• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Wisguy

Wisguy's Flameout

23 posts in this topic

Unless you're in 8th grade right now, the bold is a blatant lie. Do tell us again your thoughts on soccer, or women, and a variety of other topics about which you've been incredibly rude.

Nonsense. I've pissed off a few people here because I have voiced strong opinions on certain subjects and several people have disliked what I said not because I was unfair, inaccurate, made personal attacks or used profanity (which I refrain from doing), but because they were unable to come up with better, more intelligent responses and their egos were too inflated to admit someone else had a better point. I'm engaging in a discussion for the purpose of discourse, not for the purpose of feeling better about myself by putting others down. That's not being rude. If someone makes a dumb and inaccurate point, am I supposed to pretend that he's right? Are you "rude" if you say "No" when on a 140 yard hole, your playing partner's second putt comes up 5 feet short and he says "That's a par for me, right?" Claiming I'm lying is not just ironically being completely rude, but it's altogether inaccurate - in fact, if one of the two of us is making dishonest statements, it is not me.  I was surprised you made such a comment and waited a few days to respond, figuring you were just having a bad day and would come back and edit or delete your comment when you were in a more sensible frame of mind, but I guess that's not going to happen.
There are more than a few people on this site who engage in name calling (which I do not do). Why are you getting on my case but you don't bother with people engaging in juvenile conduct that surely must break the site rules?

Erik, we both know why. You're still harboring major resentment against me because I made two comments months ago that really set you off and enraged you and you simply cannot let it go. First, I said something to you that produced a reaction in you roughly the same as the reaction you'd cause in a more extreme member of the Taliban if you told him you just wiped your arse on pages torn out his holy book. I said, very accurately, that take away the history and tradition thing, and The Old Course at St. Andrews is a dull, unattractive, and rather poorly maintained course (your obsessive adoration blinded you but there were bare patches on at least one green at last summer's British Open). I have no idea why you are so obsessed with St. Andrews, but other than some soccer hooligans who are looking to cause harm to their rival fans (and even that may be more about being violent than being a passionate fan), I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being as obsessed about any aspect of a sport as you are about St. Andrews. I simply cannot fathom how anyone could be so blindly passionate about a golf course.  I question if you'd react that strongly to someone besmirching your wife's virtue.
You accuse me of being "rude" about women. I believe the specific comment to which you are referring was a comment I made in The Grill Room forum grousing about women's haircuts and it was the male equivalent of a woman griping about how men never want to stop and ask for directions - hardly egregious. I think your eager participation in a thread objectifying women (the "Beautiful Women" thread - exactly how many hot babe photos did you post in there Erik, a dozen, two dozen, more?), your starting a "Michelle Wie has Man Hands" thread, or your eagerness to disparage women as athletes in practically every LPGA thread in which you've posted in the past half year or more shows you to be a hypocrite for commenting about anyone else being a chauvinist.
And that brings me to the second comment I made that pissed you off so badly so many months ago: I said that the contempt you voice for LPGA players is fueled in large part by the fact that you are jealous of and resentful toward golfers who you feel have skills and perhaps a work ethic that are inferior to yours (I have no idea if you are 100% correct or altogether delusional), yet those women get to make their living playing golf on a professional tour and you do not.  To that second thought, I'll add the following: even though I'm sure there's more drudgery involved in being a golf pro than may be readily apparent, you're nonetheless earning a living doing your favorite activity/hobby. Most people don't like many, if any, aspects of their jobs and would tell you to open your eyes to the real world and quit whining about not having your every last dream come true.
So go ahead, delete this post and ban me from the site.  Or surprise me and be man enough to admit that there's more than a little truth to what I've said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

I've pissed off a few people here because I have voiced strong opinions on certain subjects and several people have disliked what I said not because I was unfair, inaccurate, made personal attacks or used profanity (which I refrain from doing), but because they were unable to come up with better, more intelligent responses and their egos were too inflated to admit someone else had a better point.

You've pissed off people here because you're a misogynist jerk who thinks that your opinion is the only one that's right. When people responded with valid points, you said things like "you don't get it" and "Or maybe I really, really dislike every single solitary thing about adults playing and/or watching adult soccer."

Yep, not exactly an "intelligent response" from someone without an "inflated ego."

That's not being rude.

This is:

Sheeesh, I have to wonder, are some of you secretly wearing little tricolor French flag bikini briefs?

