The WWE Folder

[MrRant]

Whoops... didn't see Dames post since I was posting at the time.

[The Dames]

I repeat my question from above.

So are we still allowed to make the jokes?

Like we make a joke about Randy Orton and then someone leaps in saying "God! Don't you guys ever quit! I hate you smarks! All you do is bitch!"

Are we eliminating the stuff that would cause that response(just about everything) or the people that make that response?

 

I mean you said we can make some jokes. But we don't have to all become serious anti-smarks that have to take a 180 on our opinion of everything do we?

Why would you ever have to reverse your opinion about anything? As long as it isn't deterring from the conversation (like 1inchpunch and Anglesault have done in the past), there's no reason to change how you feel about anything.

 

Dames

[Guest Anglesault]

I'm getting an Over the Edge 98 vibe here.

 

And since I'm not Austin, I can't overcome the odds. I must try to conform.

 

Randy Orton isn't that b...

 

Damnit, I can't do it.

 

I'll try to practice.

[The Dames]

AS, your opinion isn't what's going to be held down.

 

It's the way you used to hijack threads with it that will be.

 

Dames

[Damaramu]

I repeat my question from above.

So are we still allowed to make the jokes?

Like we make a joke about Randy Orton and then someone leaps in saying "God! Don't you guys ever quit! I hate you smarks! All you do is bitch!"

Are we eliminating the stuff that would cause that response(just about everything) or the people that make that response?

 

I mean you said we can make some jokes. But we don't have to all become serious anti-smarks that have to take a 180 on our opinion of everything do we?

Why would you ever have to reverse your opinion about anything? As long as it isn't deterring from the conversation (like 1inchpunch and Anglesault have done in the past), there's no reason to change how you feel about anything.

 

Dames

Because a lot of the time one of us voicing our opinion in just the least bit starts a huge fight. Someone runs in and yells "God do you smarks ever shut up!? Randy Orton wah wah!" And I could've just said "So I saw Randy Orton at the grocery store the other day and.......".....it happens.

[Lightning Flik]

There, there 'Saulty.

 

Someone will be here to comfort you in your time of need.

 

Probably be Dames, the ol' softy.

 

Just curious, what happens to people who botch Thread Titles? Like recent examples would be the "So it is going to be Angle vs. Eddy" or "Victora pissing her career away". The first being that it practically almost spoils Smackdown (since it was posted long before Smackdown aired), and that thread on Victoria was blatantly misleading.

 

Do people get a PM about such things, or will there be a suspension given out in such situations?

 

Edited February 8, 2004 by Lightning Flik

[Guest Anglesault]

AS, your opinion isn't what's going to be held down.

 

It's the way you used to hijack threads with it that will be.

 

Dames

I didn't hijack any good threads.

 

And I always had a valid point.

 

...

Aw, fuck it.

 

::Goes of to learn how to be more corporate.::

[MrRant]

Good monkey.

[The Dames]

Do people get a PM about such things, or will there be a suspension given out in such situations?

PM's will be given out in most cases.

 

Suspensions will only be handed out if warning's aren't adhered to.

 

As for people who botch thread titles...anything spoiling a show is not a good thing.

 

Dames

[Guest Anglesault]

And another thing.

 

I don't appreciate being blamed for the hijacked threads.

 

I never did anything more than post my opinion on all or part of a thread. It's not my fault that people decided to follow my post above the others and send the thread spiraling.

[NYU]

The only problem I have with this off-topic rule is that there may potentially may be some creative threads in the future that could be squashed.

 

The Tomko/Fertig thread, the Steve Urkel GM thread, even the now-Classic thread "Vince McMahon's Ladder-Legdrop." These were all threads that started out with a fairly weak premise, but being off topic and creative took it to heights it wouldn't have reached before.

