Guest Choken One Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 He is challenging the authenticy of a Good and Important interview for the evolution of TSM.COM rise to credibility by continously bringing up an horrible arguement with zero evidence to support his case. This is more then just being a troll for the sake of being a troll...He is challenging the credibility of a respected writer and more so, the very web-site he is frequenting at the moment.
Guest jericho585 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 There is all the evidence in the world supporting my claim, nowhere on wwe.com or trishstratus.com does it say that Trish did this interview. If a wrestler was doing an interview on a wrestling radio show, it would be listed on wwe.com or their official site, if they don't have one, and wwe.com doesn't list it, we wouldn't know if it was really that wrestler. Retro Rob has said himself that he ASSUMES it is Trish, that doesn't mean he knows 100% for sure.
Guest Choken One Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Either Way. But your arguement with the whole WWE.COM never reported anything or did the web-site... Take wrestlers Like Chris Jericho for instance... He does Radio Shows very often but it's never mentioned in either web-sites for the most part... The other concern is...Why would it matter to you anyways? Your attacking the validity of this interview for WHAT purpose? Just to strip away the rising credibility of this web-site?
Guest jericho585 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The radio shows that Jericho does are mentioned on his official website in fact, in the news section. This matters to me because people shouldn't believe in someone just because that someone says to them that they are this somebody (an online user saying that he/she is Trish in the case we have on TSM). Also this website is not rising, but declining in credibility after what Austin3:16HHHforLife or whatever his username on here did.
Guest JHawk Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Also this website is not rising, but declining in credibility after what Austin3:16HHHforLife or whatever his username on here did. And Dames' swift action showed that he is taking the credibility of the site seriously by not only removing the article but firing that guy as a writer. Look at the whole story before making a lump assumption.
Guest jericho585 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Dames tried to establish credibility but still what Votsis did hurt this site, just like in baseball, Sammy Sosa tried to establish credibility in the corked bat incident and so did MLB by reducing his suspension, but Sosa's tremoundous popularity decreased because of the incident.
Guest TheGame2705 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 You're picking the wrong writer to go after if you're trying to say the site sucks. Rob, B' Teazy, Dames, Tom, and PK always bring the goodness.
Guest jericho585 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Don't know about Dames, Tom's, and the rest of the writers on here, but Rob is an UNCREDIBLE writer because he assumes an internet user is someone, without being 100% positive it is them.
Guest TheGame2705 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Let me reverse the question....how do you know it isn't her? Because she didn't put it on her website? "Hey guys, I talked to the produce guy at the market today and he told me I had nice melons. More news later"
Guest ShamRock Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 What did happen to that Austin3164Life dude?
Guest JHawk Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 What did happen to that Austin3164Life dude? Dames fired him as a writer, and he voluntarily left the Forums as a means of trying to save face somewhat.
Guest bps "The Truth" 21 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 From the literal interpretation: 2. Trolls will be automatically banned. Trolling is defined as the consistent posting of useless material with the intention of getting off-topic and specifically eliciting and inciting undesirable responses from users reading the thread. Consistent. Check. Useless. Check Intention of getting off topic. Check. Throw in some stupid bullshit in the other thread in this folder he used and that his IP matches about a dozen in the ban filter and my morning starts off fantastic.
Guest bps "The Truth" 21 Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Possibly Since we moved to the Invision board it's impossible to link the previously banned poster to the IP in the ban filter. He's someone who's been whacked several times.
Guest JMA Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 I think he was Zacalax. He doesn't sound like Banky or Rob Stone.
Guest Shanghai Kid Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Saying that it isn't Trish is stupid. She gave thoughtful answers that all sounded like her. And she's known to be on AIM all the time.
Guest notJames Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The stupidity of This obvious gimmick poster or rather, more likely this 13 year old punk milequoist bitch… In fact, really, the only thing that I could see that would be grounds for banning in this thread would be… his assault on the English language. "milequoist"? Not to put any more burrs in your saddle, but what is "milequoist"? Is that French? Just wondering. And I see that the troll has been escorted back under his bridge. Well done. And I for one believe that the Trish interview is legit, so nothing else needs to be said, no?
