Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey
Because, you requested a "basis" to disprove your theory. That assumes you have a basis to prove it. It cuts both ways.
|
No, it means once you have my interpretation you should have a clear and concise ruling to show that I'm wrong. But you don't. It doesn't cut both ways because I never said your interp was wrong. I have an interp and you have absolutely nothing you can point to to say it is wrong. Unlike some folks here I have the ability to realize that just because someone disagrees with me it doesn't mean they are wrong, or that they are lazy, or they're dumb, that they are a coward.
And unless Camron writes the NFHS rules all his bloviating means nothing, especially his garbage about people not being honest with themselves because our brains aren't synced with his brain.