And that's just on the "sports teams you hate" thread. Let's not start on your feelings about women, tipping, hairstyles, clothing, and several other topics.

Claiming I'm lying is not just ironically being completely rude, but it's altogether inaccurate - in fact, if one of the two of us is making dishonest statements, it is not me.  I was surprised you made such a comment and waited a few days to respond, figuring you were just having a bad day and would come back and edit or delete your comment when you were in a more sensible frame of mind, but I guess that's not going to happen.

Let's take a look at what you said originally, the thing to which I responded:

No, not really.  I made a rather general statement.  Club Ho, in his eagerness to assert what a terrific guy he is by putting someone else down (something I confess I used to do but discontinued around the middle of 9th grade), jumped to conclusions and chose to attribute to me a very narrow, specific interpretation of my words, even though there was no basis for so doing, in order to support his feeble attempts to claim I am an annoying fool.

You've "put someone else down" repeatedly on this site. It's your entire MO. It's woven into the fabric of virtually every post you make here. In other words, you're lying. You "discontinued" putting people down around the middle of ninth grade, yet you continue to do so with almost every post.

There are more than a few people on this site who engage in name calling (which I do not do). Why are you getting on my case but you don't bother with people engaging in juvenile conduct that surely must break the site rules?

You've engaged in plenty of juvenile conduct, and though you've not used the form "You are a ___(name)_____" you've called people names. You've called them ignorant. You've called them sissies, uneducated, cheap, etc.

Erik, we both know why. You're still harboring major resentment against me because I made two comments months ago that really set you off and enraged you and you simply cannot let it go.

You're wrong if you think I was enraged by anything said on this site. And really, the Taliban? Grow up dude.

I said, very accurately, that take away the history and tradition thing, and The Old Course at St. Andrews is a dull, unattractive, and rather poorly maintained course (your obsessive adoration blinded you but there were bare patches on at least one green at last summer's British Open).

You're still wrong about how the Old Course is poorly maintained. You're wrong about bare patches. And you're ignorant to it having never been there. This is a continuing issue with you - your opinions are "right" and everyone else's are "wrong" despite the fact that opinions can't be right or wrong.

I wasn't at all enraged by anything you said. I simply wrote you off as a moron. An imbecile. An idiot.

I have no idea why you are so obsessed with St. Andrews

I'm not obsessed (are you going for a record on how many things you can get wrong in one post?), but unlike you, I've at least been there and played it.

And that brings me to the second comment I made that pissed you off so badly so many months ago: I said that the contempt you voice for LPGA players is fueled in large part by the fact that you are jealous of and resentful toward golfers who you feel have skills and perhaps a work ethic that are inferior to yours

Wrong again.

To that second thought, I'll add the following: even though I'm sure there's more drudgery involved in being a golf pro than may be readily apparent, you're nonetheless earning a living doing your favorite activity/hobby. Most people don't like many, if any, aspects of their jobs and would tell you to open your eyes to the real world and quit whining about not having your every last dream come true.

I'm quite happy with my job and role in life. So I'm not sure where that's coming from, but thanks.

So go ahead, delete this post and ban me from the site.  Or surprise me and be man enough to admit that there's more than a little truth to what I've said.

And wrong for the final time in your post. What truth? Suffice to say I know myself better than you know me. I know when I'm upset. You're an idiot and an asshat, and while we will ban members for the latter, it takes even more asshattery than you've managed to offer at this point. But keep going… I'm sure you'll get there eventually if you work hard enough. The first step will be a trip to the Penalty Box, which you've not even experienced yet.

You are, however, now restricted from this thread. Your entire post was a personal attack with mistruths and did not even remotely touch on the topic. It all started with your lie - that you don't "put someone else down."

Guess what, @Wisguy - I couldn't care much less about you or your (unfounded, ancient) opinions. Aside from the time I occasionally take to respond to your posts, I don't think about you. Within about ten seconds of hitting submit on this post, I will stop thinking about you once again, until your next stupid post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Your rant was off topic, so I moved it to its own thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

@Wisguy -Other people wont say it so I will- You are a ****ing joke of a man and one of the most easily upset and easily angered people I have ever met. ONe sentence responses result in massive posts from you that do nothing but piss on the original person.- **** off @Wisguy .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Quote:
I wasn't at all enraged by anything you said. I simply wrote you off as a moron. An imbecile. An idiot.

That's my favorite line in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Please don't feed the Trolls.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't feed the Trolls.....

