@Afos22
Well you just proved my point far better than I ever could :)
And from what lofty perch do you imagine you are to be “stooping” to Gail’s level?
Ha. You should be so lucky !
pssst.
The UNDERSTANDABLE way of what you’re valiantly trying to get across (while failing miserably) is the following:
“I refuse to stoop to that level of IMMATURITY”
Its really difficult to stoop to maturity. It doesn’t really make much sense, logically.
Think about if for a minute…..
Now that you’ve had a moment. Most people stoop to something below them. They aspire to something higher.
Difficult to imagine maturity being lower than immaturity, isn’t it ? From what exalted position does someone stoop to maturity?
Being godlike I would suppose. But difficult to know when dealing with the illogical.
BUT. To bring it back to the discussion of the original Q.
People are getting increasingly frustrated with your illogical definitions of sport based solely upon your own mind while ignoring clear definitions from authorities both current and several centuries old.
The Olympic claim the right to define sports based upon a clear historical lineage.
You apparently feel perfectly free to ignore that while insisting upon YOUR definition.
That’s illogical.
They aren’t just “any website”. They have centuries of tradition behind them. According to your illogical criteria, wrestling can’t be defined as a sport because the outcome is determined. By judging.
And yet it is one of the original Olympic sports from the very first Olympics. So your position fails the logical test.
Just like your grasp of the principles of standard language. I assume you are American?
Again pervasive lack of logic leaves me unconvinced that you know what you’re talking about.
Calling you %@#*¥ would be a personal attack.
Pointing out flaws in your logic is an observation based upon what you choose to publish in an open forum.
Get the difference?