WWE vs. the internet is up...

[Guest OnlyMe]

at thesmartmarks.com.

 

Uploaded 4 days after Dames' Bad Blood column, but still placed below it on the main page.

 

Comments? Feedback?

[The Dames 0]

The three articles at the top are "pinned" so to speak.

 

Dames

[Guest TheGame2705]

It was an ok read. Nothing new in the way of discussion and you missed some points from the opposing view but nothing big.

[Guest OnlyMe]

The three articles at the top are "pinned" so to speak.

 

You whore.

[The Dames 0]

...Hey, I didn't pin my own column!

 

Dames

[Garth 0]

Nice read, kept my attention for 10 minuites which is not exactly easy to do.

[Guest OnlyMe]

...Hey, I didn't pin my own column!

 

I got a "highly recommended" out of it, so I can't complain

[Guest Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye]

Not a bad read at all. Pretty typical Smark company line VS WWE company line. I actually think this should be read by anyone who has just recently been 'smartened up'. It will give them a direction to go in. They will easily blend into the general Smark collective. And it will give them a cause to fight for. Pretty much an indication of what's on the "Other Side" now that they know wrestling is fake.

[Guest Nevermortal]

Now let's all see if he plagiarized!

 

[google.com]

[Guest Dillon Likes Bossman]

Good read. Nothing of ground-breaking proportions. But nice.

[Guest Ghettoman]

Not too be a dick, because you put some serious thought and effort into it, but it was a bit of a waste. Your not saying anything people can't gather from there own thinking and your not really offering a point of view that hasn't been offered before. Sorry.

[Guest HartFan86]

I loved the article. Great job.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Whine whine whine whine whine.

 

I will never understand these opinions.

 

I actually think this should be read by anyone who has just recently been 'smartened up'. It will give them a direction to go in.

 

Yeah, a pretty negative direction. I know people who have "smartened up" as you put it and don't feel a need to hate on the WWE. Granted, many of them don't watch anymore, but it has nothing to do with what someone feels of the more hardcore fans.

[Guest OnlyMe]

Whine whine whine whine whine.

 

I will never understand these opinions.

 

Mine?

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Whine whine whine whine whine.

 

I will never understand these opinions.

 

Mine?

Not just yours really, because you're simply jumping on a bandwagon that has been running for about 2 years or so.

[Guest CanadianChick]

I don't really think he's whining in his article. He's just stating opinion. It's a popular opinion, yes, but it isn't really whining.

[Guest OnlyMe]

Not just yours really, because you're simply jumping on a bandwagon that has been running for about 2 years or so.

 

Bollocks. I stated different points of view, and gave a brief commentary on them. If I'm whining anywhere, it's about Bradshaw's comments.

[Adam 0]

Great column dude, got my attention.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Bollocks. I stated different points of view, and gave a brief commentary on them. If I'm whining anywhere, it's about Bradshaw's comments.

Viewing figures are one way of seeing what was popular, but "watched by a lot of people" doesn't equal "good."

 

At the same time, great wrestling doesn't mean a successful show for a business. Last I checked, Ring Of Honor doesn't have worldwide tours and nationwide TV deals. Last I checked, the Booker/Benoit Best Of Seven didn't garner the greatest Nitro rating ever.

 

Bad wrestling may not be successful, but neither is good wrestling? If WWE has a choice between popular bad wrestling matches and little-watched good wrestling matches, which do you think they'll go with? As much as I hate him, this is why Fuck Goldberg is getting pushed, because people will flip over to watch his bad matches. I don't know why that happens, it just is.

 

Props to you for bringing up unique points and ditching the elitest attitude that usually comes with rants on this subject, but this issue is a river of shit that's been flowing for quite some time now. It continues to flow everytime someone assumes the WWE hates them or neeringly comments about how Byte This will hang up on them for being TOO BIG OF A WRESTLING SMARTEY LOLOLO.

