FanNation - The Republic of Sport

As I've found out recently, some people will argue anything, often without bothering to read and figure out what it is that they're arguing.  Such was the case when I posted two throwdowns yesterday, both dealing with the same topic.  That topic was such:

To say "He got ronsoed" is funnier than "he got jacked up."

Now, I won't bore you with most of the loser details involved, but the first one was picked up by some jackas$ from Baltimore who said that because I come from the DC area, the statement p*ssed him off because it was "snotty humor" coming from a "snotty town."  Then, he commented on the affluence of Potomac, MD (where I live), and said that "I'm surprised he didn't mention pink polos, Brady Quinn and grabbing people's as$es in pictures as some of his favorite activities."  Then he went on to say that "jacked up is the BEST PHRASE EVER for a big hit or anything else in sports."  Once again, the "City that Reads" proves that it is filled with Baltimorons who don't read.  Anything.  Ever. 

That throwdown was deleted, after about fifteen people posted comments.  I only saw two of them, but I was winning, and I thought it was histerical that people cared enough about the matter to actually a) take up the challenge and b) vote one way or the other.  That guy seemed so angry that I would dare to attack his beloved phrase that he attacked me personally, as a few other people did the other day, which is interesting because most of us have never met each other, and yet we feel confident enough to pass personal judgements on each other despite our lack of knowledge.  I have no problem with that.

That guy was an as$clown.  I had no problem with that, either.

The second go around, I posted the exact same throwdown with the exact same argument.  Some guy picked it up and started arguing that jacked up was a better phrase than ronsoed.  Once again, he missed the point, but he was at least nice about it.  Then the throwdown got deleted.  Again.

I have a problem with that.

Have you guys ever checked to see which words are censored on this site?  I'll put an * so in these words so they show up as more than ****, which they all would if I wrote them out entirely with the correct spelling.  As you've probably been able to glean, as$ can't be spelled out without turning into the four stars of doom, which is funny because as$ only has three letters.  Here are some other words they don't allow on this site:

F*ck.  Sh*t.  B*tch. H*mo.  F*g.  N*zi.  H*tler.  C*cks*cker.  Just to name a few.  Interestingly, slut is not censored.  SLUT!  HAHAHA!

Now, the curse words I understand, but n*zi?  That's a level of censorship that goes a wee bit too far.  I mean, what if I wanted to say, "Snyder's attempts to over control the on-field aspects of his football team remind this writer of the N*zi's attempts to control everyday life in Germany."  That's a stretch that I'd never make, but it isn't offensive enough to warrant the **** treatment.

So the jerks at Fannation took my meaningless, unprovable throwdown off the site.  99% of the "throwdowns" on this site are meaningless and unprovable.  Think about it.  An opinion is what is called an inductive statement (and every throwdown I've seen on this site is a matter of opinion).  For example, I've never seen anyone throwdown over whether or not the Cardinals won the World Series last year.  But you do argue over who you think will win the AFC North next season, or who's the best pinch hitter in baseball.  When you all argue over who you think are, say, the Top 5 CBs in the league, you're arguing you're opinions versus someone elses.  No way to really prove your opinions.  You could throw out stats about interceptions, and your opponent could show stats about tackles and yards gained against said CB.  Though many people love to say, "Stats don't lie and can't be bent," uh, yeah they can.  Somebody can look at one batch of statistics and come to the conclusion that JP Losman is the best QB in the world, ever.  It's a silly opinion, but they can make it work.  As David Hume said, inductive arguments can never be proven, and they can't really be known.  So nobody, myself included, really KNOWS what they're talking about.  We're all just making what we believe to be good guesses. 

So all I wanted to do was argue my opinion that "He got ronsoed" and all variations of "ronso" are funnier than all other comers.  Just my opinion.  And I wanted to pit that opinion against somebody else's opinion.

Let me just illustrate my stance, for a moment.  Say for example you're watching the Nicholas Cage movie, The Rock.  Great movie.  Remember that part when Cage shoots the missile at the black dude and knocks him out the window and straight onto a barb wire pole (with barb wire still on it)?  That dude got ronsoed!

Let's say you're playing Texas Hold'em and you call an all-in and so does the guy next to you.  No side pot yet.  Flop comes, you've got nothing; your opponent bets on the empty side pot, forcing you out.  He turns out to have nothing, and triples up the guy who went all-in.  That's what we call a double ronso-ing!

Or how about when Dick Cheney shot Carl Rove's lawyer in the face with a shotgun?  That guy got ronsoed.

The variations on the word are great, too.  You can get taken to Ronso-ville USA if you're not careful.  LeBron James, instead of streaking towards the basket, could take Rasheed Wallace down to ronso-town.  The possibilities are endless.  Because there's no real meaning, you can use it for anything.  Personally, I have defined "getting ronsoed," as the look on Brady Quinn's face after the Dolphins took Ted Ginn.  Boy, Brady Quinn got ronsoed.

Apparently, the souless minions of orthodoxy who run this site thought that was a poor usage of our time.  As if debating who the best corners in football is a good usage of our time.  If we're taking, excuse me, wasting our time to debate things that at the end of the day aren't debatable, why not let some of us have a little fun doing it?  What, do they think I was mocking the system?  Things sometimes deserve mockery.  I know I do.  That Baltimoron who first took the "challenge" sure was deserving of mockery.  A little mockery doesn't always hurt.  This isn't the United States Supreme Court; it's a goofy website that's fun.  So I was making fun of the system.  So I was trying to show that some people take themselves, and their opinions, a little too seriously.  I do it way too often.  And I think anyone who would bother to resort to a personal attack on me because of where I live, due to him thinking "getting ronsoed" is stupid, definitely takes themself too seriously.  And the people who run this site, if they think that my throwdown wasn't "serious" enough, sure do take themselves too seriously.

I think I proved my point, just not in the light-hearted way I wanted to.