WWE Folder Survey Comments Thread

[dubq 0]

For a generally HHHating folder, I'm suprised at the amount of people who don't have Triple H as one of their three least favourite wrestlers in WWE.

 

I'm also glad to see that I'm not the only person who's been watching since the early 80's.

 

FYI: I started this because Loss had asked that only answers for the survey be posted in the pinned thread.

[Guest Anglesault]

I don't at all agree with all the "too negative" comments. We just call them like they are.

[dubq 0]

My reasoning for putting that is that I'm pretty much burnt out on hearing people constantly blame [jokingly or not] ANYTHING that goes wrong on Triple H.

[razazteca 0]

Its more like TOO SARCASTIC or TOO GIMMICKY.

[Guest Anglesault]

My reasoning for putting that is that I'm pretty much burnt out on hearing people constantly blame [jokingly or not] ANYTHING that goes wrong on Triple H.

Well, when you consider how much has been his fault since 2002, it's not hard to blame him.

[King Cucaracha 0]

I don't at all agree with all the "too negative" comments. We just call them like they are.

I think the problem with that is, the product gives us reason to be negative.

 

That and the fact the negatives create more debate. An Orton-hate thread will get more pages than a pro-Benjamin thread, and the latter is more likely to drag off-topic and to the negative side.

[Guest Askewniverse]

For a generally HHHating folder, I'm suprised at the amount of people who don't have Triple H as one of their three least favourite wrestlers in WWE.

I'm more surprised at the number of people who listed HHH as one of their three favorite wrestlers. It's kinda nice to see that I wasn't the only person who listed HHH as a favorite.

 

As for the survey itself, I think it was pretty good. The only question that I didn't like was number 10, because I thought it was too much of a question.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

I don't understand what could possibly be gleaned from a "is this folder too positive, too negative or well-balanced" question, and what corrective actions can be taken. I would have suggested a supplementary question like "What 3 things bother you the most about the folder?" or something like that to pinpoint certain problems.

[Downhome 0]

I think it's just another case of people taking this too seriously.

[Styles 0]

I think it's just another case of people taking this too seriously.

Really, it's a message board. We're not applying for federal grants here...

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I had a little problem with listing from worst to best the years of WWE I watched. I assume the question was when you first started watching period, becaus eI noticed someone (who shall be remaining nameless) is only 15 and put down 1990, meaning he was "1" when he started. Now I may be wron,g but who HONESTLY remembers anything from when they were 1?

[Guest Coffey]

I don't think it's silly to take message forums seriously. Especially when the message forums are talking about something that I take very seriously...like wrestling.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

I don't think it's silly to take message forums seriously. Especially when the message forums are talking about something that I take very seriously...like wrestling.

I agree - but I think that some portions, other than wrestling, don't need to be taken so seriously.

[Nighthawk 0]

Saying that it'se being taken too seriously is taking it too seriously. Do what you feel compelled to do and no more.

[Guest Trivia247]

Really this HHH bashing is just Slanderous! im sure there is a law suit blah blah blah

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

Saying that it'se being taken too seriously is taking it too seriously. Do what you feel compelled to do and no more.

While I don't want to be accused of flooding, I'm going to say that yes, that's exactly it.

[Guest Loss]

I think it's just another case of people taking this too seriously.

Perhaps. But you're not the only person here, and I keep getting complaints telling me that things aren't as hunky dory as you'd like to believe. Please understand that while you don't have a problem with this board as is, some do. All I'm trying to do is figure out what type of poster typically spends his time here. From there, if we need to create rules, we'll have a better idea which ones will work and which ones will not. It makes sense, or it will later if it doesn't now.

 

I'm not trying to micromanage this board. That got a negative backlash and I don't want to start another one. I don't see a problem with asking questions. Anyone who doesn't want to reply is under no obligation to do so.

[chaosrage 0]

I don't understand what could possibly be gleaned from a "is this folder too positive, too negative or well-balanced" question, and what corrective actions can be taken. I would have suggested a supplementary question like "What 3 things bother you the most about the folder?" or something like that to pinpoint certain problems.

Yeah, a few months ago I would've said WAY too negative, but that doesn't mean it bothered me. That would be a different question.

