There is only one way to settle this

.001 seconds isn't really that odd an occurrence-it happened to me every now and then back when I swam-and as I understand it there are usually manual timers there to back up the scores. I just find it hard to believe that all those underwater cameras and whatnot created a conspiracy.

The tone of this article (i.e., 'sugarslim voice') renders it inadmissable for me.

A legitimate scientific breakdown has data that support a conclusions, not wild-eyed blue-skying that supports bitter judgements.

SLIM'D

at a regional championship track meet in high school, i was in a separate heat from the only other good hurdler, and they decided not to have a final. that is to say, we were competing for the win, but in different races. it was electronically timed.

i won by 3 thousandths of a second. it happens.

The pictures they posted don't really mean a thing. They easily could have photoshopped two different times in for the racers, and even if the image is legitimate, it still doesn't provide conclusive evidence of anything. Cavic stopped swimming earlier than Phelps, meaning he was going slower as he hit the wall.

Furthermore, go watch the replays of the video footage. Phelps moves his arms so quickly on the final stroke, and you can see Cavic's hands still underwater, still reaching out for the wall. Phelps just slammed his hands into the wall faster than Cavic could glide there. Also, Cavic winning any preliminary races means nothing and them trying to use that as a 'fact' is complete bull. Everyone knows that the racers don't give it their all in the preliminaries and semifinals, they're saving steam for the final race.

This whole article is tripe.

lame, that top pic in that site is NOT the last frame..phelps clearly touched first on the last frame... at any rate it instantly shit up the serb teams official protest.

Havent watched the olympics (they are a most convenient distraction to Ossetia, if only coincidental), but I will settle into my expected role here: its obvious that Omega/FINA are hiding something.

You say 'settle into' your 'expected role' as though you had any alternatives in store. No one else wants ownership of your madness, so you might as well enjoy it all to yourself, scooby doo.

Obviously you are getting a kick out of all of this (which sort contradicts what you just said doesnt it? not that you make much sense anyways), but Im game, how about this:

Why dont you go post some links to your own website, congratulate yourself for submitting them, and be sure to marginalize anyone who challenges you (but only in an ad-hominem Faux News, Michelle Malkin, sort of character smear fashion, beings that actual discourse is a bit too taxing for that gerbil running around in your skull)

OR

you could consider the issues at hand, like: is 24 really effective propaganda? is Michael Phelps victory a result of corporate machination? am I a deluded, inconsequential half-wit?

PS. If you answered TRUE to all the above, you get a smiley face on your paper

^ Not to jump in here but directly from the article you cited...

Cornel Marculescu, executive director of FINA, ...noted that Serbian officials had seen the images and had withdrawn their protest of the butterfly race, satisfied that Phelps had indeed won.

Hmmm...damn, the Serbians are in on it too.

'The result of the race as declared by the federation is final and the IOC has no reason to question it,' said Giselle Davies, a spokeswoman for the IOC

AND the IOC!!!

The timing devices are operated and managed by Olympic officials at the Games, not by Omega...

Godamn!!! Not the olympic officials too!

'Given that everyone participating in the swimming events was subject to the same timing technology, it seems to eliminate any impropriety,'

Holy shit!!! EVERYONE is in on it!!!

You know, the only ones who aren't in on it appear to be the guy who wrote the article and the conspiracy theorists. So, what you are really complaining about is that you are out of the loop?

Of course Marculescu would make statements which exonerate the officials, the IOC shares these same priorities, and lord knows the IOC has never been involved in any impropriety. The timing devices arent the issue here, the imagery from the race is. The imagery is suspect in that it may suggest that the Serb finished first. The issue here is that there can be no real investigation because the evidence is sealed. Ironic how your snippets seem to contradict the entire thesis (obvious conflicts of interest, unethical nontransparency, et al) of the article cited, interesting how idiocy works isnt?

sugarslim:

Obviously you are getting a kick out of all of this

Ish.

(which sort contradicts what you just said doesnt it?

No?

not that you make much sense anyways

Yes?

Why dont you go post some links to your own website, congratulate yourself for submitting them

This again? This is at least the second time you've brought this up. As far as I can tell, you're referencing this. Let me break down for you what I see happening there...

