Hoff

I was just going to say the same. I've read most of the book at B&N, and seen it there several times.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/click Main Entry: 1click Pronunciation: 'klik http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clique Main Entry: clique Pronunciation: 'klEk, 'klik Emphasis added. 44. His belts spin.

It would seem a line-by-line breakdown is necessary here. Huh? I can go slower, if need be. Everyone who plays arcade games cares about scores. Ignoring the fact that "everyone" is disproved by my post, there are a lot of people who enjoy these sort of games as a time killer/time waster. Not a single one of these games would be any bit of fun by themselves. That's far from true: the games test reflexes and memory, which can not only be fun, but can invoke a sense of pride of the player does well. Playing Pac Man or Curveball by yourself is just as bad as playing basketball by yourself. That's comparing apples and oranges; basketball is a team sport, and an athletic competition. Furthermore, most of the games in the arcade -- if not all -- are single-player. What's fun is being challenged by someone and trying to out do his/her score, not so much the actual game. This is your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but you're presenting it as fact which is flawed. Also, I'm not saying that that's not the case for some people; it just seems trite to me, and so I like it when that parade is rained on. At no time did I say that my line of thinking was the only one. It's all about competition. I think we've covered this. Again, personal opinion. If someone is cheating, it takes all the fun out of it. Based on the belief that the only reason to play these games is for a high score, which I believe we've covered sufficiently. Let me expand on my earlier remarks. I have no problem with people taking pride in a high score, and I think cheaters should be outed. But when people start getting their panties in a knot over someone stealing their accolades on a game of internet Simon, that makes me laugh, and a part of me hopes the scores are never reset. It's post counts all over again. I know I'm not the first to make that analogy, but it's a good one and it bears repeating.

Okay, that's awesome.

Admin (I believe it was him) did his job within one hour of the offending thread's creation. NOT GOOD ENOUGH for this guy! I vote we elect an entrely new administrative staff to meet each and every need of the TSM population.

Are you suggesting that if a bad post isn't deleted in less than an hour after it's made, the mods aren't doing their job?! What are you, some kind of robot? They have lives. Until they show up to do their job, we now have a thread for soup.

There we go. Chili is to soup what Steve Austin is to John Cena. Soup is like chili without the substance, but it's hot and popular for some reason.

The Kanyon thread was improper to begin with, as it's not a WWE matter, nor is it a topic that warrants serious discussion. That was deserved, and the thread was also closed. The latter topic is just a continuation of a joke. No one's trying to "get themselves over," it's just humor. If it bothers you that much, steer the discussion back on track yourself with sound arguments stated intelligently and supported by evidence. If you can't do that -- or won't -- then you have no right to complain.

I hate soup. All soup. Soup is worse than Chris Masters. Soup is almost as bad as old people. I mean, if I wanted a tomato, I'd eat a tomato. If I wanted chicken, I'd eat chicken. If I wanted beef, and potatoes, and carrots, and onions, then I'd...all right, well, a good, hearty stew is okay, But soup? Right out.

Team up Shelton Benjamin and Funaki. Have them fight crime, only Shelton runs his mouth and then keeps messing up, and Funaki has to save him.

Yeah, '02 had a lot of fuck-ups...Jericho playing second fiddle, HHH being inflated, RVD's burial, the creation of a second World Title...but at least we didn't have Zach Gowen, Kevin Nash, or Goldberg running around in main events.

He deserved to win that match, it does nothing for Hogan. HBK was a awesome Heel and he could have been a REAL Heel against face Cena. And instead pussied out at the end of the match by shaking Hulk's hand, then became two faced (as usual) and insulted him the following night, then feuded with Chris Masters of all people on the following PPV showing fans that HBK was a face again. Cry me fucking a river. Yeah, they most likely booked that. It seems pretty clear that they wanted tweener Michaels vs. heel Angle vs. face Cena. But hey, whatever, he was a dick like ten years ago so anything he does is his fault and inexcusable.

