which proves your assumption to be completely wrong.

end of story
- Peter Richards

What assumption is that?

Someone getting fired or resigning does not automatically prove anything.

You’re mad because he doesn’t want to condemn a guy without knowing what really happened?
- Dkos

no one is mad.

He's the guy who actually is assuming things. While out of the other side of his mouth, telling me I don't know what actually happened. With no awareness that he is doing so. Can't make it up.
- MJL

go back and reread. it will benefit.

go back and reread. it will benefit.
- Peter Richards

Right after you do. You're claiming I have made an assumption. When?

What did the PA find when they were digging further? I haven't seen anything that suggests he was flippant with the right to privacy. I think it's a shame that in today's world, something like that is enough to get someone fired. Which is basically what happened.
- MJL

Well of course he had an agenda. Not everything someone does, regardless of his reputation has evil intent. His agenda could literally have been what he said. To get the know his players better and form relationships.
- MJL

If you hand over your phone to show the coach pictures, have you given consent? You're wrong that I can't wrap my head around it. There is a difference between knowing that something is a certain way, based on the current climate that we live in. Versus thinking whether it should be wrong or not. Here is what it boils down to, to me. I don't see anything wrong with ASKING players to see some family pictures in an attempt to get to know them. Apparently, he was also sharing his. Now if there were conditions attached to it, such as a player would be punished somehow for not sharing, then that would be an issue. I don't know that the latter happened.
- MJL

I believe in due process. His past history and reputation does not automatically mean that the complete facts should be ignored. Based on what I know, I don't think this rose to the level of a fire-able offense. That's my opinion. You're making a fool of yourself with your claims that I don't understand it. I understand how the world works. There are a number of players who also found it to be a non-issue and they were involved. Did they also fail to understand any of this?
- MJL

Right after you do. You're claiming I have made an assumption. When?
- MJL

the man resigned. (not fired as you were stating earlier)

shows there was probably more to the story. but also, no innocent man i have ever known would resign.

the man resigned. (not fired as you were stating earlier)

shows there was probably more to the story. but also, no innocent man i have ever known would resign.
- Peter Richards

Fired was addressed. Again, where is the assumption that you claimed that I made. I'm still waiting.

Here is what you're not understanding. There is always more to the story. However as I stated. I'm not going to look at circumstantial evidence or make assumptions. In the course of my comments on this, I have done the exact opposite of making assumptions. I based my opinion on what has been written and reported that I'm aware of.

You have made a number of assumptions, while accusing me of doing that. You have not backed up your claims.

Fired was addressed. Again, where is the assumption that you claimed that I made. I'm still waiting.

Here is what you're not understanding. There is always more to the story. However as I stated. I'm not going to look at circumstantial evidence or make assumptions. In the course of my comments on this, I have done the exact opposite of making assumptions. I based my opinion on what has been written and reported that I'm aware of.

You have made a number of assumptions, while accusing me of doing that. You have not backed up your claims.
- MJL

which is an assumption.


look up the definition

end of story

which is an assumption.


look up the definition

end of story
- Peter Richards

Basing my opinion on the information that I have read on what has been reported on what happened is an assumption? Okay!


Please, please keep going.

Basing my opinion on the information that I have read on what has been reported on what happened is an assumption? Okay!


Please, please keep going.
- MJL

You have admitted to not knowing all the facts, so yes it is. hysterical

accepting that information as the only fact or exact truth is the assumption. formulating your opinion with only that information is subjective.

i'll wait for the spin.

You have admitted to not knowing all the facts, so yes it is. hysterical

accepting that information as the only fact or exact truth is the assumption. formulating your opinion with only that information is subjective.

i'll wait for the spin.
- Peter Richards

Even if all that was true, that is not an assumption.

You contradicted yourself here. On one statement, you're saying that I admitted to not knowing all of the facts then out of the other side of your mouth. State that I accepted that information as the only fact or exact truth. Those statements are in conflict with one another.

What you've proved here is that not only do you not know what an assumption is. You also apparently don't know what subjective means.

Basing my opinion on the information and facts that I'm aware of, is not basing my opinion on personal feelings, tastes or opinions. If it was the latter, it would be subjective.

Conclusion: You're full of poop across the board but by all means, please continue.

Even if all that was true, that is not an assumption.

You contradicted yourself here. On one statement, you're saying that I admitted to not knowing all of the facts then out of the other side of your mouth. State that I accepted that information as the only fact or exact truth. Those statements are in conflict with one another.

What you've proved here is that not only do you not know what an assumption is. You also apparently don't know what subjective means.

Basing my opinion on the information and facts that I'm aware of, is not basing my opinion on personal feelings, tastes or opinions. If it was the latter, it would be subjective.

Conclusion: You're full of poop across the board but by all means, please continue.
- MJL

lmao, this spin is hilarious. but easy to see it reeks of desperation. the googled definition is the best. there is more to subjective vs objective than you posted. so this was disingenuous on your part.

Saying you didn't assume anything in disingenuous. but not surprising as you have been caught lying before.

your continued side stepping and changing the focus is pure entertainment.

no contradiction. they are clearly two different things, but would expect nothing less as you are reaching and grasping for straws.

please continue.

what evidence did you use to make your opinion?

list the subjective and objective evidence.

lmao, this spin is hilarious. but easy to see it reeks of desperation. the googled definition is the best. there is more to subjective vs objective than you posted. so this was disingenuous on your part.

Saying you didn't assume anything in disingenuous. but not surprising as you have been caught lying before.

your continued side stepping and changing the focus is pure entertainment.

no contradiction. they are clearly two different things, but would expect nothing less as you are reaching and grasping for straws.

please continue.

what evidence did you use to make your opinion?

list the subjective and objective evidence.
- Peter Richards

Your reply here is empty rhetoric and unintelligent babble.

In one statement you said that I admitted to not knowing all the facts and in the next you stated that I claimed the facts that I used are the only facts. LOL

You can't see the conflict and contradiction there? Of course you can't.

The evidence that I used is what was reported in articles such as the Columbus Dispatch and comments from players such as Jenner, Gaudreau and Werenski.

You are the accuser so the burden is on you to back up your claims. You've failed to do so in numerous posts. Not surprising. You're incapable. Yet you claim I'm sidestepping.

By all means, please continue. Dig a deeper and deeper hole.

Your reply here is empty rhetoric and unintelligent babble.

In one statement you said that I admitted to not knowing all the facts and in the next you stated that I claimed the facts that I used are the only facts. LOL

You can't see the conflict and contradiction there? Of course you can't.

The evidence that I used is what was reported in articles such as the Columbus Dispatch and comments from players such as Jenner, Gaudreau and Werenski.

You are the accuser so the burden is on you to back up your claims. You've failed to do so in numerous posts. Not surprising. You're incapable. Yet you claim I'm sidestepping.

By all means, please continue. Dig a deeper and deeper hole.
- MJL

so you know all the facts then, not just the facts presented? clearly two different things.

what do you call three players opinions and their perspective?

so you know all the facts then, not just the facts presented? clearly two different things.

what do you call three players opinions and their perspective?
- Peter Richards

I'm on record, as your previous posts alluded to, as only knowing what I have read that I have seen reported. That statement is open ended, meaning that there is a possibility of other information being out there, that I'm not aware of.