• Guy builds website to share interesting links
• Guy uses website to share a link he finds interesting
• Another guy mentions that the link is interesting
• Guy agrees that the link is in fact interesting

Seriously, I've been a dickface for years on this site, and this is what you resent? Explain it to me, or find some way to achieve peace with it, because I'm tired of being confused by the reference. Do it for my sake if not your own.

and be sure to marginalize anyone who challenges you

Ah, the 'Everyman Appeal'. What is it you suppose you are challenging here? My history of pointing out your wing-nut antics are in fact wing-nut antics? Who do you imagine you're speaking for? Anybody who needs sugarslim representation is probably either just smart enough to not make it obvious or got drummed out long ago.

but only in an ad-hominem Faux News

Well, I am genuinely uneasy at times that to fully explore the wierdness that is you, I have to go into pretty personal territory (and when you get right down to it, it really all hinges on my guesses about your state of mind, which you'll agree is pretty personal) with someone who's a friend of a friend. On the other hand, I find you more interesting as a phenomenon than I care about your personal feelings, so I don't dwell on it.

And 'Faux' News? Come on. That's just juvenile, like insisting on typing 'Micro$oft'.

that gerbil running around in your skull

Haha, this. Ad-hominem worthy of Fox News.

you could consider the issues at hand, like: is 24 really effective propaganda?

That issue isn't at hand for anyone but you, who routinely display an unhealthy pre-occupation with ideas that could most kindly be described as 'fringe'.

Incidentally, while we're here, the answer is probably 'No'. Remember, you're the guy who analyzed the show without ever watching it. Part of your 'analysis' hinged on the fact that one of the bad guys (actually a good guy, a fact plain to anyone who actually watched the show) bore a resemblance to Dick Cheney (apart from being baggy-faced white guy, he didn't). It's little indulgences like this that rule you right the fuck out as a worthwhile source. I get from you the impression that you want more than anything to be considered a worthwhile source. Maybe you should stop covering your own face in shit before you whack the buzzer?

Having said that, is 24 as subliminal Republican propaganda possible? Sure. Is it probable? No. You seem to confuse possibility with probability a lot, a trait you share with paranoid schizophrenics. (Just sayin'.)

interesting how idiocy works isnt?

You should steer clear of this game. You aren't any good at it, and I'm guessing it's probably beneath you. Plus, as your mom always told you, you get more bees with honey (nigger).

is it a conspiracy? if it was, good. greater glory for U.S.A., legit or not. Kinda like in baseball, where 'the tie goes to the runner', Phelps deserves the win if only for the fact that he dominated in all sektorz. I'm more concerned with some of china's 'female' athletes and that under aged gymnastics girl.

the olympics have been rife with controversy for the last 50 years, if not longer. why is any of this shit a surprise? the IOC is nothing more than a wine and dine IP holder that just so happens to hold bi-annual athletic competitions. it's fun to watch but it's also a sad joke stuffed full of patriotic propaganda. though i have to admit that the opening ceremony this year (faked or not) was fucking sweet.

end of fucking thread.

NO THIS IS THE END OF FUCKING THREAD

Come on, guys, don't be cutums in here, or I won't get my check from Mr. Murdoch.

Meta, your moral relativism astounds me. There is suggestion of serious wrongdoing in the most hallowed grounds of competitive sports and you ignore it in favor of mere patriotism? Glory is meaningless if ill-gotten. Vas, I brought up 24 because its relevant in the sense that it represents most of our debates (especially this one, you still have yet to contribute anything of import) The fact that 24 was referenced by a Supreme Court Justice during an argument of jurisprudence verifies its efficacy; I dont need to watch it. Ive lost count how many times Ive referenced this. It doesnt matter if the show affects me or you, or either of our opinions, its message has already affected the highest power of the land. It isnt probable, its already happened. You just cant fathom it. (kind of like when your mind was blown when meta explained to you that corporations do indeed mine your data, just like in that scifi novel you have sitting on your toilet, go ahead and deny it) Just like your insipid overstretch article, which I only took issue with because you are a self-congratulating twit.