[Guest Cerebus]

I'd like to read an article about marks rather than how smarks are better than WWE. For example, I dled several really great matches (toryuman, NJPW, **** & ***** matches from WCW & WWF/E) and showed it some friends of mine who are casual fans and even friends who aren't really wrestling fans at all. I was surprised to see them watching and loving these matches (which usually had a little more than punch-kick-irish whip-pedigree) and many saying "You know if wrestling was more like this I would watch" It seems that marks (the ppl MacMahon apparently knows better than anybody else) desire to see many of the same things WE do. High flying matches, good in-ring psychology, funny promos, unique submission moves, storylines that make sense etc.

[Guest TheGame2705]

They should hire back Russo and the whoever did WCW's storylines in 1995 and 1996. Then we'll have interesting storylines.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

It seems that marks (the ppl MacMahon apparently knows better than anybody else) desire to see many of the same things WE do.

Everyone wants good TV, but I dunno about that. I think once someone sees something that makes them say "Holy shit!" the first time, they have a fondness for those kinds of matches. I talked about how a Mick Foley beatdown was the first match to make me pay attention to WWF, and as a result I've always loved HIACs and other garbagey matches. Heck, I even kinda liked HHH vs Nash at the past PPV, although the monotony between the foreign object shots could have been more entertaining with different guys in there.

 

Not sure marks take so much notice of match psychology and such, judging by the huge pops when Mick or Undertaker or Fuck Goldberg (in WCW) no-sell a chair shot.

 

 

Hell, when I was a mark, I usually just stopped watching when a match began on Raw, coming back when I heard the winner's music blare. I was all about the 20 minute promos and the backstage skits, and depending on who's involved, I sometimes still am (see: Rock.)

[Guest JMA]

Man, Bradshaw comes off as a real ass.

[Guest TheGame2705]

WWE doesn't like you. Because you know too much

No, WWE doesn't like the fact that we're telling them how to do their job usually in a condescending manner.

 

Vince McMahon has always been set against the internet, and despite the death of kayfabe, he has still not warmed to it

If Vince hated the internet there'd be no WWE.com.

 

How often do you hear a WWE employee decry the internet, "smart" fans as a bunch of kids? For example, Triple H in April 2003's Raw magazine said "What some six-year-old in Podunk thinks about the show that night, or the match I had... It's a bunch of crap."

How often do you hear someone online decry the WWE as a boring, decrepid piece of crap? What Triple H said is true to a degree. He doesn't need to care about what his criticizers think. The name-calling by Triple H isn't necessary and if you get mad when he insults the net maybe you should meet a friend of mine, his name's Kettle. Kettle already knows he's black, no need to tell him.

 

While there are a few who try hard to be journalists, there are many who just want to be heard, probably because they are computer-loving geeks who don't have an athletic bone in their bodies and are mad at the world. They probably had their lunch money stolen by some big guy when they were young, and this is their way of "striking back."

Now what the fucking hell is that meant to mean? "Probably because they are computer loving geeks..." Way to talk about your fans there, Justin. You talentless piece of shit. And yeah, I'm just saying that because I'm a computer-loving geek without an athletic bone in my body, and I'm mad at the world. Oh, and because I had my lunch money stolen by some big guy when I was young and this is my way of striking back. Nothing personal. You twat.

Ooo striking back with another insult. Do it some more and maybe you’ll be better than Bradshaw. To be honest even thought it’s a big generalization, the majority of smarks are people who are fat, have a computer, and an interest in discussing wrestling. The biggest example being Scott Keith. Go through the pictures thread here and more than a few look like “geeks”. It doesn’t justify him in anyway but then again as the situation with H, call them names, they’ll call you them right back.

 

Another typical WWE response to "online rumours" is to discredit them

Doesn't EVERYONE trying and discredit rumors about them? Hell I can think of hundreds about me.

 

Jim Ross made it a weekly thing in the Ross Report to discredit some of the stories that were going round the internet at that point.

All I remember him talking about was his sauce, the injuries, and how it's harder than it looks. If he ever did try to discredit a rumor, well gosh darnit, WWE is evil and Jim Ross can go to hell because what kind of person tries to deny nasty rumors.

 

I don’t see how Hurricane was different in how he treated internet rumors about him. He called the torch bullshit and also used an insult “I have too much fun doing what I do to let some keyboard warrior try to bring me down"

 

Even respected sites get it wrong sometimes, and that is the very nature of rumours: They may be true.