 

I'm not advocating that some nonsense shouldn't be cracked down upon. For instance, many topics in Hardcore Discussion become ruined because things deviate SO much from what the inital topic was, and these new, off-topic responses aren't in the least bit funny. But it seems to me that the WWE Folder is a different animal and should be treated as such. At times, I think going off-topic should be accepted, because it could bring the thread into a much more entertaining version than it would have been before. I mean....who would have started a "Steve Urkel as Raw GM" thread on its own. It had to naturally evolve from the original topic and taking away some off-topic discussion would take away some of the magic of that ever happening.

 

I very much understand that a high majority of the WWE threads should be intelligent and on-topic. But I don't think people should be punished for the occasional thread going off-topic and resulting in something entirely different from what was intended. These are how ideas are formed.

[The Dames]

Not necessarily. What's to stop someone from creating a thread in HD based on a joke made in WWE and taking it from there?

 

Dames

[Art Sandusky]

Steve Urkel as GM was overrated too.

[Guest Anglesault]

I'm also not quite sure how I got passed over for the job in favor of these guys.

[NYU]

Steve Urkel as GM was overrated too.

Ah, you think everything's overrated.

 

Steve Urkel as GM was comedy GOLD!

 

Not necessarily. What's to stop someone from creating a thread in HD based on a joke made in WWE and taking it from there?

 

Eh, then the idea seems a little more forced, and it just loses some of the magic it had before. But then again, maybe that's just my opinion.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

Not necessarily. What's to stop someone from creating a thread in HD based on a joke made in WWE and taking it from there?

 

Eh, then the idea seems a little more forced, and it just loses some of the magic it had before. But then again, maybe that's just my opinion.

Not to mention the people who frequent HD are not the same as people who frequent the WWE folder.

 

RRR & FrozenBlockOfPiss are both funny...but they aren't the same. Besides the fact that Banky rarely visits the WWE folder and those threads wouldn't have worked in HD with him and a couple others just going into so "OMG this is ghey~!"

 

I would think if the thread has had its resolution to the topic and then goes off course it would be cool.

[The Dames]

Hopefully, there will be more people going into the WWE Folder soon, including those who have been avoiding it in the past.

 

Dames

[Damaramu]

Hopefully, there will be more people going into the WWE Folder soon, including those who have been avoiding it in the past.

 

Dames

Those people avoid it because they have a differing opinion than the supposed "mass smark brain" and therefore think everyone in their is stupid because they hate HHH or something.

[treble]

I can understand wanting to make the folder a better place to post, but you're just going to piss people off if the people making/enforcing the rules are people who rarely post there, which is kind of how this is coming off (to me, at least).

[The Dames]

Goodear and CC post there all the time and Sass & Loss are committed to start posting there more often and bring the content.

 

Plus...I made most of the rules and I post everywhere.

 

Dames

[Guest Anglesault]

I can understand wanting to make the folder a better place to post, but you're just going to piss people off if the people making/enforcing the rules are people who rarely post there, which is kind of how this is coming off (to me, at least).

Which is why I should have been give the job.

Edited February 8, 2004 by Anglesault

[the pinjockey]

I just want to say TC hit the nail right on the head for me at least. Could things be done to clean up the folder? Absolutely. But nothing was even brought up in the folder itself until Tom accidently posted the rules. I think it is wrong that rules sprang out of a discussion in the HD folder among people who act as though it is a privlege for the folder if they return (the "maybe I'll go back in the folder if the rules change" sentiments.) There weren't any threads in the folder itself, amongst the people who actually post in there, requesting ideas to help change the folder. And I don't think saying take it to site feedback counts, considering if you weren't on during the time Tom's thread was in there you wouldn't even know anything was going on.

 

Dames if you want to make changes on your own that is cool, it's your board. But it doesn't seem as if you initiated the changes, so I don't see why the WWE folder wasn't involved.

[Guest El Satanico]

Going to the WWe Folder with the plans would've just resulted in the people that would be affected by the rules throwing a fit and the people who wouldn't be affected by the rules applauding the crack down.

[RavishingRickRudo]

This is NOT being done to take away the fun of the folder but rather to give the WWE Folder the intelligent discussion that it deserves in order for everyone to participate and enjoy.