All of our little spats can be summed up as such: I bring up fact, you balk and start spewing shit. Which is your right, this website is your virtual playpen, and you, despite your age, are nothing more than a child. Now go photoshop some more pictures of yourself and maybe consider a different hairdo, mid 30s is pushing it for horns (and more than a bit metro as well, read: fag), no? And after all, good little wage slaves want to be managers some day don't they?

PS. You better start quoting something real if you are going to attack me, no one believes you anymore (outside of the usual sycophants). (CALL META, DO IT NOW, HE CAN SUPPLY YOU WITH THE EPIC LULZ, OTHERWISE YOU KNOW NOTHING)

haha you silly fag, you get all up in arms over an event with electronic timing and video evidence

you do realize that many events are judged?

Who are these sycophants, anyway?

I missed the Sugarslim's Credibility Poll, can you re-link? RAPED.

+1 sugarslim casts argument of fact. uses word jurisprudence for double damage.
-1 sugarslim misses with personal attack on late 90's hairstyle +1 vasudeva calling out someone's credibility on the internets -1 vasudeva calling out someone's credibility on the internets +1000 metatr0n for not caring enough to explore the idea of olympic controversy

i win the gold medal faggotz

What video evidence is that nocal? Why cant we review it?

GOOD ANSWER VAS, THE SWARM STILL WORSHIPS YOU. (i could give a shit less about my perceived credibility, the opinions of fools are worthless)

PS. i win

Ironic how your snippets seem to contradict the entire thesis (obvious conflicts of interest, unethical nontransparency, et al) of the article cited...

Not ironic. To the point. The journalist, in an effort to write some shit that people will buy, implies a conspiracy that named Phelps the winner of the race. Then he goes on to cite zero evidence for said conspiracy. For that matter it appears that everyone he talked to agreed that Phelps was the winner of the race including the other team. So, it appears that you are the only one with an issue.

Let me illuminate this for you one more time.

you say...

The timing devices arent the issue here, the imagery from the race is. The imagery is suspect in that it may suggest that the Serb finished first.

the article says...

Serbian officials had seen the images and had withdrawn their protest of the butterfly race, satisfied that Phelps had indeed won.

So, your argument is that the images say the Serbs won, but the article says that the Serbs saw the images and admitted that Phelps won. Which is it?

Now either write coherently or

It's wierd that you keep comparing me to you, like we're in some kind of competition for Coolest Guy or something. Are you just jealous of my beautiful hair and avatar and overall low chance of going mad some day? You are special in your own right.

Also, if you're going to make claims unsupported by evidence, then you obviously care enough to have typed it once without any real compelling external incentive. When you get called on it and then just totally don't care and are so above all this, it's pretty transparent that you have no follow-up. It's wiser, in that course, to not have made the claim in the first place, and saves space in the database. Disk is cheap, but come on.

The articles quotes Marculescu in its evincing the Serbs capitulation. Marculescu is an obviously biased party. This would not hold up in court. Everyone the journalist talked to in reference to Phelps' victory was connected to the IOC, FINA or Omega (with the exception of one) all complicit elements with very real motives in maintaining Phelps' victory. Still nothing has been proven, or can be. BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE IS WITHHELD BY THE VERY SAME PEOPLE YOU ARE QUOTING. My argument is the same as the author's, nondisclosure of the imagery suggests wrongdoing.

information witheld from the public?

Not hold up in court?

NOT HOLD UP IN COURT?

NOT HOLD UP IN COURT?

STOP ALL FUCKING PRESSES WE GOT A CLOWN ON OUR HANDS

The only evidence of the Serb's capitulation comes from a biased party, second hand at that. To truly prove the Serb's acceptance of Phelp's victory, you would need a direct quote from a member of their party. Im fairly certain thats how it would work in a court of law. I would say the clowns spend more time with HTML than informed debate.

Actually, with the new preview bar from wmd, a rich world of visual self-expression is just mouseclicks away. Good burn though.

i would think that evidence of the serb's capitulation is the fact that you're not reading their press release about being pressured to drop the medal protest.