I wouldn't really classify @Wisguy as a troll, he's more of a prick with serious anger issues and a penchant for verbosity. Pretty unpleasant fellow but he can be amusing from a safe distance, and by safe I mean outside of spittle range. I know that I, for one, have been amused by this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Eric, your juvenile name-calling in lieu of actually addressing the points I made demonstrates clearly that I was correct. My response to your comment was direct, on point, and explained precisely with examples why you were wrong.  You responded with the maturity of a 13 year old boy on a video game website with conclusory statements, no more.  In fact, your post said little more than the oft-heard playground chant "IKNOWYOUAREBUTWHATAMI? ~~"IKNOWYOUAREBUTWHATAMI?" .  Your post, childish personal attacks and all, was a rant.

My comments were far from being "absurd" or a "random rant."  I was addressing your completely unjustified and quite frankly defamatory accusation that I was a liar.  Maybe people call you a liar all the time and you've grown immune to such statements, but I cannot recall the last time a rational person called me a liar and I take great offense at such an unfounded and derogatory accusation.

Some newbie member posted about recently playing at St. Andrews and being disappointed and you threw a fit, disagreeing strongly with him, as I knew you would do when I first saw the title to his thread.  But no, I'm just making things up and being ignorant.  And keep kicking that dead horse about how awful the LPGA players are.  Golf Digest came out with their list of best golf pros in the US a few months ago, a list that contained not just a few names but the names of hundreds of golf pros (i.e. not a tremendously selective list).  Correct me if I'm wrong, but your name was not on it, was it?  Restating contemptuously for the fourteenth time that the LPGA pros don't compare statistically with the male pros isn't going to get you on that list and isn't going to get you your PGA Tour card, is it?

Unlike some of the other people on this website (and the last two posts you've exchanged with me show that you're in that camp), I'm honest and mature enough to admit when I'm wrong or someone else has made a better argument. I understand that everyone makes mistakes.   It doesn't happen often and hasn't happened much here, but if someone does point out major flaws in my arguments, I'd much rather admit that I was wrong than be thought an idiot for continuing to defend an untenable position.

In fact, I'll even concede some degree of error now.  I haven't read my post on soccer for many months and forgot what exactly I said, as some moderator (I believe Jamo), locked me out of that thread and at least one or two others in which he found himself unable to respond to points I was making and threw a hissy fit, so I couldn't read it.  But I logged off and went back and read that post and I'll concede that I probably should not have said that all soccer fans are less bright than the typical Bears fan (who I said are dumb for blaming their quarterback for playing poorly when he's injured and then blaming him for being gutless when he can no longer play because of those injuries).  I probably did have a bad day when I wrote that - I should have criticized only the sport, not its fans, even though I was anticipating arguments (lame ones at that) that I've heard many times before from soccer fans.  However, Erik, you couldn't even come up with the one thing that I said that was arguably inappropriate.  The French bikini brief comment was funny, clearly was not intended to be a serious or spiteful attack against anyone, and it's rarely, if ever, inappropriate to mock the French.  A single, only arguably excessively critical post does not make me a "blatant liar."  However, I will defend the rest of my comments in that thread by saying the following:  a) unlike many of the other people posting on that thread, I actually explained and very adequately justified my opinions; and b) the title of the post was "Sports Teams You Absolutely Hate" - it wasn't "Sports teams that cause you to have slightly-less-than-super-duper-pleasant, happy-happy feelings."  If you don't like people expressing strong opinions, then stay out of threads that clearly state in their titles that they are inviting all posters to make them.

I have a relatively low tolerance for fools and foolishness.  Make intelligent, fair, and reasonable comments and we won't have any issues.  The problem is that when I do explain exactly why the points I am making are correct, I get labeled either a jerk because I am right or else people say I am too verbose (which sometimes is true).  If I'm so damn wrong, then make a more intelligent argument.  If you can't, then reassess who is correct and who is not.  Be mad at yourself for being mistaken, not at me for pointing out that fact.