Poor Jim Ross, he's not supposed to say if they're true or false.

 

Additionally, it does seem that internet fans can be overly negative. Obviously, the solution to this should be "make better shows",

I don't think making better shows will stop all the negativity to be honest.

 

but obviously you can't please everyone all of the time, but WWE should know what they are doing by now. I think that it is easier for people to talk at length about the things that were bad, such as the infamous Lance Storm "humiliation" segment on Raw this week, simply because there is more mileage. With something good, it's easy to say "wow, that was awesome" and then move on. With the bad, you can talk about how stupid it was, why it was stupid and what they should have done.

I can't argue with you here except I can say that it's more frequent that a topic will be overdone rather than "constructive criticism" being given and forgetting about it. Usually no criticism other than WWE sucks is given.

 

HHH next went onto a tirade about the internet community. He used the tired old argument that the internet actually just a bunch of kids on their parents' computers, writing about an industry which they've never competed in. - byte this.

 

These points have been stated a million times, but just to recap:

 

1) Stereotyping gets you nowhere

Oh really so calling bigger wrestlers hosses and saying they all can't work is all for nothing. For shame.

2) "Kids on their parent's computers" is the best he can come up with?

I'm sure he could but if he did, everyone would be on it.

3) And no, I've never competed in a wrestling match. Does that mean I know nothing about wrestling? I've never made a movie – can I not review those? Or not even have an opinion on them?

If you've never competed in a match then you don't know what having one is like so it's easy to criticize.

 

It's ridiculous, because if they embraced the internet, they could have a DIRECT LINE of contact with the fans.

Why wouldn't they want to have a quicker way of being told they suck? This may sound neato but to be blunt, some smarks have stupid ideas. If you listened to and catered to some of the things that have been suggested, I'm sure there would be even less viewers. Another thing is, what smarks want isn't always what the regular fans want. Marks like Goldberg, smarks don't. Should Vince listen to his net fans because he gets all these responses on WWE.com from his DIRECT LINE? Feedback is good but there will never be one common desire derived from feedback that you can use.

 

Viewing figures are one way of seeing what was popular, but "watched by a lot of people" doesn't equal "good."

So if it was really popular but wasn't that good you shouldn't do it anymore. Goldberg was/is very popular but he's far from good. Stop using him? ALOT of Austin's segments have been stupid but very popular...stop doing them?

 

Just remember that WWE want it both ways. They want you to vote on who will Stone Cold will make the referee at Bad Blood. They want you to buy things at shopzone.com. They want you to click their adverts. But they don’t want you to talk about the product.

No, it's more that the WWE don't want people spitting venom out of their mouths when it comes to them. If they didn't want people to talk they'd get gag orders placed on the fans and get rid of the wwe.com chat.

 

Not by doing Russo style "shoot" angles, but by listening and responding in a positive way, instead of what they are doing right now...

Why respond to someone positively when they're negative for the most part?

"Your shows suck ass!"

"I'm sorry, why is that?"

"Because Big Show was on TV"

"We're very sorry. We're gonna fire Show, Train, our 10+ year business partner who's done everything we've asked of him Undertaker, Triple H....you name it!"

"Not good enough"

"Ok well next week there will be a 30 minute main event with Benoit vs. Angle"

"STOP REHASHING STORYLINES YOU DICKHEAD!"

"I'm sorry, how about Benoit vs. Guerrero?"

"Damn do you guys know logic, you can't throw two workers together in a match for no reason!"

I could go on...

 

Remember that the ratings have dropped from regular 6.5s, to a situation where a 4.0 is impressive. I'd be willing to bet that it isn't casual fans that want to see Stone Cold Stunnering McMahon that are still watching. It's the hardcore fans. The ones that are on the internet. The 12 year olds on mom's computer.

I doubt that the only people who watch now are smarks. I know for a fact that not all fans go online to read the torch.

[Guest Kamui]

No, WWE doesn't like the fact that we're telling them how to do their job usually in a condescending manner.