CONSPIRACY'D

Phelps deserves the win because 8 gold medals is TOO great of a story, come on, EIGHT EFING GOLD MEDALS. That's money in the bank!

'The fact that 24 was referenced by a Supreme Court Justice during an argument of jurisprudence verifies its efficacy'

This is all clearly inarguable. I move we consider the conversation concluded.

The fact that 24 was referenced by a Supreme Court Justice during an argument of jurisprudence verifies its efficacy; I dont need to watch it.

correlation, meet causation. the fact is that a judge believed that something is not torture and then referenced a popular show that includes depictions of (not) torture. if there were no such show, perhaps he would reference a popular movie.

the very nature of a show like 24 is suspense, no? therefore, if you were a smart person who has ever considered writing something of import, you would understand that in order to prolong scenes of suspense, one would write in scenes where the hero beats info out of someone just in time to save the day.

that is a very typical scenario in a script.

you believe that there is some kind of conspiracy there.

All of our little spats can be summed up as such: I bring up fact,

uh sorry son but you are not bringing up facts. you're constructing tenuous relationships of causation, as a skinny chink might construct a rice paddy or whatever.

What video evidence is that nocal? Why cant we review it?

i've seen the race. i've seen it on tv. i've seen photos of the finish. i've seen the results of the electronic timing.

this reminds me of talking to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist (which, of course, you must be).

'there's video of it.'

'NOT SURVEILLANCE VIDEO THOUGH.'

'here are the opinions of demolitions experts, engineers, architects, firefighters, and scientists.'

'THOSE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE IN ON IT.'

welp guess i don't have shit to prove it to you besides all the proof

Hey, you guys missed the end of the thread. It was way up there.^

Phels won....hehehehehhe

I cant even believe Im reentering this; nocal, the original question regarding 24 (in this thread) was 'Is 24 really effective propaganda.' (Feel free to answer the others as well) I am not so shallow as to think that Scalia's decision would have actually been impelled by a TV show, that is ridiculous. But judging by his own statements, the show obviously serves as a reinforcer. 24 never convinced anyone that torture was right, it simply makes one feel better about it. That is one function of propaganda, no? As far as the damn olympics are concerned, the FACTS havent changed one bit; no review of that race is possible because the evidence is withheld. And Im sorry, your memory of the race doesnt really serve as admissible evidence. Though if you have seen the results of the electronic timing (outside of what prepackaged nonsense you saw on TV) and were able to examine them at will, under laboratory conditions, I guess you would be in a most privileged position. Do you work for FINA? No you watch fucking TV. There is no tenuous causation here, no triple word score for you. The only people who saw those tapes were the Serbs, and even they werent convinced. Furthermore, the similarities between 9/11 (though your invokation was most crude) and the race are striking; the so-called 'experts' have a monopoly on the evidence. There can be no realistic investigation under those circumstances. No one can truly say whether Phelps won or if a plane did hit the Pentagon. What can be said, is that the parties withholding the evidence must have something to hide. Just like if you are ordered to testify in court, and you dont, YOU GO TO FUCKING JAIL. But a subpoena really isnt possible here is it? Keep plunging your head into the sand, you wont have to see the police when they sodomize your stupid ass.

I am not so shallow as to think that Scalia's decision would have actually been impelled by a TV show, that is ridiculous.

oh...ok?

But judging by his own statements, the show obviously serves as a reinforcer

oh, another of your 'facts.' tell me about how propaganda is just a series of 'reinforcers.' (you don't know what the fuck you're talking about)

the so-called 'experts' have a monopoly on the evidence. There can be no realistic investigation under those circumstances.

you stupid fuck. you're not an expert, so what good would it do you to examine the evidence? do you give yourself therapy, do your own surgery, build your own house, or even do your own taxes? i would guess that you don't, because you're likely not an expert.

you wouldn't even know what you were looking at, and that's why 'loose change' morons like yourself are tricked into believing this bullshit. you don't know enough to know that you don't know shit about this stuff.