[DangerousDamon 0]

I had a little problem with listing from worst to best the years of WWE I watched. I assume the question was when you first started watching period, becaus eI noticed someone (who shall be remaining nameless) is only 15 and put down 1990, meaning he was "1" when he started. Now I may be wron,g but who HONESTLY remembers anything from when they were 1?

Dude, you can say my name. It's not like it's gonna make me angry or anything.

 

But, just because I can't remember anything from that year doesn't mean I wasn't watching it back then.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

You know, I still don't like HHH that much but he's become a whole lot more tolerable for some reason over the last several months and in the same process you've seen a vast improvement of RAW.

 

And the folder is way too negative for how well the product has been so far this year. 2004 for the most part has been a vast improvement over the last 2 years and yet you look in the WWE folder and it seems like its still 2002.

[Guest Ray]

I'm surprised that more than a few people rated 2003 over 2002. I don't understand that. Raw was just as bad in both years, but the quality of Smackdown plummetted after Heyman's demotion. The loss of Edge was a HUGE blow, Benoit spent much of the year in a pointless tag team or being a JTTS, and Angle was injured and the quality of his work suffered from it.

[Guest cobainwasmurdered]

I don't at all agree with all the "too negative" comments. We just call them as our own personal feelings, influenced my the mob mentality of the IWC sees them.

*Edited for accuracy.

[griffinmills 0]

I don't at all agree with all the "too negative" comments. We just call them as our own personal feelings, influenced my the mob mentality of the IWC sees them.

*Edited for accuracy.

Too much quoted material to work IMO. :-)

As for "15 year olds watching when 1 year old" it is almost a Zen like puzzle! In the vein of "a tree falling in the woods."

If you watched wrestling when but you don't remember it, did you really watch it?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

It's too cynical. I couldn't believe there were people who were unhappy with how Benoit won the title at WM.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I had a little problem with listing from worst to best the years of WWE I watched. I assume the question was when you first started watching period, becaus eI noticed someone (who shall be remaining nameless) is only 15 and put down 1990, meaning he was "1" when he started. Now I may be wron,g but who HONESTLY remembers anything from when they were 1?

Dude, you can say my name. It's not like it's gonna make me angry or anything.

 

But, just because I can't remember anything from that year doesn't mean I wasn't watching it back then.

OK, but even I don't even know if I watched back when I was 1. I didn't mention by name because a poster here seems to think I bitch too much about crazy/off-topic posts and telling whoever that such-and-such topic should go in folder b.

[Tawren 0]

It's too cynical. I couldn't believe there were people who were unhappy with how Benoit won the title at WM.

He jumped to Raw for no reason, was treated as an annoying third wheel by HBK and HHH, won the match in a good way I'll admit, but then post WMXX it was "HHH lost the belt" not "Benoit won it".

 

Match was good, feud and build to it sucked.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

While I'll be the first to admit that the build to that match at WrestleMania could have been better, the match was great, and WWE wanted to give Eddy Guerrero the WWE Championship.

 

Chris Benoit was just making his mark on SmackDown! before leaving.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

He jumped to Raw for no reason, was treated as an annoying third wheel by HBK and HHH, won the match in a good way I'll admit, but then post WMXX it was "HHH lost the belt" not "Benoit won it".

 

Match was good, feud and build to it sucked.

I thought it said everything that was needed.

 

Shawn Michaels bleeded all over the place and kept going as though to say that he was that determined to winning the match. Benoit had to virtually fight two guys at once who were more interested in knocking him out of the picture and focusing on each other. And then it ends with HHH, the guy who made his whole career on shouting on and on for years about the love affair he has with the title, realize that he had nowhere left to go and submit, giving up his favorite object.

 

Business wise it didn't make immediate sense, but each guy went as far as he possibly could to show that regardless of how they got put into the match, they were damn sure going to take full advantage of it. Some people here talk about the title being viewed as unimportant after watching this match. I still don't get it.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

I think it's just another case of people taking this too seriously.

Really, it's a message board. We're not applying for federal grants here...

WE ARN'T!?!?

 

*leaves Smart Marks forever*

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

He'll be back.