Are all smarks like this? Making assumptions is fun, but INCREDIBLY inaccurate.

 

If Vince hated the internet there'd be no WWE.com.

This arguement is so incredibly retarded I don't know where to begin. OBVI-FUCKING-OUSLY they meant "internet" as in "the IWC". Marks have computers. Marks use internet. That is why WWE.com exists.

 

How often do you hear someone online decry the WWE as a boring, decrepid piece of crap? What Triple H said is true to a degree. He doesn't need to care about what his criticizers think. The name-calling by Triple H isn't necessary and if you get mad when he insults the net maybe you should meet a friend of mine, his name's Kettle. Kettle already knows he's black, no need to tell him.

I agree a little bit about the name-calling, but the difference is that we're talking amongst ourselves, while Hunter is broadcasting his opinions on us on a PUBLISHED MAGAZINE.

 

Ooo striking back with another insult. Do it some more and maybe you’ll be better than Bradshaw. To be honest even thought it’s a big generalization, the majority of smarks are people who are fat, have a computer, and an interest in discussing wrestling. The biggest example being Scott Keith. Go through the pictures thread here and more than a few look like “geeks”. It doesn’t justify him in anyway but then again as the situation with H, call them names, they’ll call you them right back.

I'm the first one to admit I'm a geek (a skinny one, though, thankfully). Does that somehow make my opinion as a fan less valid? If I buy a PPV, do I somehow NOT have a right to complain when I don't like it just because I'm a geek? Please tell me how that works, 'cause it sounds like discrimination to me.

 

Doesn't EVERYONE trying and discredit rumors about them? Hell I can think of hundreds about me.

Agreed.

 

All I remember him talking about was his sauce, the injuries, and how it's harder than it looks. If he ever did try to discredit a rumor, well gosh darnit, WWE is evil and Jim Ross can go to hell because what kind of person tries to deny nasty rumors.

 

I don’t see how Hurricane was different in how he treated internet rumors about him. He called the torch bullshit and also used an insult “I have too much fun doing what I do to let some keyboard warrior try to bring me down"

Agreed again.

 

Poor Jim Ross, he's not supposed to say if they're true or false.

No, he's supposed to tell the truth, not blatantly lie.

 

I don't think making better shows will stop all the negativity to be honest.

I wrote for IGN Wrestling shortly during early 2001. The place was full with smarks (some borderline, admittedly) and it was INCREDIBLY positive going into 2001, and before that as a fan in 2000 I can say the same thing. Triple H won wrestler of the year for 2000 because the smarks LIKED HIS MATCHES. Angle and Benoit and Jericho were putting on classics and the FANS PRAISED THEM FOR IT.

 

Sure, they bitched about Taker and mid-card crap, and that's how it works. You're negative about the bad and positive about the good. If the shows got better again, the praise would out-weigh the bitching, just like it did back then.

 

I can't argue with you here except I can say that it's more frequent that a topic will be overdone rather than "constructive criticism" being given and forgetting about it. Usually no criticism other than WWE sucks is given.

Some smarks say things like that, but most give reasons why such and such sucked.

 

Oh really so calling bigger wrestlers hosses and saying they all can't work is all for nothing. For shame.

Once again, that'd be some, not all. I don't like the work of big men, usually- that's my choice as a wrestling fan- but I like Mike Awesome, for instance. He'd be considered a "big man" (a borderline one, I guess). I don't really mind Kane either, and I like Brock.

 

If you've never competed in a match then you don't know what having one is like so it's easy to criticize.

"Hey, Ebert, close down this operation, you've never made a movie, you can't criticize them!"

"Yo, Sports Illusturated, stop critcizing these athletes, you've never competed in any sports before!"

"EGM, stop reviewing these videogames, you've never made a game before!"

I rest my case.

 

Why wouldn't they want to have a quicker way of being told they suck? This may sound neato but to be blunt, some smarks have stupid ideas. If you listened to and catered to some of the things that have been suggested, I'm sure there would be even less viewers. Another thing is, what smarks want isn't always what the regular fans want. Marks like Goldberg, smarks don't. Should Vince listen to his net fans because he gets all these responses on WWE.com from his DIRECT LINE? Feedback is good but there will never be one common desire derived from feedback that you can use.