What can be said, is that the parties withholding the evidence must have something to hide.

is this another 'fact'? it's just bullshit that you spew. how would you assume that they should disseminate this 'evidence' for you to examine? send you a dvd, or a video, or host a special page and pay for the bandwidth? is there 'evidence' posted for other races that are hotly contested, so that we can examine it?

you post this shit in a vacuum. you don't compare it to other close races, because you know nothing about competition at that level. races are OFTEN decided by fractions of a second, based on a photo that is taken when an object crosses the finish line.

you think you're a free thinker, but unsurprisingly, you don't actually know shit about shit that you think you know shit about.

More evidence disclosed: Phelps obviously won by a clear lead.

I mean disseminated.

Well thought out answer nocal, curse and insult enough and anyone can convince themself that theyre right. I think you have just earned yourself sycophant status, congrats, I know you and Vas are yukking it up as we speak....

oyyy quote of the day: 'you don't know enough to know that you don't know shit about this stuff.' FUCK SHIT STUFF THINGS, hahahaha, why dont you think about what you post before logging in (the middle of a Friday night might I add, somebody's lonely? fucking loser)

Everybody's laughing at you.

I believe sugarslim has a problem He continually lives his life making grave errors in faith.

yay, we got the good nocal back :)

sugarslim Sat Aug 23 [...] before logging in (the middle of a Friday night might I add, somebody's lonely? fucking loser)

This is somehow more pathetic than the nonstop F5 mashing you do every time you get into one of your brainless pissing contests with people possessing a firmer grasp of reality than yourself?

you wouldn't even know what you were looking at, and that's why 'loose change' morons like yourself are tricked into believing this bullshit. you don't know enough to know that you don't know shit about this stuff.

please correct me if i'm wrong, but this seems to be the crux of nocal's argument, you don't know enough about these type of events to make such an informed basis to come to the conclusion that there has been any kind of conspiracy, pretty much like the people who make these little blogs/sites, they see something, have heard that a bunch of shit like this could possibly indicate something has been with-held (truth or something more mundane, doesn't matter), and cry foul.

at least nocal has participated in similar events but obviously not on an olympic level, so can at least be qualified to make some kind of personal opinion based on actual facts.

^ You mean people are kind of like sheep?

i shamefully know i am

Vomiting (also called throwing up, puking, barfing, and emesis) is the forceful expulsion of the contents of one's stomach through the mouth and sometimes the nose.

sugarslim does this into LinkSwarm except his is a forceful expulsion of the contents of his malfunctioning brain through the fingers and sometimes the thumbs.

An argument of 'FACT' based upon a bullshit story and a couple of random photographs makes this idiot look like the most retarded of the retarded among us, myself included.

nurgleming basically has it right. a guy i ran with in college was in the olympics, a girl on our team holds the national record for her country in her event, i watched xavier carter and countless other future stars win races by hundredths of a second. it doesn't make me an expert, it just gives me experience with close races. therefore i put trust in the experts, because i know that they know what they're doing. just like how a bio major might trust a surgeon while a christian scientist trusts the big jc.

i mean there is a large photospread in sports illustrated this week. examine the pictures for yourself.

basically, you think that an impossibly close finish, one that couldn't have been judged by the naked eye except by the photo finish, was fixed. but if the pictures showed him decisively losing, do you think anyone would believe that he had won?

you think a guy who set a world or olympic record in every event he competed in in the olympics may not have won. yeah gosh how could he have won, he's really not that good

but you don't claim that kerron clement actually came in 3rd in the 400 hurdles and not 2nd. you're just picking a single close race and making a whole bunch of claims, substantiated by...nothing whatsoever.

Well thought out answer nocal, curse and insult enough and anyone can convince themself that theyre right.

the typical answer of a moron; insult my semantics and not my arguments.

you'll note that despite your barely literate ramblings, i addressed your arguments.

(the middle of a Friday night might I add, somebody's lonely? fucking loser)

lol

sweet argument bro, but as usual you're a totally stupid faggot

if you check the time stamp on the comment, it was posted at 8:09 PM

if that's the 'middle' of your friday night, then you're either painfully lame or you have a serious drinking problem

Well it seems I missed most of this, but my one solitary claim was never really addressed:

FINA/Omega have something to hide.

Why else would they seal the evidence?

