Your arguments hold zero weight...

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Zeebadaboodee at spider-tm053.proxy.aol.com on March 23, 2001 at 15:45:35:

In Reply to: Re: The "Matt & Ben" didn't write 'Good Will' thing posted by TravisBickle on March 23, 2001 at 13:25:00:

: No... it is a well known fact that Goldman did a rewrite.

: You can all try to goad me as much as you want. I was hoping for some intellegent civilized exchanges about this. Silly me.

The problem with wanting intelligent conversation but not revealing your "source", is the fact that no one here believes you actually have on. Actually, that's not true. It's not that we don't believe it necessarily, but with no proof, it's difficult to believe.

No one would equate intelligent journalism with the National Enquirer, and one of the primary reasons is the fact that they print stories that rely on innuendo and half-truths.

The truth is, it is NOT a well known fact that Goldman did a rewrite. It is a well known fact that he looked at the script. you say that they denied it "at first", but find me an article or statement made by them that has admitted it since.

As for Affleck not mentioning it on "Actor's Studio", doesn't that make sense to you? If you wrote a script and a small group of people were constantly trying to give credit to someone else, would you want to perpetuate that myth by giving it any credence at all?

Affleck, Damon AND Golding have all come out and said that Golding did NOT write GWH. To my knowledge, other than a very tongue-in-cheek reference in his book, Golding has denied having written any part of it at all (much less a rewrite).

So if you want "intelligent conversation", bring something to the table. We have written evidnce in the form of quotes from the parties involved on our side. You have hearsay from a person supposedly in the know. If this were a court of law, which side do you think would win?

I'd be willing to debate this further if you could produce one shred of evidence supporting your argument other than the sarcasm golding placed in his book, but I have a feeling you can't do that.

ksb

Follow Ups:

Re: Your arguments hold zero weight... TravisBickle 16:02:43 3/23/01 (4)
- Trying to be fair - What's your point? Neil 23:49:06 3/23/01 (0)
- What Neil 23:35:01 3/23/01 (0)
- A guess as to your source... Zeebadaboodee 20:46:50 3/23/01 (1)
  - ...he just wants us to think he knows Minnie *NT* Gringo_Nino 23:40:23 3/23/01 (0)

Post a Followup

E-Mail/Userid:
Password:

Subject:

Comments:
: : No... it is a well known fact that Goldman did a rewrite. : : You can all try to goad me as much as you want. I was hoping for some intellegent civilized exchanges about this. Silly me. : The problem with wanting intelligent conversation but not revealing your "source", is the fact that no one here believes you actually have on. Actually, that's not true. It's not that we don't believe it necessarily, but with no proof, it's difficult to believe. : No one would equate intelligent journalism with the National Enquirer, and one of the primary reasons is the fact that they print stories that rely on innuendo and half-truths. : The truth is, it is NOT a well known fact that Goldman did a rewrite. It is a well known fact that he looked at the script. you say that they denied it "at first", but find me an article or statement made by them that has admitted it since. : As for Affleck not mentioning it on "Actor's Studio", doesn't that make sense to you? If you wrote a script and a small group of people were constantly trying to give credit to someone else, would you want to perpetuate that myth by giving it any credence at all? : Affleck, Damon AND Golding have all come out and said that Golding did NOT write GWH. To my knowledge, other than a very tongue-in-cheek reference in his book, Golding has denied having written any part of it at all (much less a rewrite). : So if you want "intelligent conversation", bring something to the table. We have written evidnce in the form of quotes from the parties involved on our side. You have hearsay from a person supposedly in the know. If this were a court of law, which side do you think would win? : I'd be willing to debate this further if you could produce one shred of evidence supporting your argument other than the sarcasm golding placed in his book, but I have a feeling you can't do that. : ksb

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]