Some Guy

I think that Survivor Series 96-KotR 98 was the best booking period for WWF. Austin's emergance as a star. The Hart Foundation. HBK and Bret's running feud. DX starting up. Mr McMahon. The ME scene during that time ruled all (save Sid's title runs, but he was never booked as the top star), the booking was logical and flowed well from week to week. After the Kane title win at KotR 98 the booking went to hell when the stupid Kane and Taker feud invaded the ME scene and Russo got firm control. The booking in 2000 wasn't great, but with Benoit, Jericho, Eddy, Rock, HHH, and others the workrate was. 2000 is really when the troubles of not elevating anyone started. They had Jericho and Benoit (fresh off winning the WCW title) ready to roll but they opted to push Angle adn then cut his legs out from under him with the love triangle feud.

NOTE: I'm only counting JCP and TNA as NWA for this. Virtually every guy in the business has wretled some show promoted under the NWA banner. And I don't know everybody who has come through TNA. Guys who have appeared in ECW, WCW, and WWF are too numerous to bother with. Guys who have main evented PPVs for all three are not, I think Terry Funk is the only one (WCW GAB 89, WCW Halloween Havoc 89, WCW Fall Brawl 94, WWF NWO 98, ECW Harcore Heaven 97). How has nobody mentioned Jim Cornette? He worked for Mid-South/UWF, JCP (Jim Crockett Promotions NWA), WCW, WWF, ECW, ROH, SMW, OVW, etc... Steamboat worked for JCP, WWF, WCW, and TNA as well as ROH. Flair worked for JCP, AWA, WCW, and WWF. Ron Simmons - JCP, WCW, ECW, WWF. Al Snow - JCP, WCW (had a tryout), WWF, ECW. Rick Steiner - JCP, WCW, WWF, ECW. Perry Saturn - ECW, WCW, WWF, TNA. Raven - WCW, WWF, ECW, TNA, ROH. When did Scott Hall ever work for ECW? He had the semi-famous thing where he shoed up to see Aldo Montoya and DOuglas told him to fuck off. I don't ever remember him actually being part of the show. He was under contract to WWF and WCW throughout the entire existance of the promotion, save maybe a few months at the very end. Hall did work for AWA, WWF, WCW, USWA, amongst others but never for ECW that I know of.

I'm glad I'm old enough that I didn't have to deal with it. My first license was among the first with the goofy holgrams and what not. I never had a vertical one. I also narrowlyt missed the new law about having to have your learner's permit for 6 months and not being able to have minors in the car with you. Back in 98 they were such simpler times.

Without getting into a philosophical debate, I'd seize on definition 2, and offer the classic example of a tree falling in the woods - it fell, regardless of whether anyone saw it. (Whether it makes a sound, I'll leave as an exercise for someone who cares.) Thing is, judging by what you're writing, we agree about everything but a standard versus nonstandard definition of the word 'fact.' If you're depending on irrefutable evidence, you're needlessly restricting your definition of 'fact.' True. We disagree because the non-standard defintion of "fact" is wrong. There is a standard defintion, IE the correct defintion and the rest are wrong. How am I "needlessly restricting your definition of 'fact.'" It is quite warranted that I restrict my defintion to the proper one, not some make believe one. True. Irrelevant. Your quarrel is with the inappropriate appeal to authority, not with empirical evidence. OK. True. I agree wholeheartedly - that's why what a fact (in this case, the elusive accurate description of the process by which the diversity of species as we know it came to be) is isn't dependent on whether we've found 'definitive proof,' whatever that is. In this case, the diversity of species came to be by some process that we didn't witness. (Scientists will likely disagree with the way I phrased that. To them, I say, there's a reason I'm not a scientist.) That we don't have definitive proof doesn't change what the fact of that process is. I'd also suggest that the evidence points strongly in favor of the evolution theory. I never argued that the case for evolution wasn't way stronger than creationism, quite the opposite actually. All I argued were that they both were theories, with one having way more merit than the other. The "fact" is that the earth and all of her species are here, the theories are attempts to explain that. I don't really give a shit why we are here or how we got here. We are and I try to do the beat I can with what I have.

