cmoney23
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,654
- Reaction score
- 2,119
Please. My intelligence isn't up for discussion or dispute. And you don't even believe what you just said. You're just trying to save face. So we'll move right along to your next point.
Skreeetttcch!!! Brakes applied.
First, no, that's not what the headline states or implies. I used to write headlines and have them written for me. And I was taught you make the headline as accurate as possible albeit brief. Your statement would be interpreted by many - if not most - as talking about the entire draft. If you were talking about the Cowboys alone, you should have used the prepositional phrase for the Cowboys, i.e., Noah Brown: Steal of the draft for the Cowboys? That is more accurate, if indeed what you're saying is true, and I have my doubts.
Second, what's so funny about this is you criticized me for not communicating effectively, but you apparently don't understand basic forms of grammar and how they're applied in language. "for the Cowboys" is a KEY prepositional phrase needed to understand your thought. Without it, the average person would interpret the headline to mean the entire draft.
Third, the explanation you're now giving isn't what you said in your initial response to me. I guess after a few days you thought you found an excuse. Fortunately, some of us know the appropriate use of language.
But the poster was saying that every team board is talking about a player they drafted as "the steal of the draft" not just the "steal of the draft for their team."
Nice try twisting what was said to fit your belated explanation/excuse.
Please stop. The context of your sentence defines "the draft." In the first example, we know that the "draft" being talked about is the entire draft because the entire draft was on television, not just an individual team's draft. In the second example, the pronoun "we" defines what is being discussed in the sentence. But YOUR headline DOES NOT give enough information to understand it any way other than it applying to the entire draft.
You're trying to con a grammarian.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Sigh.
Follow the bouncing ball of logic.
1. My initial comment was based on your headline.
2. You got offended by my comment about your headline and my hyperbolic statement about Jerry Rice.
3. The discussion disintegrated from there.
Whatever yours or other posters' point beyond that, I have no idea. So if they support you or don't isn't really my concern.
You merely had to say, "Tyke1doe, I didn't mean the entire draft but just the steal for the Cowboys." Problem solved. But you did not. Instead, you took offense and started talking about how I'm not communicating effectively - an ironic statement considering how you're NOW trying to explain what you meant.
Second, consensus does not determine correctness. At one point in American history, consensus supported slavery. Pointing to what everyone does or what most do is not the sole way to determine right or wrong.
Third, my point beyond my definition of steal was a grammatical one. And I am absolutely, unequivocally, emphatically correct as it relates to the use of the article the, the inappropriate and incomplete nature of your headline and the use of the phrase "the steal of the draft". Ask any English teacher, professor, PhD candidate and they will tell you the same thing I've told you. Now, whether you or your friends understand this is another matter. But I am absolutely certain of my position on this.
But you seek validation from consensus, which, in the case of this board, can be fickle and bias. I seek validation based on established truth, in this case, the appropriate use of grammar and language and the analytical way we would determine who or what determines "the steal of the draft."
Maybe next time, you should be a bit more careful with your headlines/language and less sensitive to criticism.
WOW... while you are long winded. You are not correct.
Let me lead with this. I currently work in the newspaper industry. I have for 9 years. Please save me your "expertise". While I'm sure living in your mothers basement is very good experience for internet trolling, it isn't helping you much when it comes to your comprehension of basic information. (should I insert an emoji here? nah... )
I will stick to the facts and hopefully you will "get it" this time...
The fact is, the headline was finished with a question mark. This was used by me, the "author" to ask the question "Is he the steal of the draft?" I know, because I wrote it. FACT
Your statement about Jerry Rice was not hyperbole and that was very clear by my reply, that was hyperbole (you can tell by my sarcastic eye roll emoji, that was used to convey sarcasm) and how you responded to it. Stating Brown would have to be the best WR of all time to be the steal of the draft. FACT.
Now, you are being as long winded as possible, because you are a loser and have nothing better to do than discuss grammar, incorrectly, with someone on the internet. FACT.
In closing, I work a full time job, have a wife with two kids and am busy. I don't have time to get on here everyday and post to morons. So feel lucky, I wasted a lot of time dealing with you. FACT
