 

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

 

You'll notice that the Leftist extremists on college campuses complain about every human rights violation under the sun (whether real or imagined) but never seem to mention the largest mass murder in human history.

[Guest BackInDaDay]

You have a point about the revisionist history on college campuses. I've heard it said that the source of this revisionism is Marxism and its hatred for all things Western. I've also read that communist governments have murdered 95 million innocent people:

 

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

 

You'll notice that the Leftist extremists on college campuses complain about every human rights violation under the sun (whether real or imagined) but never seem to mention the largest mass murder in human history.

294498[/snapback]

 

 

Sorry serious dudes. I thought we were talking about posters saying they remember seeing OJ run for 500yds in one game.

[Milo]

How many posters wing it on facts?

 

Exactly 57.3% of all posters on this forum.

[Britbillsfan]

You have a point about the revisionist history on college campuses. I've heard it said that the source of this revisionism is Marxism and its hatred for all things Western. I've also read that communist governments have murdered 95 million innocent people:

 

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

 

You'll notice that the Leftist extremists on college campuses complain about every human rights violation under the sun (whether real or imagined) but never seem to mention the largest mass murder in human history.

294498[/snapback]

Pretty much all history was revisionist at some point. It is why it is not a science, as it is often a spin on the facts.

 

Link is wrong on number of state sponsored deaths, though. The Marxist inspired regimes (none of them were really Marxist, but Marxism itself is an 'ideal' that could never be achievable in the real world) of the last century probably doubled the 95mil figure, Mao alone might have made that figure on his own with some of his policies (figures I have read have given the cost in lives in the famine caused by his 'Great Leap Forward' alone at somewhere around 20mil), there were (and are) an awful lot of Chinese in Gulags who perish in them, etc.

 

However as far as the original post of the topic is concerned it is very annoying when incorrect 'facts' are posted about football and I agree that posters should ensure they know what they are writing about prior to posting. Please.

[Nanker]

Sorry serious dudes.  I thought we were talking about posters saying they remember seeing OJ run for 500yds in one game. 

294502[/snapback]

 

Yeah! I remember that game! In fact I was AT that game!

I'll always remember it because the very next week is when Ferguson tied the NFL record for a rookie with 9 touchdown passes in a half. It was also the first time The Bills had beaten the Fins in over a quarter century!

What precious memories those are!

 

I love it when people share theirs with us.

[cåblelady]

I miss Lori.

[Pac_Man]

Pretty much all history was revisionist at some point. It is why it is not a science, as it is often a spin on the facts.

 

Link is wrong on number of state sponsored deaths, though. The Marxist inspired regimes (none of them were really Marxist, but Marxism itself is an 'ideal' that could never be achievable in the real world) of the last century probably doubled the 95mil figure, Mao alone might have made that figure on his own with some of his policies (figures I have read have given the cost in lives in the famine caused by his 'Great Leap Forward' alone at somewhere around 20mil), there were (and are) an awful lot of Chinese in Gulags who perish in them, etc.

 

However as far as the original post of the topic is concerned it is very annoying when incorrect 'facts' are posted about football and I agree that posters should ensure they know what they are writing about prior to posting. Please.

294525[/snapback]

You draw a distinction between what Karl Marx wrote in his book, and what those who called themselves Marxists did in practice. The need for such a distinction is not clear to me for two reasons: American Marxists have been a lot more vocal about, for example, the Nazi Holocaust than the much more massive Soviet or communist Chinese Holocausts. While there are a few Marxists out there who have condemned the Soviet Union for its unparalleled mass murder, these few are hated by the overwhelming Marxist majority. Most Marxists loved the Soviet Union; they loved it so much that (at least here in the U.S.) they took orders from Moscow; either directly or indirectly.