At this point, I don't anticipate that I'll receive any comments in response that deserve my further time or effort.  I'm dealing with an ego that cannot admit he is wrong, plus a few follower-types that have to tag on their "ME TOO!!!" comments.  I've made my arguments, provided logical reasons and examples to support them, and I think there's no point in paying any further attention to this thread, which clearly was created with spiteful, juvenile motivation (see its title).  Contrary to your contention, the significant majority of my posts here have been solid, constructive and worthwhile contributions to discussions on the sport of golf and when I've been able to provide a word of help or assistance to those seeking it, I have tried to help others (if I was such a jerk as you contend, why would I condemn other members for attacking new members who claim to be mere teenagers?).  This site has grown tiresome and I think I'll take a bit of a break from the Sand Trap.  The several angry types here making posts far more influenced by ego than reason, plus the incessant whining about slow play, have soured me on the sport rather than made me more eager to play it.  There is a foot of snow on the ground and I'm going to forget about golf for a few months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you really expect me to read all of that? Seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I dont know how you do it erik.-Dealing with these crazy people. What ghastly Horrible conditions! [VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A--3uLuSwGE[/VIDEO]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I dont know how you do it erik.-Dealing with these crazy people. What ghastly Horrible conditions! [VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A--3uLuSwGE[/VIDEO]

Yeah, ghastly indeed, kind of like being in Disneyworld as a 7 year old with an unlimited budget for tasty treats. Looks nice, and I just read a book about St. Andrews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I said, very accurately, that take away the history and tradition thing, and The Old Course at St. Andrews is a dull, unattractive, and rather poorly maintained course (your obsessive adoration blinded you but there were bare patches on at least one green at last summer's British Open). I have no idea why you are so obsessed with St. Andrews, but other than some soccer hooligans who are looking to cause harm to their rival fans (and even that may be more about being violent than being a passionate fan), I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being as obsessed about any aspect of a sport as you are about St. Andrews. I simply cannot fathom how anyone could be so blindly passionate about a golf course.  I question if you'd react that strongly to someone besmirching your wife's virtue.

The Open Championship was at Muirfield last year, not St. Andrews. And no, there weren't "bare patches" on the green, and you were inaccurate saying that the course was dull, unattractive and poorly maintained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

This site has grown tiresome and I think I'll take a bit of a break from the Sand Trap.

Good idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I should buy a lottery ticket!-Except that this did not require any guessing at all-Was bound to come true.[quote name="Phil McGleno" url="/t/71712/wisguys-flameout#post_933737"] @Wisguy -Other people wont say it so I will- ONe sentence responses result in massive posts from you that do nothing but piss on the original person.-[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I wouldn't really classify @Wisguy as a troll, he's more of a prick with serious anger issues and a penchant for verbosity. Pretty unpleasant fellow but he can be amusing from a safe distance, and by safe I mean outside of spittle range. I know that I, for one, have been amused by this thread.

I guess I am the only person that disagrees with the consensus here?

It is of little concern to me, but let me just be on the record with my dissent.

Carry on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't really classify @Wisguy as a troll, he's more of a prick with serious anger issues and a penchant for verbosity. Pretty unpleasant fellow but he can be amusing from a safe distance, and by safe I mean outside of spittle range. I know that I, for one, have been amused by this thread.

I guess I am the only person that disagrees with the consensus here?

It is of little concern to me, but let me just be on the record with my dissent.

Carry on...

I guess it depends on which part of Ernie's post you disagree with.

- Ernie's certainly right that Wisguy is not a troll.

- Prick?  Yeah, he comes across that way to me too.  Phan-like in that his opinions are passed off as fact or gospel.  He doesn't say "I don't like soccer," but rather "soccer is the dumbest sport around, played and watched by imbeciles."  It's hard to think a guy who takes his opinion to those lengths is not a prick.

- Serious anger issues?  I don't see that.  His posts and responses seem like they're coming from a calm person to me.  Super strong "opinions," but he doesn't seem angry to me.

- Penchant for verbosity?  Nobody could disagree with that.  I know once I see his name that I'm going to have to scroll the mouse to get to the end of the post. ;)

- Unpleasant fellow?  At times certainly, but aren't we all?  I think this view may be skewed because he only seems interested in posting controversial things.  He doesn't seem to even come to TST for swing theory stuff, or music, or anything that's just "fun."

-Amusing from a safe distance?  Yeah, I agree with that.  I don't usually have much desire to converse with him, but it's sometimes fun to watch from the outside.

-----------------------

For the record, I think the last thing I posted in regards to him was actually in his defense.  it was in a thread about slow play or something like that and somebody else (a newbie, I think) misunderstood his comment and jumped on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I guess I am the only person that disagrees with the consensus here? It is of little concern to me, but let me just be on the record with my dissent.   Carry on...