That's not the first time I've seen you use this hyperbole. It's not funny. It's like a five year old trying to be funny. Just use "millionth" like everyone else. God. Anyway, I've got to say I support the cheating (if it's going on, which I have no idea or opinion on), because it makes things less fun for the people who care about high scores. If you're playing the games for fun, your score should be irrelevant. If you really need that source of pride, list your personal high scores in your sig and try to best yourself. Self-improvement is more of a challenge, anyway.

This argument, by the way, which you blew off without defending your own point, is also circumstantial evidence.

Housewife. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/...tial%20evidence - Until taking time off in June, Triple H held the World Heavyweight Championship approximately 60% of the time since its inception (source: http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/worldheavyweight/). This includes his matches with Batista. - Triple H is married to Stephanie McMahon, daughter of WWE Chairman Vince McMahon, and the couple are expecting their first child (source: http://www.wwe.com). - Triple H has been criticized by nearly every former employee of WWE, as well as some current ones (source: various WWE DVDs, various shoot DVDs, various video clips and radio segments). These criticisms have at times included the comment that Triple H is seen as having backstage power and being a member of management. This isn't a court of law and I don't have evidence to hand you, but it's all there. It's not hard to find. If you want to change people's minds, the burden of finding that evidence is on you. Otherwise, this is likely not a good fit for you as forums go.

You know what makes me think a person is smart? When they use a wrestler's real name. Man, that really ups my opinion of someone and totally lends creedence to their argument. Housewife. The generally held belief is that HHH has political power. There is circumstantial evidence to support that. As the one challenging popular opinion, the burden of proof is yours. Get on that.

That's been brought up before, and I've thought about it for awhile. I guess what it comes down to for me is that, if a face uses it in the "traditional" sense -- declaring his shot at a PPV months in advance -- there's no intrigue. It's not even that it's a bad idea, but now it's boring. I don't know, it may be a personal thing, but I don't like it. I could really only see it working if, say, it got down to a top face (with the MITB shot) vs. a top heel in the Rumble, and the heel won through nefarious means. The face then challenging for the shot @ WM would be interesting from a storyline standpoint, and offer the option to go to a triple threat. I still don't see an "honorable" face doing that. Might work on a young guy, someone in Maven's position at the end of 2004, but that's about it and that's awfully limited. I think my concern is also more to the fact that, sure, there's ways to retool it for this year, maybe even next, but it doesn't seem like it'd take long to get played out. That's what I loved about King of the Ring; the tournament itself was its own reward. You were supposedly KING of the squared circle. May not be WWE Champion, but there's only a handful of guys who've done it.

King of the Ring didn't result in a guaranteed title shot until 2002, the last year of the tournament. Some winners got one, but it was mainly a tournament simply for the rights to be called King of the Ring. It was also a tournament, which MITB isn't, and it was also elimination-style, which MITB isn't. Also, the winner never got to choose when they took their shot. But, other than that, it's really similar.

Hoff knows what's up.

Also, to everyone suggesting Money in the Bank 2: http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/blog/hoff/...p?showentry=419 Just my thoughts on the issue.

That's an interesting idea, but it seems so convoluted. It sounds like something off of Bischoff's RAW wheel. So, in that context, I suppose it could work. But it might be a lot for some fans to follow. Not to dispairage wrestling fans, but you know the type...the guy next to you at the house show wearing the camo Austin 3:16 hat, working on his fifth beer? Yeah. As for an elmination cage match, that's essentially what the Elimination Chamber is. It's doable. They've allowed pinfalls and submissions in the cage for awhile, now, although sometimes they get confused about their own rules. A ladder match would be tougher.

Is JBL really a big politician? I hadn't heard that before.

That must be really difficult to say while sitting in your computer chair.

Well, I don't think anyone really wants Shelton in the WWE Title Match just yet. He's good, he's athletic, but he's still young and even if you think he's ready for the big one, he still has a lot of career ahead of him.

I don't think what you said was that bad. I mean, it's true.