From your last link:

« There has been no denial from anyone saying the report was wrong and Danault has said he doesn’t want to talk about his contract situation. »

Bergevin doesn’t comment on contract negotiations ever. It’s not his job to refute erroneous reports. All of this stems from the report in La Presse last year. Danault himself, speaking to the Montreal press, confirmed he never received a contract offer from Bergevin. I trust Danault’s word over that of newspaper reporters, who are much more likely to get leaked information from agents than from Bergevin, imho.

Now it’s a « fact » because you read it in the newspaper?

I just shared links showing where the reported a contract offer, I could not find any saying that Danault denied the offer existed but that doesn't mean much cause sometime the French stories are harder to locate. I did not hear he denied the contract offer ever existed until now. I definitely believe him as well, even IF MB said it did exist because MB has already been proven a liar regarding players contracts and trades. Most recently Mete's request for a trade comes to mind.

Really why are you being condescending? Are you just looking for something to argue about? Seriously you are twisting what I am saying because you don't agree that Danault is worth more or whatever. I could ask you to prove where he denied the contract offer but I took your word for it. Now since you are being condescending PROVE to me that you are not a LIAR and that Danault in fact did refute the contract offer! Otherwise stop being a D.

Your argument is that since it was written in a newspaper it must be true?

I don’t read newspapers. Too much spin, imho. I watch what the players say directly. Available daily on the Habs website. You’re welcome to scour the video archives if it interests you to that extent. Personally, I’d just advise you not to believe everything you read.

You wrote the word « fact. ». We have different standards for that word. You don’t need to agree.

I don’t particularly care what conclusion you come to. You have the right to your own opinions. Even the wrong ones.

I NEVER said it was true I said it was reported! There is a huge gap between what is reported and what is true and until either side refutes or acknowledges a report there is no way to identify what is actually true. It is a FACT that REPORTEDLY Danault turned down a 5 MIl x 6 year contract offer, Those were my exact words I did not say, it is a FACT that Danault turned down a 5 MIl x 6 year contract offer!

You could also write that « it’s a fact that Danault maybe turned down a contract ». Poor choice of words/poor English in both examples.

Just say « reported ». No use for the word « fact » in your sentence.

Your response dismissing the previous post was akin to alleging that it was the turning down of the contract that was actually the fact.

And re: decorum, keep in mind that it was you who was dismissive of exo2769’s point of view. Based not on fact, but based on a report, trying to masquerade your point as « fact ».

If you’re gonna be loud and call someone out, it’s better to make sure you’re not wrong in the way you present yourself.

This is the ONLY story I can find that reports that Danault did not receive a contract offer from the Canadiens and it is NOT Danault speaking to the Montreal media it is Danault's Agent Stephane Fiset talking with TSN960. He only said that he submitted Pageau's contract as a comparable (6 years, 30 Mil) and that contract was never offered. This may be true or it may just be a negotiating tactic used because the fanbase was falling out of love with Danault and his demands. Truth is NO ONE not me not you not anyone outside of the room with MB and Fiset knows what was truly offered and what was not, all we have to go on is what is REPORTED.

https://www.gohabsgo.com/articles/update-regarding-phillip-danault-contract-situatio/

I didn't dismiss Exo's POV I contradicted it with the ONLY available information I could find (media reports). I was not masquerading anything a s fact I specifically said REPORTEDLY in my response.

You were the one being condescending and I tried to have restraint in my responses but I am only human and can only take so much crap before I went on the offensive and started demanding proof from you that what you were saying was true (which by the way you NEVER provided and like a true liar responded by saying that you didn't need to prove anything)

Using the word « fact » to describe the existence of a « speculative report » is disingenous at best. To the extent that you care, the proof of what Danault did or did not say, is on the Habs website. HabsTV more specifically. I don’t particularly care what you choose to do with that information. Your life is your own.

Calling people liars, or « true liars » now, just makes you look weak. You are welcome to ignore my AC GM posts going forwards.

Yes you are human. Some humans react well, and others poorly. Your decisions are what put you in one of those two categories. The choice is up to you who you wish to be.

I assume you mean something like being condescending towards another person because they disagree with your point of view or you just don't like the player or whatever!

As for using the word 《fact》 to describe the existence of a report. Does the report exist? Yes it does therefore it I a FACT that the report exists. I can't help you to understand the English language and I apologize if I used too big of words for you or whatever.