That was part of the point about bias reporting on issues by people who hold certain beliefs. If I went to whatever site that bigolsmitty went to I'm sure I find everything he said, if I went to a site with the opposite view I'm sure I could find stuff refuting whatever global warming advocates say. No one has paid me a nickel to believe what I do and yet I still do. If I were to be paid to express my opinion it would still remain the same. My point was that money doesn't always effect anything.

Just a quibble - it's probable that one of them is fact. You're confusing "a fact" with "something we have irrefutable evidence for." An analogy is an unsolved murder - it's a fact that someone murdered the victim, even if it can't be definitively proven who it was. It's also possible that evidence points strongly toward a particular suspect, even if it can't be definitively proven that he committed the murder. A fact is something that can be backed up with irefutable evidence. A fact would be that 2+2=4 or that I wear size 12 shoes. Those are backed up by irefutable evidence. The former becuase it was decided and became the standard and the latter by the boots on my feet. The devlopment of the earth is obviously a fact as last I checked I'm living on it, I never disputed that. Whether God or the big bang or evolution is responsible is no more than theory, hence "the theory of evolution." None of those have been proven, some have more evidence to suggest their validity than others but none are fact. "Fact," according to my dictionary means: 1. a deed; act. 2. a thing that has actually happned or that is really true; thing that has been or is. 3. The state of things as they are; reality; actuallity; truth. I could say that Papa Smurf invented Kool-Aid and find some kook to back me up, but that doesn't make it true, nor a fact which are one and the same. There is no such thing as "ones man's truth." The truth is the truth and their is only one. Their is a such thing as one man's interpretation of the truth or of the facts, but that doesn't make it true or the facts. As far as your analogy about murders, no one is judged in the as to whether or not they are 100% guilty or innocent. People are judged guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or not guilty. Being innocent and being found not guilty are not the same thing. I undestand your point but just because evidence may point one directiong or another doesn't necessarilly make it true. It seems that somewhere along the lines the defintion of fact has been lost.

Where would one get said photo ID? High School? My only photo ID is my driver's license. Chances are if you are a legal imigrant from the 3rd world that you wouldn't have a birth certificate, either. Why not just run the person's name through the computer. If it comes up that they are illegal then arrest and deport them. Seems to me that that would be a better way and would curb a lot of problems. This is all about illegal imigration, Tim McVeigh would have been able to get a license and blow up the OK City Building and there is really no way to prevent domestic terrorists if you have no inkling that they're are going to strike. You can do soemthing to stop foriegners from attacking by more careful screening, not letting illegals have licenses, tightening the borders, etc... There is no need to bother American born citizens with shit like this, it's a waste of time and won't accomplish anything.

I have, sadly, seen this too. It is sad to see things like Creationism and Scientology discussed seriously. Someone even complained to me that in our society people don't want to accept things as truth unless they can be proven. Uh, yeah, people generally like to accept only FACTUAL INFORMATION as "truth." Well, neither evolution nor creationism is fact. They are both theories that cannot be definitavely proven. The former certainly has much more proof behind it than the latter. And since I'm a Godless heathen I tend to buy into evolution more than the magical man in the sky created the world deal. Evolutuion strikes me as much more logical.

bigolsmitty, if I posted a bunch of stuff showing that global warming proponents accepted funding from environmental groups would that taint their claims in your opinion? Just because someone accepts funding does not mean that his opinion is tainted and furthermore it does not mean that he came to his conclusions based soley on that money. Ann Coulter gets paid to right columns expousing conservative politics by conservatives, I somehow doubt that she was politically neutral until evil conservatives came along and paid her to side with them. I would argue that said conservatives paid her to write columns because she was in fact already on their side. On the flip side Al Franken gets paid to do much the same for the other side. He was full of shit before he ever got paid for it. The money that Air America is paying him had nothing to do with it. It just made him a wealthier man who is full of shit. Money does not always indicate bias. This is something that many people tend to have trouble comprehending.

Because they nearly went bankrupt a few years ago. They need all they can get. Nobody buy comics anymore. Despite the massive success of the X-Men and Spider-Man movies is has meant little to the comic book sales. Stan Lee co-created most of the characters you mentioned and as Starvenfger pointed out Lee fucked over both Kirby and Ditko, so I suppose what goes around comes around.

