Quote:
Originally Posted by NFump
You can't read what isn't there nor can you disregard what isn't there.
|
Again, pure, unadulterated bull$hit. It's all "there", and has been "there", in what is currently post #88 on this thread. You just didn't bother to read it.
Apparently, instead, you went to your outdated version of the MLBUM, found a case play that was kinda', sorta' similar (but not really) and based your erroneous argument on that. Despite the fact that the case play you read is "6)" and the one johnny posted is "13)" - even AFTER I suggested you hadn't actually read johnny's case play.
Quote:
|
Even after reading my post stating my version was 2002 you still posted that smart *** reply rather than using tact and simply stating it was in another version.
|
Sorry, pard, you're making an inaccurate assumption. I had not seen your post at the time I posted my reply. When I DID see your reply, I added the helpful "P.S." to my post to let you know that the case play was in the 2009 version but not in the 2002 version.
You're welcome. Glad I could help you correct your misunderstanding(s) in regard to the question.
And, if a person continues to make willfully ignorant posts, even AFTER having been presented with authoritative documentation which disproves his position - because he didn't even bother to READ IT, lah me - I will feel free to make whatever smart-a$$ remarks I think appropriate.
If you don't like that, there is a pretty simple remedy.
JM