JJFIVEOH

You're right, a lesbian wouldn't wear track shorts.

Or a lesbian.

Those aren't minor actions. Holding them to different standards, is in fact, inequality.

One change I propose for next year is the option of having spots for IR. It doesn't seem fair to have to dump your star draft picks to make spots for guys you need to pick up to fill the holes. After all, teams in real life have IR spots, so does fantasy hockey. Just a thought. It might not even be an available option.

Does it really matter? The winners usually just end up being whoever makes it through the season healthy. There is little strategy any more as long as you draft with common sense.

:w00t:

Shameless is one of the most ridiculous and unrealistic shows I have ever watched. With each passing year, it's almost as if they're saying "We really want to move on with other aspects of our lives and yet they keep renewing us. Maybe if we try this they'll finally pull the plug." And yet for some reason, I keep watching it. I'm still amazed that Shameless keeps moving on while Vinyl got the ax.

No Kane?

Not even three weeks in and there already isn't any legitimate FA RB's. In my other league I lost Peterson and Woodhead. Gonna be a combined 0-6 after this week. :wallbash:

I was going to say 'no pun intended'............ but you didn't specifically state the wall you kicked was concrete. I didn't want to assume without knowing the facts. :angel:

There is another major flaw in your logic............... you have concrete evidence............... of a broken foot. I don't know what else to tell you. It's elementary logic.

My you are a snarky individual.

:wub:

It's no big secret that you're the most partial and biased person on this board when it comes to social issues.THAT is an opinion. Vogl shouldn't imply that Kane is delirious because FACTS AREN'T COMPLETELY KNOWN YET. Not sure why that is so difficult to comprehend.

To the bold, if I said 2+2=4 and you didn't agree with me, does that make 2+2≠4 true? You've made it abundantly clear your agenda against Kane, you're going to support whatever narrative makes him look bad. It's a shame you let feelings get in the way of impartiality. (Yes my font changed because I copied the ≠ sign)

I like to agree with facts. I guess that makes me different. That's why I don't jump to conclusions on sensitive matters such as race and harassment. I guess I give Vogl too much credit. Telling people he's delusional with nothing to base it on? I guess that's just modern day journalism.

No misunderstanding, that's exactly what I took from it.

Well, you did when you agreed with his Tweet. I hate to bring race into this, but it's odd the way people (journalists primarily) are hesitant to assume guilt in the black community until it involves women. Then it's all about the women. Before you ask what that has to do with anything, Vogl's Tweet implied that's how he feels when he made the accusation that Kane is delirious in his thoughts.

And people are taking it as fact. It's a dangerous step to take as a journalist.

You're right, I should have quoted this post. I did get the impression he was directing it at me. While it's not my idea, the term 'you' can be taken too many ways on an internet forum.

Hank, I'll take your word for it. I have no reason to doubt you. Both cases need to be dealt with. And now that you mention the name, it does ring a bell.

If there is any truth to that (I haven't looked it up) it needs to be dealt with harshly and swiftly. After the Milwaukee shooting, there was video of rioters saying blacks need to go burn down white neighborhoods. That didn't make national news (and if it did, it was briefly). Both of these instances should have been dealt with harshly. Yet, cases where there is some gray area and need to be evaluated before coming to a conclusion, are the ones that cause problems after the fact.

I'm pretty sure most here realize the maliciousness these words carry when used in certain contexts. I'm also pretty sure that ignorance plays a part in people that cannot use them without getting offended because the intent isn't there. Political correctness is getting out of hand and people can't discuss, rationally, the topic of said political correctness because they either don't understand the lack of malicious intent in rational discussions or they're just that thin-skinned. How can we address the situation of bigotry and racism if we can't discuss it without people getting offended by every other word? I've gotten into some heated debates with some people on here, but I generally give SS posters a great deal of credit by being able to differentiate. Maybe you should too.

Did he do something wrong to warrant being cut? It appears Vogl knows something the rest of us don't. Unless, of course, he's just speculating which is pretty poor journalism.

What was Vogl doing at the club with Evander that night?