- Joined
- Jan 25, 2009
- Messages
- 25,512
- Reaction score
- 13,798
tldr and no
Objectively you shouldnt be allowed to make threads.To preface this, I’m not trying to be deliberately controversial nor am I nothing but indifferent as it relates to Conor Mcregor. I also recognise that trying to discern ‘the greatest’ is very elementary and somewhat inherently nihilistic in practice, as we are devaluing existence as it pertains to the future. Primarily, I’m not as much claiming greatness; but rather understanding briefly the methodology behind how we reach a consensus for defining it within MMA and sports in general. Short answer, we don’t - not consciously anyway.
To comprehensively analyse the fundamentals of this line of questioning, we must first understand the established methods in how we as a community approach the phrase ‘Greatest of All Time’. Traditionally, our methods are coated with subjectivity as we compartmentalise and evaluate explicit metrics, or a checklist of requirements that are nothing more than symbolistic and can’t truly be concrete nor tangible. Not universally anyway.
In this sense, ‘greatness’ is an objectively overwhelming, subconscious commandeering feeling throughout an entity and its anthropology. Objectively, this is Conor McGregor to MMA.
I’m only talking MMA. My apologies if I didn’t make it clear
I don't. I think he's smarter than you though.The OP is a mess of the English language. If you think TS is smart, he isn't.
I don't. I think he's smarter than you though.
How's it feel to lie like that, newguysnm1? Do you think you're fooling anyone with this, pretending to be "new"?You know exactly what your doing. I’ve been here a day and know people don’t rate McGregor that highly.
As a “Prize fighter”
He’s the greatest but in terms MMA he isn’t the greatest.
Man it’s like some of you guys find creative ways to be more stupid...
<{chips}>
That's just because you don't understand the words he's using, and therefore can't see how terrible his command of language is.
Why not directly respond to the points articulated instead of continuously throwing low-ball jabs that are clearly coming from a place of intimidation.
.500 at his actual weight
Never defended a title
Hasn't won since Obama was president
The fuck else do you need, mate?
"explicit metrics, or a checklist of requirements"
This will make these words seem important..
All you do is to shit on fighters.. you are the worst join date to post ratio poster on this site..
Insert triggering gif/picture..
Your perceived objectivity is tainted with subjectivity.To preface this, I’m not trying to be deliberately controversial nor am I nothing but indifferent as it relates to Conor Mcregor. I also recognise that trying to discern ‘the greatest’ is very elementary and somewhat inherently nihilistic in practice, as we are devaluing existence as it pertains to the future. Primarily, I’m not as much claiming greatness; but rather understanding briefly the methodology behind how we reach a consensus for defining it within MMA and sports in general. Short answer, we don’t - not consciously anyway.
To comprehensively analyse the fundamentals of this line of questioning, we must first understand the established methods in how we as a community approach the phrase ‘Greatest of All Time’. Traditionally, our methods are coated with subjectivity as we compartmentalise and evaluate explicit metrics, or a checklist of requirements that are nothing more than symbolistic and can’t truly be concrete nor tangible. Not universally anyway.
In this sense, ‘greatness’ is an objectively overwhelming, subconscious commandeering feeling throughout an entity and its anthropology. Objectively, this is Conor McGregor to MMA.