I feel like I'm debating with a child. Every time I make a point, you take random words from the point and talk about something else entirely, and then act as if you've refuted my points. So this is pointless.
> Fans shouldn't care about belts
>But fighters care about belts, so you're wrong.
>You didn't use the world perspective until I did.
>Here's me using the word perspective (after you did), so you're wrong.
>Conor McGregor isn't preventing any key lightweight fights from taking place, and thus isn't holding the divison up. Belts don't matter, because they don't prove anything, as evidence by Conor getting one with only one fight in the divison.
>But fighters have dreams of having the belt, you know, so you're wrong.
>Provide examples of Conor McGregor preventing a key lightweight fight from taking place, that we would have seen had he given up the belt.
>You're not a fighter, so you don't know.
I don't think it's because you dislike Conor McGregor. Just judging the way that you present and reply to arguments in text, it seems like you have some sort of mental condition or at the very least poor writing skills. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it's the later. So this is the last post I'm making on it. Cheers.