Quote: 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="FBT" data-cid="187596" data-time="1398971906">
<div>
I know you're not the sharpest tool in the shed.  I can't help you there.  But, since I actually know the people involved in this discussion, and I know for a fact what the motivation was for him taking the job, I guess you'll just have to take my word for it, unless of course you'd like to try to ask Vic for yourself. 

 

It doesn't actually matter, you see.  The only problem is that you took your tool out of the shed and waved it around.

It wasn't the fact or non-fact of a pension, it was your statement that you had "confirmed " the issue.  Ya didn't.

Or do you believe that saying, "you'll just have to take my word for it" = "confirmation beyond any shadow of a doubt"? 

When you use imprecise language, you only confuse yourself and others.

</div>
</blockquote>
 

If it doesn't matter, why does it seem to bother you so much?  Is it because I actually spoke to the people involved, and have some insight here?  Is that is your issue? 

 

I haven't used "imprecise language" here.  I've been pretty specific in my point.  The only one confused here is you. 

 

It's funny because I just had an opportunity to speak to the other person who was privy to this conversation about 3 weeks ago, and the subject of Vic leaving came up again, and his point was that it was a shame we had to lose him, but covering the Packers is something Vic couldn't turn down, AND he really needed to buckle down on his retirement as he wasn't getting any younger, and the Packers had the additional incentive of a pension plan that wasn't offered here.

 

I'm not sure how I'm supposed to validate that for you, but if you don't believe it, feel free to click the ignore button on my posts because otherwise you're just going to have to suffer your skepticism.

---