4 ms·
>Whether it was intended or not, OP was dog-whistling the genetics argument, which I do not buy. Again, no it wasn't, and even if it were it does not change th
by omginternets 10y ago
>Whether it was intended or not, OP was dog-whistling the genetics argument, which I do not buy.
Again, no it wasn't, and even if it were it does not change the veracity of my (more nuanced) rendition.
- sangnoir 10y agoYou are making a totally different argument - not refining OPs original one. If you think yours is a refinement of the same argument, then you could perhaps state which of your listed reasons explains OPs lack of success with the NBA? For what it's worth - I do not disagree with your argument, but I do not think it adequately explains the situation. OT: it's somewhat surreal for me to experience HN going all out for the status quo (regardless of subject). I just wanted to get that off my chest - carry on.
- omginternets 10y agoI'm clarifying what I'm 99.99% certain OP meant by his argument.