Gailey misspeaks about earls' condition

Why was this a misspeak? I haven't seen a lot about the situation, so I don't know.
 
gth816f said:
Why was this a misspeak? I haven't seen a lot about the situation, so I don't know.
Click to expand...
Positive test results are bad. He meant positive as in good results. Earls' test results were negative.
 
Positive as in good, a plus. Meaning he is ok since that is a positive. Good luck on the SAT's Kyle.
 
demjackets said:
Positive as in good, a plus. Meaning he is ok since that is a positive. Good luck on the SAT's Kyle.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure I did better on the SATs than you.

Very bad wording on his part.

I just got my AIDS test back today. It was as positive as it could be at this point!
 
GTKyle said:
I'm pretty sure I did better on the SATs than you.

Very bad wording on his part.

I just got my AIDS test back today. It was as positive as it could be at this point!
Click to expand...

Think so? Wow I couldn't tell. It was about as positive news as we could here. Sorry about the AIDS, thats bad.:biggthumpup:
 
Well...by trying to key in and nail Gailey on a technicality, you've only shown your own incompetence with the english language. When referring to a medical test using "positive" and "negative", it can only be positive or negative. There is no half positive, or 75% positive, or 33% negative. By using the word "as", Chan implied that he was speaking about something other than a binary situation. Thus, we can infer that he was speaking about the what all the results, taken together, said about Earls' condition. If you think that it would be better for Earls' situation to be negative, I think you are alone. I think you are also the only one who misinterpreted Gailey's statement, if in fact you honestly did and weren't just looking for something to bash him about.
 
This is a ridiculous piece of nitpicking.

Besides, Chan Gailey has a fine Physical Education degree from Florida so you know he's got to be bright.
 
Really man, how old are you? He didn't say a particular test was positive or negative. He said that overall it was as positive as could be. You're the one who has misspoken...again.
 
knoxjacket said:
Besides, Chan Gailey has a fine Physical Education degree from Florida so you know he's got to be bright.
Click to expand...

Hey that's almost as prestigious as Reggie Ball's management degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology :).
 
As a current Tech student I'd like to assure everyone that we don't all lack tact.

Thank you.
 
gth816f said:
Well...by trying to key in and nail Gailey on a technicality, you've only shown your own incompetence with the english language. When referring to a medical test using "positive" and "negative", it can only be positive or negative. There is no half positive, or 75% positive, or 33% negative. By using the word "as", Chan implied that he was speaking about something other than a binary situation. Thus, we can infer that he was speaking about the what all the results, taken together, said about Earls' condition. If you think that it would be better for Earls' situation to be negative, I think you are alone. I think you are also the only one who misinterpreted Gailey's statement, if in fact you honestly did and weren't just looking for something to bash him about.
Click to expand...
O rly? Let's make some more assumptions.

First off he was referring to multiple tests. So, yes there could be 75% positive or 33% negative results. Thus, you are wrong.

2nd off, when did I ever say I wanted Gailey fired right now? I am not bashing him. That will come at the end of the season if we don't do well.
 
GTKyle said:
I'm pretty sure I did better on the SATs than you.

Very bad wording on his part.

I just got my AIDS test back today. It was as positive as it could be at this point!
Click to expand...

When posting on GT board with GT fans and alums it is not only arrogant but downright ignorant to assume you did better on the SATs than anyone. Most folks who have a pull toward GT are quite bright. Granted their verbal sores aren't always all that great but unless you scored perfect on the math, I assume you scored lower than many posters here. And even then, you simply tied them/us.

Gailey's comments were not grammatically incorrect.
 
thwg said:
When posting on GT board with GT fans and alums it is not only arrogant but downright ignorant to assume you did better on the SATs than anyone. Most folks who have a pull toward GT are quite bright. Granted their verbal sores aren't always all that great but unless you scored perfect on the math, I assume you scored lower than many posters here. And even then, you simply tied them/us.

Gailey's comments were not grammatically incorrect.
Click to expand...
In response to an insult I find it entirely appropriate. You can kindly kiss my ass.

As far as Gailey's comments:
Grammatically, no. Semantically, maybe.
 
GTKyle said:
O rly? Let's make some more assumptions.

First off he was referring to multiple tests. So, yes there could be 75% positive or 33% negative results. Thus, you are wrong.

2nd off, when did I ever say I wanted Gailey fired right now? I am not bashing him. That will come at the end of the season if we don't do well.
Click to expand...

Yeah...you're right. And, you know, when there's only one light on in a house, we refer to the house's lights as being "as off as possible", because a certain percentage of them are off.

And clearly you are looking for a reason to bash Gailey, otherwise this ridiculous thread never would have been made. Even if he had misspoken, which he didn't, everyone knew what he meant, so what is the point of posting this?
 
Kyle, I suggest you leave the Mr. Language Person shtick to Dave Barry.

Imagine if you will, a test doctors often perform where they drag something across the bottom of your foot or tap your palm to test your nerve responses. If your nerves are still functioning, guess what? A "positive" result means your nerves are still functioning, i.e. it is good! Or what if a doctor shines a little light in your eye to see if your pupil will dilate - once again positive is a good thing. So the generalization that you base your silly complaint on is not even valid.

Chan Gailey is not a medical professional, and when he says something, medical or otherwise, is "as positive as possible" any idiot should be able to understand what he is talking about. No matter what his SAT scores were.
 
gth816f said:
Yeah...you're right. And, you know, when there's only one light on in a house, we refer to the house's lights as being "as off as possible", because a certain percentage of them are off.

And clearly you are looking for a reason to bash Gailey, otherwise this ridiculous thread never would have been made. Even if he had misspoken, which he didn't, everyone knew what he meant, so what is the point of posting this?
Click to expand...
If I was bashing him I would have said something like "He is such an idiot." I haven't bashed him in any other thread, so why would I start now?

I don't know why I posted this. Maybe I just felt like arguing? You guys are fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top