On Jul 6, 4:05 pm, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> Renli wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 10:22 am, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> >> For example, I don't understand the game cricket. And I will
> >> say "I don't understand cricket" if forced to comment on it. And
> >> that is as far as it goes. If you'd said "I don't get it", I'd a'
> >> chuckled - been there, done that. That's a perfectly reasonable
> >> response.
>
> > Oh? If I asked you to come play cricket with me this sunday, I take it
> > you would likely decline. When pressed, I don't think the reason would
> > be that you didn't want to play because you didn't understand it. Why
> > aren't you on a cricket team? Why does your lifestyle not revolve
> > around cricket? The truth is not because you've never tried it or you
> > don't understand it. You don't play cricket regularly because you are
> > not attracted to it. You simply don't like it.
>
> I don't know anything about cricket.
>
> See how this works? It's very simple.
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> Les Cargill
Yes Les - I know how it works. You can't see it.
Why don't you go try some cricket then and tell us if you like it or
not? Yes, this is a completely different question: I'm asking you to
go learn something about it - go watch a cricket video. Now tell us if
it appeals to you.
I am willing to bet real money that not only does it not appeal to
you, that you find you don't like it. Not even a little bit.
That's how humans work, Les. All this subjectivity crap is low-
grade...
-