 

As to your second point: I agree that the 95 million figure looks low to me as well. But bear in mind that it is difficult to arrive at an exact body count for the communist genocides. Consider for example Lenin's mass murder of the Soviet intelligentsia; or the Ukrainian famine, or the Soviet mass murder of the Polish, or the Soviet army's butchering of the German people during WWII, or the relocations the Soviet government imposed upon the German people after the war. With the possible exception of the mass murder of the intelligentsia, there was no list of names kept. There was just an inhuman government that unleashed the demon of mass murder without making any particular effort to quantify their policies' effects. While reasonable people will vary in their estimations of the exact scale of communist murder, no one can doubt that communism is the worst calamity ever to be unleashed upon the human race.

[The Tomcat]

-Bump....

 

 

 

Post = Post + 1......which ='s acceptance = RJ - Db = JP!!!!! I figured it out!!!

[Nanker]

-Bump....

Post = Post + 1......which ='s acceptance = RJ - Db = JP!!!!! I figured it out!!!

294674[/snapback]

 

Reworking your calculus through Klingon mind-melding with alien life forms I came up with:

 

[[MM + JM + JC +(SW * JP)2 ] * (6T!)] * (N*P) - X = 9 - 6 record and a bright future.

 

Where:

MM = Our head Coach

JM = Our OL coach

JC = Our OC

SW = Our QB coach

T = Months of offseason contact time between SW and JP

N = number of preseason games

P = % of playing time

and X = days lost to injury caused by ScheißeKopf Defensive Backs in practice.

[ajzepp]

Reworking your calculus through Klingon mind-melding with alien life forms I came up with:

 

[[MM + JM + JC +(SW * JP)2 ] * (6T!)] * (N*P) - X  = 9 - 6 record and a bright future.

 

Where:

MM = Our head Coach

JM = Our OL coach

JC = Our OC

SW = Our QB coach

T = Months of offseason contact time between SW and JP

N = number of preseason games

P  = % of playing time

and X = days lost to injury caused by ScheißeKopf Defensive Backs in practice.

294684[/snapback]

 

9-6? What happens in the last game? Don't leave us hangin!

[R. Rich]

A disturbing trend I've noticed is a lot of posters wing it on their memories and post totally erroneous information as facts in their posts when discussing NFL drafts/games/stats/history.  The latest example today is a post which names 3 out of the 5 players who were 1st day selections by TD in Pittsburgh as 2nd day selections.

 

My question is: how many of you don't give a rat's @ss what the truth is & will post anything to increase your # of posts & how many feel some sense of responsibility to get it right when you post "facts"  This obviously does not apply to opinions, only stuff you can look up somewhere. 

 

I feel posters should have a sense of responsibilty.  Whenever I'm posting facts, I try to look it up if I have any questions as to the accuracy of my statements about the Bills/NFL.  If I can't find the answer in one of my publications, I'll say something that clearly gives the reader the information I'm not 100% sure of my statement about history. 

 

We need to be a little more diligent when giving out information.

294370[/snapback]

 

 

I don't use facts. I have no use for them, seeing that I'm just a PNGWNPTGB.

[ROSCOE P. COE TRAIN]

You say:

"I'll say something that clearly gives the reader the information I'm not 100% sure of my statement about history."

 

While authoring your profound doctrinal "publications," it a FACT that you give ALL readers, ALL THE TIME, AND EVERYTIME (as you purport to do so 100% of the time) with "something that clearly give the readers the information"? Is your ego-generated mantra a contradiction?

 

[Pac_Man]

You say:

"I'll say something that clearly gives the reader the information I'm not 100% sure of my statement about history."

 

While authoring your profound doctrinal "publications," it a FACT that you give ALL readers, ALL THE TIME, AND EVERYTIME (as you purport to do so 100% of the time) with "something that clearly give the readers the information"?  Is your  ego-generated mantra a contradiction?

 

294726[/snapback]

I agree with you that the sentence you quoted is a mess. But to call albany's quest for a higher level of accuracy "ego-generated" does not appear to have any factual basis. I realize that I don't know albany as well as you guys might, but his original post didn't seem to be ego driven.

[Dan Gross]

Yeah! I remember that game! In fact I was AT that game!

