Kim Mulkey at it again

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... and I agree. However, did you note my on-topic (high school) contributions to this thread regarding the timelines of the technical foul call (my very first comment in the thread, and so far, the only one to discuss it), the possibility of an intentional foul on the collision (replied to and discussed with Raymond and bob jenkins), and the impact of wearing a mask while officiating (only after JRutledge broached the topic)? I didn't think it necessary to expound on the actual technical foul itself because I thought that it was very apparent to all that it was much deserved, thus causing me to branch out to other things that I spotted in the video. On the other hand, I can see how my on-topic contributions could have gotten lost in the shuffle, with my off-topic musings (coach fashion and official fashion) causing some to not read my on-topic comments. It's a chance that I'm willing to take. It appears that some read my off-topic musings, since some respond negativity to them. It also appears that Forum members respond to my on-topic posts (even those hidden in a sea of off-topic posts), because they respond with agreement, disagreement, criticism, clarification, etc.

You're unnecessarily wordy response only proves the point that was being made.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Was all this seriously necessary?

I am not known to back down from a challenge. Everyone here knows that. They also know that I will admit mistakes, and often apologize for such. My posts in this thread were not, in my opinion, mistakes. Others may have a different opinion, which is fine with me, but those differing opinions will not go unchallenged by me.

Originally Posted by Raymond

You're unnecessarily wordy response only proves the point that was being made.

I will never disagree that many of my posts are "wordy", thus no need for proof, I agree.