View Single Post
11-09-2013, 02:01 PM
Registered User
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 25,247
vCash: 500
Here's a definition that most closely resembles what Drew and BRB think objectivity is, however they get the first half of it but not the second:

(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Drew thinks that because BRB and he are fans by being negative they're not being influenced by personal feelings. However they both forget the part about "representing facts". "The Rangers suck" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BTW, I completely disagree with Drew and BRB's personal feelings not influencing their opinions too. Their feelings are completely influenced, just like the positive HFers. Except their feelings are negative, they see everything in a negative light as opposed to a positive light. Their hatred for Sather, if anything removes any pretense for not having personal feelings involved. When a team starts a season 2-6 and goes 6-2 the rest of the way to an 8-8 record and you only look at the poor injury riddled start with a team was learning a new system, it tells me that BRB is definitely letting his feelings dictate his "objective" opinions. When you ignore half the sample size to make your case, you CLEARLY have an agenda.

SnowblindNYR is offline