The Great Barrier Reef is in trouble , and it ' s bleaching quickly . It was on my bucket list to go and scuba dive there but I ' m worried by the time I have the money to go there , it will be dying or dead . <| sep |> Have you tried to repair the client ? also , you can lauch the legacy client on the login screen and there was a post to make the legacy always open instead of the beta one , <| sep |> But you don ' t know how my mind works . You saying I have recency bias is a label that you ' ve placed on me simply because I said I think Steve Smith is deserving of the HOF . As if that was the only possible thing that could make sense for you . It ' s like saying if you dont believe in God you ' re going to hell because . the Bible . You ' re putting words in my mouth like you ' re putting artificial facts in your head . Steve Smith may not stack up to what you believe is universal law for what it means to be a HOF player . That ' s fine for you , but I ' m allowed to have my opinion on who I think is deserving just like the voters are every single year who don ' t argree in unison . And I ' m not obligated to recognize some authority that really just doesn ' t exist . Hines Ward didn ' t retire that long ago and I don ' t think he deserves to be in while alot of people think he has a decent chance to get in . Those people simply have a different opinion . I ' m not going to point fingers and cry recency bias though as if that is the only reason why they believe he is deserving . So why is my opinion irrelevant , but the sportswriters who are chosen every single year from across the country more valid ? Are they going back 20 plus years and looking at every single play for every single player in every single game and comparing them to every other player that is eligible ? Or is it just based on recollection ? Where is the factual process there ? What is the objective strategy ? Looking at a list of statistics isn ' t going to tell anyone how well Stan Brock was as a tackle . It isn ' t going to tell you how well Jimmy Smith ran routes , how fast he was , or how he dominated one on one coverage in addition to putting up big numbers . What it actually takes is not an objectiveby the book process and it never has been . It ' s subjective reasoining . Which is why votes are required in the first place . Why vote if everyone already knows who should be in via what it takes ? And why are certain voters picked every year over other voters ? Derek Loville or Mike Wilson didn ' t retire top five in anything . Neither did Sharpe or Davis . Or even Troy Aikman who is in Canton . Yes he has multiple rings . So do a lot of other players who didn ' t finish top ten in anything . Personally I see that as a team accomplishment more than an individual one anyways . I wasn ' t advocating that Loville or Wilson should be Hall of Famers . I was simply throwing out uncontextualied blanket statements like you did with a couple of other players in comparison to Steve Smith as if that was an end allbe all argument . And for Smith , I think he has a good case for Canton based on what I saw compared to other great players . You keep saying statistics are objective and seem to be insinuating that since it is what is available , it should be considered unbeatable information . But this has never been the case for football , even with advanced metrics of today . Where are the statistics for Jerry Kramer of the Packers ? How do stats tell someone how good or bad Leslie O ' Neal was against the run ? Or Jevon Kearse ? How do stats tell a voter how good Eric Allen was as a tackler ? Or how good Eddie George was at picking up a blitz ? Relying on consistently uncontextualized information and passing it off as a solid method to evaluate a player ' s career is really an illogical approach . Stats should be used as an assistant to evaluation in addition to other methods . Not as a crutch though . Stats don ' t lie with they information they provide , but the information provided by them to make an informed decision is incomplete . If off the field personality is the exception then I ' m guessing Ray Lewis is in for a long wait . Yet Larewnce Taylor is in . Ok . And Joe Horrigan , president of the HOF tells voters every year and advocates to others that only on the field accolades should be recognized with everything else ignored . Yet if what you say is true by the voters in regards to personal feelings of non football dynamics playing a role in the voting process which I believe is true then it just adds further nonobjective reasoning to the fire . Which would go agianst the established rules by the book thinking of electing a candidate . How the process works is not objective and never has been . If it was we wouldn ' t need voters , and certainly wouldn ' t need those same voters to rely on unreliable information to make an informed decision . And I wasn ' t putting words in your mouth . I was responding to what I thought you were insinuating . Those two things aren ' t mutually exclusive .