This one claim was immediately followed by an insult (Vas). None of the ensuing debate answered the question. It seems that I would be a pariah for asking relevant questions.

I could respond to every single ridiculous insult that followed with utter ease, but this is getting to be a waste of time. My only excuse up to this point is having been stranded at a hospice for cancer patients over the weekend. Otherwise, answer the fucking question you fucking idiots, or continue to pray at the altar of media.

Oy, Nocal, Vas, and any other interested party: for the record, 24 is indeed propaganda.

Ah the ol' Cancer maneuver, the Kobayashi Maru of the internets.

Yes, the all important Last Word. However, I have ended with a question (and a demand for an answer) as opposed to a final 'fuck you,' which would be pointless. No seriously, somebody answer the fucking question.

Why else would they seal the evidence?

not released != sealed

you really think they want to set a precedent and release those documents to undermine their organizational authority? it has nothing to do with a conspiracy you goddamned kook.

(you demanded an answer)

Why else would they seal the evidence?

i already answered this, you ponce.

in other races that are close, what do they do? do they put up a website to show the results? do they send sugarslim a dvd package?

they don't do anything.

because close races are close.

you suppose they should spend a lot of money to, what, make all ten of you feel better about a single olympic race?

is that what this is all about? self importance? you know the grand secrets of the world, if only you could share them with us! but it's cool, you can rest assured knowing that you're a special snowflake who knows that the truth is ultimately not banal and ultimately soul crushingly boring, but in fact things are mysterious and exciting! like the history channel!

So imagery of close races is usually sealed from public viewing? Hmmm, it seems that ESPN, Sports Illustrated, etc have a very vested interest in that official recording of sporting events be made public. The point is the real experts (that is not me) cant analyze the recordings; I can only surmise that they would simply wish to verify the integrity of the imagery, but I'm not an expert. I'm sorry I'm having to repeat myself, but this idea of me wanting to do my own image analysis really slowed things down. Note that I never mentioned myself doing any of that, or being an expert either. You introduced those ideas, quite idiotically I might add.

So I'm going to say that your answer is untrue; sports media exists only because of the public dissemination of such recordings. Now, if you could respond with an example showing that regulatory nontransparency is actually common practice, I will rest my case. But something tells me that you wont.

i'd be more interested in prior examples of FINA/Omega Olympic transparency. i bet there are none, which would lead reasonable people to think that their whole stance is 'business as usual'. (reasonable people)

well the burden of proof is on you at this point isnt it?

This thread is definitely better than Wapner.

haha WHAT. surely you jest.

i'm not the one claiming that their behavior is suspicious. being as i am not making claims, i don't have to submit supporting evidence to prove anything.

here's the thing:

you claim that they're sealing results and there must be some reason for them to do this, otherwise, why would they?

logically, my first thought is 'if this behavior was abnormal, doing the opposite must be commonplace or at least done before.'

if i were making the claim, i would research the prior history to see if this is true. it's obvious you haven't, so i really can't take you seriously. you have no basis for your claims except paranoia/hysteria.

enjoy.

Now you are just being lazy, not to mention dodging the question like everyone else; I have already posted a link that shows such a policy to be abnormal. Did you read it? It would seem that the portion of the athletic world concerned with ethics is as concerned as I am. Whatever your laconic excuse may be, if you are not making a claim of some sort, what are you saying?

'i bet there are none, which would lead reasonable people to think that their whole stance is 'business as usual'.'

Sounds like a statement to me. But really, what is your excuse? Are you happily riding the fence? or are you still hanging out in dumbfuckistan with the rest of the swarm? go get me some evidence to back up your halfassed statements or go back to looking at porn you disingenuous fuck.

go get me some evidence

really. really?

Yes I am communicating on your level, keep balking faggot.

What was the question again?

go get me some balking faggot

p.s. 24

sugarslim: go get me some evidence to back up your halfassed statements

O NOW U JUS TROLLIN DAWG

add 'burden of proof' to the list of things that sugarslim doesn't quite understand

o o but he does, he is just having a hard time slowing down his sweet-ass brain to regular humanspeed, so what he does is, he uses babelfish to translate everything he says from High Slimmish into Chinese and then into English, to dumb it down enough that we can grok it with our painfully sheeplistic little minds, THAT'S HOW ABSURDLY SLICK DIS NIGGA BE, w00t?