 

294571[/snapback]

 

I thought I had read/heard Levy saying something along the lines of having run into about 300,000 (or some absurd number) people who were at the Comeback game during his travels....

 

Kinda like how everyone who was alive in the '60's went to Woodstock...

 

[Albany,n.y.]

You say:

"I'll say something that clearly gives the reader the information I'm not 100% sure of my statement about history."

 

While authoring your profound doctrinal "publications," it a FACT that you give ALL readers, ALL THE TIME, AND EVERYTIME (as you purport to do so 100% of the time) with "something that clearly give the readers the information"?  Is your  ego-generated mantra a contradiction?

 

294726[/snapback]

 

All it means is, if it's something like what round a player was drafted or how many yards a player ran for in a given game if I'm not 100% sure I look it up to be sure I'm accurately stating something that happened. If I vaguely remember something but can't verify it I'll say something like "he fumbled in the double digits" as I did recently referring to Henry since his fumble stats weren't readily available.

 

Since I have access to about 20 Bills media guides & draft orders publications since the merger, I prefer not to wing it when discussing absolute events.

 

The post's origin really had nothing to do with ego. It was the result of viewing a lot of inaccurate statements over the offseason on a variety of boards that I visit & in the media. Unfortunately, Pac_Man's post was the one I specifically cited, although I didn't see his post as any different than other's which had me building up to my post. (Sorry for singling you out Pac_Man) The frustrations of an offseason of people saying things a lot worse than Pac_Man got me to the point that I had to say something. The members of the national media are among the biggest offenders & I'd had enough.

 

There was nothing I feel that was egotistical about demanding an attempt at accuracy when someone makes a statement. Most things stated on this board are opinions, and anyone is entitled to think & post whatever they want (Although if someone says we're going to trade the team to SF to draft a QB they should expect a lot of negative feedback). But when you are stating historical facts, you should be more careful. If you're stating an absolute but can't verify it just say "I think" before the statement & that tells others you recall to the best of your abilities but didn't verify it.

[Bill from NYC]

All it means is, if it's something like what round a player was drafted or how many yards a player ran for in a given game if I'm not 100% sure I look it up to be sure I'm accurately stating something that happened.  If I vaguely remember something but can't verify it I'll say something like "he fumbled in the double digits" as I did recently referring to Henry since his fumble stats weren't readily available. 

 

Since I have access to about 20 Bills media guides & draft orders publications since the merger, I prefer not to wing it when discussing absolute events. 

 

The post's origin really had nothing to do with ego.  It was the result of viewing a lot of inaccurate statements over the offseason on a variety of boards that I visit & in the media.  Unfortunately, Pac_Man's post was the one I specifically cited, although I didn't see his post as any different than other's which had me building up to my post.  (Sorry for singling you out Pac_Man)  The frustrations of an offseason of people saying things a lot worse than Pac_Man got me to the point that I had to say something.  The members of the national media are among the biggest offenders & I'd had enough.

 

There was nothing I feel that was egotistical about demanding an attempt at accuracy when someone makes a statement.  Most things stated on this board are opinions, and anyone is entitled to think & post whatever they want (Although if someone says we're going to trade the team to SF to draft a QB they should expect a lot of negative feedback).  But when you are stating historical facts, you should be more careful.  If you're stating an absolute but can't verify it just say "I think" before the statement & that tells others you recall to the best of your abilities but didn't verify it.

294742[/snapback]

 

Btw Harv, what round WAS Lloyd drafted in?

I place him in the top 10 LBs of all time before he got hurt.

[Albany,n.y.]

Btw Harv, what round WAS Lloyd drafted in?

I place him in the top 10 LBs of all time before he got hurt.

294744[/snapback]

 

6th round, pick 150 in 1987 draft

[Surfmeister]

For me, facts have the same effect as sunlight on Count Dracula. There's an old Romanian saying which translates ... These people live by lies and die when they come in contact with the truth. That's me!

 

Although I do sympathize with your point ...

[Dan Gross]

My problem is that I can never get the truth to support my arguments...thus I don't bother.