Guest Retro Rob Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 I sure do miss out on a lot when I go to sleep. Considering Zacalex e-mailed me the other day, it probably was him. As for the authenicity of the interview, other conversations, consistency, and quickness to answer questions is more than enough proof for me. Not to mention that nothing was said that would "cross the company line". As for appearing on TrishStratus.com, as far as I know none of her interviews are featured on that site. Furthermore, I know that at least one person thanked her for doing the interview on her comment board (although it was not made public on the board), therefore she "knew" of the interviews exsistence and never asked for it to be removed.
Guest Kingpk Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The stupidity of This obvious gimmick poster or rather, more likely this 13 year old punk milequoist bitch… In fact, really, the only thing that I could see that would be grounds for banning in this thread would be… his assault on the English language. "milequoist"? Not to put any more burrs in your saddle, but what is "milequoist"? Is that French? Just wondering. Actually, it's "milquetoast". It means "a person who behaves in a childish, weak, or spoiled way"
Guest notJames Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 I had a feeling it was "milquetoast", but I didn't want to assume anything. And I think it means "weak' (sissy, pansy) more than spoiled or childish… at least according to this.
Guest edge-o-matic Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 Don't want to really start things up again, but it would be odd to build the validity of a site around an interview with "Trish" that you admitted could not be her. You said that you were going by intuition, but is that enough? As tc said, ask her the name of her public school. Something that hasn't been announced to the general public. With a little research, it could be proved. /not a troll, just have been wondering since the first interview
Guest nikowwf Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The issue here is this.....do they NOT post the interview because they don't know if its real, or post it, with disclaimer as they had so if it is real, we all get to read it. I think the second choice is best. This is not the New York Times. (bad example, i know) Its not a deliberate attempt to deceive, so its ok for me even if it turns out not to be real. niko
Murmuring Beast Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 It couldn't have been Trish because I was pleasuring her in my bedroom at the same time.
Guest Choken One Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The stupidity of This obvious gimmick poster or rather, more likely this 13 year old punk milequoist bitch… In fact, really, the only thing that I could see that would be grounds for banning in this thread would be… his assault on the English language. "milequoist"? Not to put any more burrs in your saddle, but what is "milequoist"? Is that French? Just wondering. Actually, it's "milquetoast". It means "a person who behaves in a childish, weak, or spoiled way" Shit on me, I spelled it wrong. At least the little Cunt is dead and gone.
Guest Retro Rob Posted July 2, 2003 Report Posted July 2, 2003 The issue here is this.....do they NOT post the interview because they don't know if its real, or post it, with disclaimer as they had so if it is real, we all get to read it. I think the second choice is best. This is not the New York Times. (bad example, i know) Its not a deliberate attempt to deceive, so its ok for me even if it turns out not to be real. niko Good point. I'm really not going to argue over this forever. If you don't want to think it is legit, then so be it. Doesn't affect me one way or another. As for those of you who complimented me, I appreciate all the feedback.
Guest ArchoanJB Posted July 3, 2003 Report Posted July 3, 2003 YIKES I think you guys should read this http://www.trishstratus.com/news/default.asp?aID=1004 I thought it was real too, but wow...
Guest Downhome Posted July 3, 2003 Report Posted July 3, 2003 Wow, my "funny remark" that I made in the other thread (saying wouldn't it be funny if this was a fake and some moron is laughing at all of us) seems to be possibly true. Of course, that could just be some moron that hacked her site, couldn't it?
Guest Coffey Posted July 3, 2003 Report Posted July 3, 2003 It seems that everyone shut the fuck up pretty damn quick after that link was provided. I think it's only fair that Jericho585 gets unbanned too. I wish I could see the look on some of the posters faces when they read that. People whom were calling other basically imbeciles for questioning how legitimate the interview was. I think some people owe some other posters an apology or two.
Guest Jobber of the Week Posted July 3, 2003 Report Posted July 3, 2003 It seems that everyone shut the fuck up pretty damn quick after that link was provided. I think it's only fair that Jericho585 gets unbanned too. Hey, Jericho is a guy who was already banned for previous shit before this. STFU
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now