Guest Coffey Report post Posted October 26, 2003 Well, I'm glad that you agree. I thought that maybe someone gave me a lobotomy in my sleep and suddenly I lost all of my reading comprehension or some shit. It just read like he didn't have an idea of what he wanted to write about when he started his column. It came off as "last minute" and it gave me a headache when trying to follow it. Like RRR said, "There were probably 3 different topics which could have been given it's own column." Use an outline next time, holmes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted October 26, 2003 I'm sorry, he lost me after he said that a couple clearly in their 60's were in their 40's. And where exactly did I say that? Hint: I didn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted October 26, 2003 What did this analogy have to do with anything? The point I was trying to make is that you should - in theory - react more strongly to something that is "real". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest PhantMan Report post Posted October 26, 2003 I thought the whole topic was really about the difference between legit smart fans and fake students of the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland 0 Report post Posted October 26, 2003 I would have to say I'm a smart fan, I'm certainly not a student of the game as I have no wrestling experience. Aside from internet reports, etc, I don't know what goes on backstage, nor do I attend the booking meetings to know what is going on. Am I a mark? I don't know, I hate the term because to me a mark is a fan that cheers for whoever a promotion tells you to cheer for. This is completely different than a heel or face getting the crowd to give a desirable reaction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted October 26, 2003 You said they were "at least" in their 40's. Clearly they weren't. It's just as asinine to say they're "at least in their 20's". I mean, I could see -maybe- "at least in their 50's" because some people age differently than others, but their 40's? How many 40 year olds do you know that look like that? They look like my grandparents for crying out loud. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted October 26, 2003 Clearly they weren't. They aren't at least in their 40s? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted October 26, 2003 Do they look in their 40's? Do they look near their 40's? It's a stupid statement amongst many stupid statements. By saying "At least in their 40's" you open up the possibility that they could be 41 - do they look 41? Do they look 45? Do they look 49? This error in judgement dents your credibility as a writer (it also didn't help that it seemingly had no point). I also find it astounding that with all the other points I - or others - have mentioned the only ones you have replied to were/are rather insignificant in comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