Are there any pics of CC?

Go for it. I'll give you my opinion of her. Send the nude pics that you mentioned. I think I need those to properly judge her.

Yup, Worcester is pretty shitty, I went to a wedding down there whichw as held in a hall rigt next to the Centrum, whuch was hosting an ICP conert. My grandmother was unintentionally funny when she asked why all those people had their faces painted like wierd looking clowns and a WWF house show (HHH/Austin headlined with Benoit/Saturn on the undercard) amongst other visits for various reasons. I live in Winchester, which borders on Woburn, Lexington, Medford, and Stoneham. I assume that you will have heard of at least one of those towns and everybody in America should have heard of at least Lexington for the whole Battle of Lexington and Concord deal.

Where in Mass are you from? OK, I figured by the Nomar pic that you were from here but "down there" means RI to me. South Carolina is little far for a relationship. You could be her long distance hero though.

Where are you from and where is she from?

I started out going to a site called LPNewboard or something like that. All the news was followed with "credit 411." It's funnier in hindisght.

No, your a pussy if you don't try to move in. Do not and I repeat do not be her shoulder to cry on unless you want to be her friend and go home to jerk off after hanging out with her, rather than getting your dinky stinky.

Maybe so, but either way it worked.

Chyna was protected from the day she debuted until they fired her. Foley has said that there was a no touching rule for the boys when it came to her. She could slam, hurrancanrana, and low blow them all she wanted but they couldn't hit back. I think that is more a case of smart booking than a case of HHH protecting her. Too bad it seems like smart booking has disapeared from the WWF since 97. Chyna drew money for the company, for better or worse she drew people to watch. I have no use for her, but obviously some people liked her a lot. I've been watching a ton of 97 and 98 Raws lately and the way she was booked was great as far a making a star. She was the voice of reason in DX, thus smarter than the others, she never got hit, thus making her appear tough when men sold for her, and she never talked (she told Foley to kiss her "assth" in June 97 and spoke Spanish to the Boriquas in Feb 98), thus not exposing her inability to speak without a lisp at that point. They did a great job making her a star. Too bad HHH fucked her over and she went insane, or which ever came first.

I decided to hold off a week. I couldn't come up with anything that didn't suck.

I hadn't thought about RVD. He would fit into the category. Watch his DVD and witness huge markishness for one's self.

Shawn may have said that but he also claimed in 2003 that he was in the WWF for 20 years and that he and HHH's feud was nearly ten years in the making when he had been in the WWF for 14 years and HHH had only been in the WWF for 8 and they weren't even on screen partners until Sept. 97, which was 6 years. HBK can be slightly delusional at times, in case you hadn't noticed. I think Booker and Benoit's "Best of Seven" was actually nine matches, not 8, but I could be wrong. People, marks especially always get dates and such wrong, so that type of thing is not really worth mentioning. Like the Hogan heel speech on Nitro being the week after BatB, which I had forgotten about until I found the tapes a few weeks ago. The show after BatB saw the Outsiders doing shit like putting an nWo logo over the big metal WCW one on top of the arena at Disney and invading the production truck, I think.

Yeah, Taz was a huge mark for himself, watch his RF Shoot for proof. I really enjoyed the guy's gimmick and liked the Tazplexes, but he was a pretty crappy worker in general. He seemed to think he was the best in the world at that point. That said, he was money in the bank that WWF wasted in 2000. Hogan wasn't so much a mark for himself as he was a mark for making money. If you can even call greedyness being a mark. JJ is more delusional than a mark for himself. I think he reallt believes that he should be in that spot, when it is apparent to everyone else that he doesn't. Dusty is a huge mark for himself. There is no other reason that he would book those two TNA bitches to be feuding over who gets to fuck him.

What was this all about?

Yup, except without all the smart kids from the 12th grade. Only the misfits and pot heads make it to the ultimate in education that is Community College. I have an Associates Degree in Criminal Justice and a BS in Political Science, neither were very difficult to attain and both are equally useless. I am currently doing temp work calling a bunch of dip shit college students who applied for some scheme called Campus Fundraiser. If any of you guy want to talk to me then just apply and you have a 1 and 4 chance of getting the honor of talking to me while I'm completely miserable for having to talk to you.