Uh, WWE.com could be a direct line to the marks too if Vince REALLY cared about what the fans wanted. Compare and contrast what the different fans are saying and come to a conclusion.

 

So if it was really popular but wasn't that good you shouldn't do it anymore. Goldberg was/is very popular but he's far from good. Stop using him? ALOT of Austin's segments have been stupid but very popular...stop doing them?

Goldberg's very popular? News to me, as I haven't noticed the ratings going up.

 

As for your little conversation....I once again point to the fact that Taker was around in 2000 and the praise out-weighed the bitching then.

 

I doubt that the only people who watch now are smarks. I know for a fact that not all fans go online to read the torch.

I don't think that's what he was claiming.

 

-Duo

[Guest TheGame2705]

No offense but I'd rather have HIM comment on the feedback to his column. You telling me "that's not what he meant" doesn't sit well with me.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

If he ever did try to discredit a rumor, well gosh darnit, WWE is evil and Jim Ross can go to hell because what kind of person tries to deny nasty rumors.

It is good to see a person stand up for our poor defenseless rumor mills.

 

Seriously, most the shit I heard JR denying is rumor mill crap, not what was in Meltzer. Stuff like WWE negotiating with Savage and that kind of thing. God forbid he let us know the truth, we already "know too much" for him to do that. No wonder his column went down!

 

That must by why Chris Jericho stopped everything but paying the bill for his site: He realized that Scott Keith's smartaleck remarks are gospel!

[Guest OnlyMe]

No, WWE doesn't like the fact that we're telling them how to do their job usually in a condescending manner

 

Got anything to back that up? Guess we'll have to just disagree on that one.

 

If Vince hated the internet there'd be no WWE.com.

 

It's profitable. I was talking about smarks, rather than the whole internet as a concept.

 

How often do you hear someone online decry the WWE as a boring, decrepid piece of crap? What Triple H said is true to a degree. He doesn't need to care about what his criticizers think. The name-calling by Triple H isn't necessary and if you get mad when he insults the net maybe you should meet a friend of mine, his name's Kettle. Kettle already knows he's black, no need to tell him.

 

Heh... you're doing EXACTLY what Triple H is doing: Painting everyone with the same brush. I got mad with what Triple H said because he's invalidating my opinion based on where I voice it. How is that not ludicrous?

 

Ooo striking back with another insult. Do it some more and maybe you’ll be better than Bradshaw. To be honest even thought it’s a big generalization, the majority of smarks are people who are fat, have a computer, and an interest in discussing wrestling. The biggest example being Scott Keith. Go through the pictures thread here and more than a few look like “geeks”. It doesn’t justify him in anyway but then again as the situation with H, call them names, they’ll call you them right back.

 

Again there is a difference: Bradshaw is talking about smarks as though they are all one mythical entity. Whether "the majority of smarts are people who are fat" or not, it doesn't matter. Generalisations are wrong. On the other hand, my insults towards Bradshaw are directed at a specific person, and actually based on something

 

Doesn't EVERYONE trying and discredit rumors about them? Hell I can think of hundreds about me.

 

I meant that that they say, "oh ignore online rumours", rather than "this rumour isn't true."

 

I don’t see how Hurricane was different in how he treated internet rumors about him. He called the torch bullshit and also used an insult “I have too much fun doing what I do to let some keyboard warrior try to bring me down"

 

Hurricane was polite, articulate and allowed one insult to sneak in. He talked about the rumour, rather than about the people that perpetuated it.

 

I don't think making better shows will stop all the negativity to be honest.

 

It'll decrease it though

 

Oh really so calling bigger wrestlers hosses and saying they all can't work is all for nothing. For shame.

 

See, I've never done this. NEVER. You're thinking of the "smark mentality" again.

 

If you've never competed in a match then you don't know what having one is like so it's easy to criticize.

 

So you're saying we shouldn't criticize matches unless we've been in them? What about praising them? What about criticizing movies?