Please Nocal, do tell how it is that Mundra could make a claim without justification (though denying he even made a claim) and expect me to take him seriously.

Its funny that the point has been made, or at the least still standing, and the swarm is descending into literal nonthought. Mundra makes claim, denies making one, fails to supply proof, I ask for proof in the most literal sense (burden of proof, onus probandi, obligation to prove allegations presented in legal action, not that any of this is any way official or meaningful for that matter). Nocal does the digital equivalent of plugging his ears and denying reality; because obviously my request for proof means I don't understand what proof is. Vas in turn, with distinctive flair, sarcastically denounces my appeal to the principles of debate. Vas, despite having not once addressed anything of import (outside of some vague sense of my sanity, based on contributions to a website which could only be described as slightly deranged), you make me laugh, and I truly wish I were as articulate as thou. Nocal, pay attention, if you're going to attempt an insult (without logic I might add) at least do it with some style.

ok, idiot. my claim is that you're a fucking nutjob, but i don't have any proof other than the obvious.

allow me to summarize our exchange:

sugarslim: Omega/FINA are hiding something. Why else would they seal the evidence?

mundhra: 'if this behavior was abnormal, doing the opposite must be commonplace or at least done before.' if i were making the claim, i would research the prior history to see if this is true.

sugarslim: Now you are just being lazy, not to mention dodging the question like everyone else; I have already posted a link that shows such a policy to be abnormal. Did you read it?

i suppose you can claim that i'm actually claiming something rather than questioning your claims, but whatever.

but i did actually read your linked article, and with a bit more comprehension than you i might add.

so when i said this: if i were making the claim, i would research the prior history to see if this is true

and you said: I have already posted a link that shows such a policy to be abnormal.

were you referring to the following excerpt of the article?:

Images from track events have routinely been released by Omega.

because when i read 'it was FINA's policy not to release race images' and 'FINA decides what can be published or not. FINA said it was a no go' i'm not confusing FINA with Omega.

so maybe prior examples of FINA's transparency would actually be relevant, since it's actually - you know - their call (apparently, being the international swimming federation and all). from what i see, the link you provided doesn't show any.

in conclusion: go get me some evidence

Oh, OH, onus probandi, well doesn't this entire domain name now look utterly bedraggled in the triumphant whirlwind of precision debate skilz and lofty derring-do you been slangin.

There's a point that keeps getting made here, but I don't think it's the one you keep typing like you actually believe it.

I AM NOT SLAPPING MYSELF IN MY OWN FACE

*slaps self in face

I AM NOT SLAPPING MYSELF IN MY OWN FACE OR EVEN ANY OTHER FACE

*slaps self right in own face

HEY I THINK YOU STUPID GUYS KEEP SLAPPING YOUR OWN FACES HAHA

*not even a flinch as the slaps rain down like vicious hail upon the self's dumb face

HAHA GUESS I WIN THAT SLAPFIGHT EH

Don't spend all those make-up endorphins in one place.

add 'burden of proof' to the list of things that sugarslim doesn't quite understand

^Some of this. Sugarslim I don't know what country (or planet) you are from, but in a court of law the burden of proof lies with the accuser. You on the other hand think

To truly prove the Serb's acceptance of Phelp's victory, you would need a direct quote from a member of their party. Im fairly certain thats how it would work in a court of law.

No, it is not. See, in a court of law people are innocent until proven guilty. Also, the burden of proof lies with the accusser. In a court of law people do not go to court to accuse someone of being innocent. Instead, someone who is in a position to do so would have to make an accusation of wrongdoing. In this particular situation the only ones to be in the position to do so were the Serbs, and they did. Then, in a court of law all of the interested parties would get together in a room and examine the evidence. In this case everyone INCLUDING THE SERBS got together in a room and viewed the evidence in its entirety. When the viewing of said evidence was complete the Serbs withdrew

their protest of the butterfly race, satisfied that Phelps had indeed w