Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ateamstupid
So because he's a good horse in California, that makes him a good horse? I don't understand your logic. Being a bad horse everywhere else doesn't make him bad, but being a good horse in California makes him good?
|
Why do we have to figure out whether he deserves the label "good" or "bad" at all? I think maybe it is a bit more complex than that. He is one horse in SoCal, and a different horse ouside of it. Why can't we leave it at that? Do we really need to say that on an overall "goodness scale" of 1 through 10 he is a 6.75 or whatever you would rank him?