 

Why wouldn't they want to have a quicker way of being told they suck? This may sound neato but to be blunt, some smarks have stupid ideas. If you listened to and catered to some of the things that have been suggested, I'm sure there would be even less viewers. Another thing is, what smarks want isn't always what the regular fans want. Marks like Goldberg, smarks don't. Should Vince listen to his net fans because he gets all these responses on WWE.com from his DIRECT LINE? Feedback is good but there will never be one common desire derived from feedback that you can use.

 

Um... Jesus Christ. They will have a direct line to marks and smarks, and opinions that are positive and negative. It's like you are taking everything I'm saying, deliberately misconstruing it and trying to use it against me.

 

So if it was really popular but wasn't that good you shouldn't do it anymore. Goldberg was/is very popular but he's far from good. Stop using him? ALOT of Austin's segments have been stupid but very popular...stop doing them?

 

Stop putting fucking words in my mouth. WWE's aim is to make POPULAR segments, not GOOD ones. So they should do directly the opposite of what you think I said.

 

No, it's more that the WWE don't want people spitting venom out of their mouths when it comes to them. If they didn't want people to talk they'd get gag orders placed on the fans and get rid of the wwe.com chat.

 

AGAIN, you're going to this ridiculous "smark mentality" where everyone thinks the same thing. There's a HELL of a lot of good stuff posted here. Do a search on RavishingRickRudo's posts, and you'll see what I mean. Not EVERY SINGLE post is "spitting venom".

 

"Your shows suck ass!"

"I'm sorry, why is that?"

"Because Big Show was on TV"

"We're very sorry. We're gonna fire Show, Train, our 10+ year business partner who's done everything we've asked of him Undertaker, Triple H....you name it!"

"Not good enough"

"Ok well next week there will be a 30 minute main event with Benoit vs. Angle"

"STOP REHASHING STORYLINES YOU DICKHEAD!"

"I'm sorry, how about Benoit vs. Guerrero?"

"Damn do you guys know logic, you can't throw two workers together in a match for no reason!"

I could go on...

 

Because this is EXACTLY how EVERY SINGLE smark, including me thinks? Right? Because otherwise, you wouldn't have included it. Bullshit.

 

I doubt that the only people who watch now are smarks. I know for a fact that not all fans go online to read the torch.

 

Did I say only people? No. Your debating technique is tiresome.

[Guest TheGame2705]

EDIT: Finished when I had time.

 

I think it's more of you going back on what you said because of wrong wording.

 

No, WWE doesn't like the fact that we're telling them how to do their job usually in a condescending manner

 

Got anything to back that up? Guess we'll have to just disagree on that one.

You have another article entitled Worst PPV EVER. If that isn't a little rude then...I also can find tons of posts on here with little to no actual constructive criticism, rather just "This shit sucks, they need new writers"

 

How often do you hear someone online decry the WWE as a boring, decrepid piece of crap? What Triple H said is true to a degree. He doesn't need to care about what his criticizers think. The name-calling by Triple H isn't necessary and if you get mad when he insults the net maybe you should meet a friend of mine, his name's Kettle. Kettle already knows he's black, no need to tell him.

 

Heh... you're doing EXACTLY what Triple H is doing: Painting everyone with the same brush. I got mad with what Triple H said because he's invalidating my opinion based on where I voice it. How is that not ludicrous?

I'm not seeing how I'm doing that...You said how often does a WWE employee call the smarks a bunch of kids...I said how often does a smark call WWE shit? I didn't say "All smarks call WWE shit"

 

Again there is a difference: Bradshaw is talking about smarks as though they are all one mythical entity. Whether "the majority of smarts are people who are fat" or not, it doesn't matter. Generalisations are wrong. On the other hand, my insults towards Bradshaw are directed at a specific person, and actually based on something

All I was commenting on was the fact that it serves no purpose of insulting him because he insulted you. You're message here was that the WWE employees have to resort to namecalling but you're doing it too.

 

Hurricane was polite, articulate and allowed one insult to sneak in. He talked about the rumour, rather than about the people that perpetuated it.

No, he threw in an insult and called the torch bullshit. I don't see how it was any different.