Perhaps I should have prefaced my comment with an IMO. I also think it's incredibly lame that he uses the fact that nobody bothers to retort to his wall of texts rants with an equally verbose retort as some kind of evidence of his own superiority. I can't speak for others but I don't bother because I couldn't be bothered . It's just as satisfying, perhaps more so, to simply roll my eyes and move on. I may occasional mock him when he is being particularly ass-hattish but that is pretty much the extent of the degree of attention that the ******* guy warrants. Plus, I really don't care for the whole internet tough guy persona, it's weak sauce and I'm sure he doesn't act like that in real life or he'd be spending an inordinate amount of time picking up his teeth. But whatever...I hear what you're saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Golf Evolution
  • Posts

    • GAME GOLF - Digital Tracking System
      Well, I went ahead and bit. Amazon Warehouse Deals has a few for $86 each. I had a $25 Amazon GC from Christmas, so after tax, it's going to be $66. It says the packaging is damaged, but no mention of problems with the device. Here's hoping it comes in good shape, and that it warms up pretty quickly so I can use it!
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (February 2016)
      The tournament I was supposed to play in was cancelled , so I played in a shotgun start today. The group I was in played at a quicker pace than the group in front and the group behind us, so I had plenty of opportunities for practicing greenside chipping and bunker shots as well as putting.
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      While I expect it's largely accurate, I was more interested in a link to the actual quote than your paraphrase. The context of the question and interview plus the exact wording gives a clearer understanding of the statement. I accept deeper field of talent, I don't accept that it's automatically 'a ton' or an order of magnitude greater. What's the average score relative to the field (or % making the cut) in the PGA for the Pros vs. the PGA qualifiers from then to now? That could provide some insight to relative gap between majors field depth then and now. I am certain it's gotten harder for the PGA qualifiers to make it tot he weekend. I am less certain by how much the margin has shifted. The reason I stress the Majors and Opens is that size of field and openness to qualifiers is very important in making the top competitors face many elite players with potential to have a hot run of form. You're comparing apples to oranges there. That was ~ 1.5 million players in the U.S., not the world population of golfers. About 26 million golfers today in the U.S. Worldwide in 1920 who knows? But including Europe, Australia, and other 'commonwealth' countries it was likely double that - maybe triple. Also I can find no credible estimate that supports 100 million current golfers worldwide. Most generous is about 61 million. While there are a lot of clubs world-wide, participation of 'casual' unaffiliated golfers per club is not going to be the same as in the U.S. and that's the only way I get a number close to 100 million based on actual data. U.S. golf population talent base roughly tripled between Jack and Tiger and I expect worldwide it was a similar rate of increase. I think since the 1920's the U.S. has had about half the wold golf population, though that's started to decline of late as Asian participation increases. Jack was head and shoulders above highly competitive fields for nearly a generation similar to Tiger. I don't think human abilities change by orders of magnitude in short spans of time so I expect that Jack was an outlier of similar human ability as Tiger. How close and who has the edge is IMO debatable. Were Tiger's achievements (esp. the 'beat the field' streak) tougher than Jack's because of field depth, yes. How much more I'm not as sure as you. Did a relative 'competitive break' from full field events offered by the WGC's help Tiger there? Don't know but it's possible. Combine Tiger's regular wins and Majors and I have no problem giving him the greatest player of all time nod. I just don't think it's as cut and dried or by as large a margin as you seem to. They didn't play against each other so your confidence isn't any more a fact than my uncertainty. We're both estimating. Size of the field actually competing matters too, not just who wasn't invited to the party. I like the idea of a top player field and enjoy watching the events, but if only the top 50 players are playing they all have a better shot statistically than if the field was open to 156 or more players who are still very 'elite' in skill. As you've said in many posts, golf skill performance is highly variable. I agree and that's why I think size of field is relevant to the comparison, because I think the scoring variability of the top 90 golfers in the world overlaps considerably with the next 90 down and even a bit beyond that. That's why I wondered whether WGC wins are a bit less valuable than a major or a full field PGA tour event that's also open to Monday qualifying. Granted the world ranking system is better than it used to be, but it still weights international events more strongly than they deserve. Some of the reasons I think you may be undervaluing Nicklaus' achievement in comparing across eras.
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (January 2016)
      I managed to complete the January challenge (without missing a day, I believe). It was a great months' work for my game - having to blog every day sure helps to focus each session.
    • Steel vs Graphite generic question
      S300 is one of the lowest launching steel shafts.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries