So a setup poll and then an additional thread just to say, "Quit being mean to me, goshdarnit!"
Outstanding.
If you want to know why you tend to get some vitriolic reactions when you post your hundredth "Flynn is so dreamy and tons better than Wilson" thread of the day, this is why:
Your posts on the QB situation are intellectually dishonest. You base your arguments on false premises and then support them with logical fallacies. And then when people point out those fallacies, you ignore those posts and continue asking, "Why won't people address these points?!"
Let's start with your favorite approach. You like to argue that Flynn should be starting because he clearly beat out Jackson in training camp/preseason, and Wilson hasn't represented an improvement over Jackson. Ergo, in your world, that means Flynn is better than Wilson.
You argument that Wilson isn't an improvement over Jackson was based - at least 5 games in - on the idea that Jackson threw for 60 more yards per game than Wilson on average, and you somehow equated those 60 more yards with being a better or more capable QB. When it was pointed out to you that Jackson had many, many more attempts (10 more per game on average) and that the Seahawks had gone to a no-huddle offense early in the 2011 season, you ignored it. In fact, you instead turned it around as an excuse for Jackson, suggesting that he had a harder task in putting up those extra yards because he had no running game (rather than acknowledging that there was no run game precisely BECAUSE the team was going pass-happy).
It's no surprise that you've abandoned that particular approach since Wilson threw for 293 against the Patriots, now claiming that Jackson and Wilson are essentially on par. But even that claim isn't based in reality. It doesn't account for what the coaches are asking Wilson to do. It doesn't account for the quality of opponents.
"But I'm not talking about comparing those two QBs!" you say. You say, instead, that your point is about the treatment of Flynn supporters. But what you fail to note is that the treatment that you've seen in response to your posts, at least, has been in response to your repeated comparisons between Wilson and Jackson. I don't have anything against you, and I don't have anything against someone who thinks Flynn would play better than Wilson (even though I think they'd be wrong). What I do have an issue with is the specious arguments you've continued to make.