 

Oh really so calling bigger wrestlers hosses and saying they all can't work is all for nothing. For shame.

 

See, I've never done this. NEVER. You're thinking of the "smark mentality" again.

 

Maybe you haven't called them hosses but I know of your hatred for Albert with no substantial backup. You tried to say he sucks and the only reasoning you gave was because he bored you. That's in the same vein.

 

So you're saying we shouldn't criticize matches unless we've been in them? What about praising them? What about criticizing movies?

I'm not saying you shouldn't have an opinion but some people act like they have the expert opinion. It wasn't really directed at you because I've never seen you rate a match.

 

Um... Jesus Christ. They will have a direct line to marks and smarks, and opinions that are positive and negative. It's like you are taking everything I'm saying, deliberately misconstruing it and trying to use it against me.

You're saying they'll have a direct line to be able to listen to the fans and make everything better again. I'm saying what good will that do when a.)opinions will clash guaranteed so you don't know who to please and b.)you can't even say that the majority of the people using it wouldn't be smarks because they're already doing wrestling related stuff online as it is. It's not as great as it sounds

 

WWE's aim is to make POPULAR segments, not GOOD ones. So they should do directly the opposite of what you think I said.

What I got from you is that you don't care about segments being popular as long as they are good. I said that's not always beneficial. If that's not what you said then I'm sorry.

 

AGAIN, you're going to this ridiculous "smark mentality" where everyone thinks the same thing. There's a HELL of a lot of good stuff posted here. Do a search on RavishingRickRudo's posts, and you'll see what I mean. Not EVERY SINGLE post is "spitting venom".

Now you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say every single one was. I was commenting on you saying the WWE doesn't want people talking about their product.

 

Because this is EXACTLY how EVERY SINGLE smark, including me thinks? Right? Because otherwise, you wouldn't have included it.Bullshit.

Don't even act like those aren't the main arguments. I'm not saying everyone makes them but that's the gist.

 

Did I say only people? No. Your debating technique is tiresome.

I'd be willing to bet that it isn't casual fans that want to see Stone Cold Stunnering McMahon that are still watching. It's the hardcore fans. The ones that are on the internet.

You right there said I bet it's not the casual fans watching. It's the hardcore fans on the internet. That would infer you think only hardcore fans are watching and by saying the ones on the internet, you mean smarks.

Edited June 24, 2003 by TheGame2705

[Guest OnlyMe]

You have another article entitled Worst PPV EVER. If that isn't a little rude then...

 

No. I have an article entitled "Worst PPV ever?" The "?" is important.

 

I also can find tons of posts on here with little to no actual constructive criticism, rather just "This shit sucks, they need new writers"

 

You can also find lots of well constructed, intelligent posts.

 

I'm not seeing how I'm doing that...You said how often does a WWE employee call the smarks a bunch of kids...I said how often does a smark call WWE shit? I didn't say "All smarks call WWE shit"

 

There's a WORLD of difference between me insulting Triple H specifically, and him insulting smarks as a group. Surely even you can see that.

 

Maybe you haven't called them hosses but I know of your hatred for Albert with no substantial backup. You tried to say he sucks and the only reasoning you gave was because he bored you. That's in the same vein.

 

I knew this came back to the Albert thread. Let it go. I don't "hate" Albert. I dislike him as a wrestler, simply because he bores me. I can't come up with any further justification, because it would be untrue. You can come up with anything you like about him trying hard, or whatever you want, and it won't make me suddenly think, "shit, yeah, I do like him."

 

You're saying they'll have a direct line to be able to listen to the fans and make everything better again. I'm saying what good will that do when a.)opinions will clash guaranteed so you don't know who to please and b.)you can't even say that the majority of the people using it wouldn't be smarks because they're already doing wrestling related stuff online as it is. It's not as great as it sounds

 

I'm not saying that they'll be able to "make everything better again". Back with putting words into my mouth. What I am saying is that by getting feedback, they will be able to have a better idea of what people want.

 

a) Look for the popular opinions, and ones that are feasible

b) So what if it is smarks? They have just as valid opinions as the marks.