First of all, read the post from "Kemballin'" immediately above yours. It's lunacy.
Second, I have no idea what your problem is with my "approach." I asked a question. Does the fact that I asked a question hurt your feelings? To you that's "an over the top defense"? I mean, you're clearly enamored of your own intellect, but you seem to be way off the mark on this one. I noted the inconsistency of simultaneously blaming Calipari for whatever foibles his players have while also contending that he deserves no credit for what they do on the court. And to you that's an "over the top defense"? I think you need to rethink that one.
And, for the record, this board's collective fixation on Calipari is embarrassing. It's not a mandatory requirement of posting on here that you buy into all the tinfoil hat nonsense that gets thrown around about UK.
I get what you're doing. I have no problem with bringing balance or rationality to the forum. I've engaged periodically with it myself. What I see to be the major difference between us is that you have zero tolerance for irrationality regarding certain things. I may feel the same way you do about people being irrational in a particular topic but I see a value to letting people vent.
I prefer to wait until the mob appears to be getting out of control before stepping in. At that point the value of venting is superseded by my perception there is a potential to do violence. It's a gray area when to step in and when to let things play out.
I chose to engage you because I respect you as a poster. I also feel you are not fragile and I could use our discussion as a teaching moment to others.
I felt some advice would be worthy. I guess I didn't need to be snarky with my first post but I really wanted to get your attention because of the value I perceive that you bring to this forum. Incessant challenge loses effectiveness and respect over time. I have no problem with scolding someone. But I use it as a last resort. Scolding or isolating people gets the job done quickly if the result intended is to make people afraid to express themselves. But it doesn't allow people to make a committed change. The way to get the most effective change is to let people determine if the way they are looking at or doing things is in their best interest and/or the greater good of the world. Most of us have moments of irrationality but on the whole are very rational. It's hard to move in the best direction when someone puts a foot on our neck.
This is my advice to anyone. If someone does or says something and that action creates anger or resentment within us, we first should try to understand why it has that effect on us before proceeding to react. Or if we do react in the heat of the moment to reflect later on why that behavior triggered us. Most of us justify our actions and reactions and there is alway something that gives us justification. So this is less about the way we should proceed but more about why things bother us. There is usually a reason why one guy can laugh at abuse and another one can't. None of us have the same computer and programming. Our input/output is contingent upon this. We can fix other people somewhat, but can only really fix ourselves. That doesn't mean we don't offer advice or try to guide one another.