 

1. If your goal is to promote intelligent discussion, then "everyone" won't participate . I used to listen to the LAW (and still infrequently do). However, ever since Jeff Marek left, the show has gotten so freaking bad. There's a lot more callers now, which I guess is good for the LAW, but they are SO STUPID. Once Marek was gone, there was nothing to stop the rubes from calling in and giving their thoughts on wrestling... and I use the term "thoughts" loosely. The current hosts, Dan Lovranski and Jason Agnew, are idiots and they really promote intelligent discussion... Marek did. So if you're hoping these new rules are going to get more "intelligent" people into the folder, then you're mistaken.

 

2. The most enjoyment I get from the WWE Folder is with off-topic stuff like Tomko & Fertig, Steve Urkel Raw GM, The Book on the WWE, John Cena's Christmas Carol, etc. It's WWE-related (involves WWE wrestlers, parodies certain WWE concepts), but specifically off-topic. I can understand barring completely unrelated topics like football, politics, religion, etc. but having to take out the goofy stuff like that is certainly taking a bit of "fun" out it; at least, to me it is (and it seems like others as well).

[treble]

I think the purpose of the LAW is to verbally fellate Paul Heyman as much as possible.

[Guest Loss]

If everyone is having fun with a thread that's off-centered or creative, I see no reason to delete it or issue warning. We'll handle those types of things on a case-by-case basis.

 

And I have been posting in the WWE folder semi-regularly since summer. I took a hiatus for the first few months of 2003, but I haven't exactly been persona non grata -- I just haven't been making 30-40 posts a day like many here do.

[Damaramu]

Orton = Fire him now.

 

Eddie = Story is most likely not true.

 

It's really hard to ignore these sort of things.

 

There you go.......that's a response that FBP made in a thread that had NOTHING to do with Randy Orton. You say you're tired of everyone fighting over the same shit and this is what I'm talking about.

Everyone acts like it's the sheer number of smarks that share the same opinion but jackasses like this are the ones that stir the shit. 75% of the long posts about HHH and Randy Orton are caused by responses like this.

So if you want to make the folder better you're going to have to figure out a way to curb shit like that.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

This is NOT being done to take away the fun of the folder but rather to give the WWE Folder the intelligent discussion that it deserves in order for everyone to participate and enjoy.

Then remove those that contribute nothing and only serve to antagonize.

 

See: Besus. I said he was TripleHater who was banned shortly before he showed up, mostly due to the similar and unique typing habits, but nothing was done. And this isn't a baseless acussation; I've identified more than one PBP here.

 

EDIT: I just saw a thread where Goodear addressed Besus's flame-baiting presence and I found it to be a sort of 'non-threatening warning' which Besus no-sold since nothing was... you know... actually done about it. If we're going to have three new mods they need to shit or get off the pot. Take some action.

 

And by the way, this applies for "HHHate" too, as well as other forms of flame-baiting. Downhome can contest to that - I criticized him in the past over a clichéd anti-HHH sig.

[Guest Loss]

Damaramu, I just looked at the thread in question and I'm about to close it. It was started on a he-said-she-said basis and it's a story without any confirmation or credibility, and *again*, it veered off topic into Randy Orton hate and annoying terms like "smark" and "IWC" started getting batted around. Thread closed.

[Damaramu]

Damaramu, I just looked at the thread in question and I'm about to close it. It was started on a he-said-she-said basis and it's a story without any confirmation or credibility, and *again*, it veered off topic into Randy Orton hate and annoying terms like "smark" and "IWC" started getting batted around. Thread closed.

Yeah well that stuff happens a lot.

Most of the time it's the "smarks" that don't even bring the terms into it. It's the so called "anti-smarks" that stir the shit up. They are the ones that usually come in with the "God you smarks......." shit when everyone is just discussing peacefully. Stopping that crap will cure half of the problem with that other folder.

 

 

The other problem? The Dames.......I know it.....you know it.......he knows it.