G35 wrote:Doctor MJ wrote:G35 wrote:What's confusing is why would you use such a vague term when you want to discuss only performance?.......
This should not be confusing G35. It's how people talk.bastillon wrote:let me get this straight, as I was starting this thread almost a year ago I didn't care about Harden's popularity. the reason why I participate in these discussions on the PC Board in the first place is because it's not about popularity contest for anyone. so I have no idea why G35 would wonder who a superstar is. everyone in this thread, be it Harden's fan or his opponent, nobody ever had a doubt about that. it was about playing level all along. now you can have a different standard for that too; for some superstar is can be a top10 player; for the other he needs to be a top5 player, for me it's more about being a high impact player. but let's debate whether Harden's playing level lives up to these expectations, not turn this into a popularity contest.
That's just an excuse. For a board that is so anal retentive and can take things down to the nearest tenth and then USING a word that is BASED around popularity in anyone's definition and then saying you didn't want to discuss popularity was his mistake. Raven does summarize this up the best.......
Your perception is interesting here.
First and foremost: The dude explained what he meant in the OP. It's fine for you to deal with that explanation and reject it's link to the word "superstar", but after that there shouldn't be any confusion here, and I guess that's the thing that just keeps getting me. The thread is a year old and NOW we're talking about confusion? This shouldn't be this difficult. And I suppose that's why I'm so negative at times: I think that even if you were confused before, you aren't confused any more, yet you can't seem to move away from the minor point to focus on the major one. Doing so wouldn't even require you to admit you were wrong necessarily, just that you were tolerating the eccentricities of others. Yet you still don't do it.
Secondly, the allegation of people here being anal. That's a label I don't necessarily reject. I am not however autistic. I am not pragmatically challenged. I understand that there are different senses of a word and that it is foolhardy to push against something just because something might have an odd etymological history. I'm precise where precision is necessary and supple otherwise...or at least that's what I try to be.