WWE Folder sucks dick

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

We call that "racism" (at least they do when I told someone that I thought our waitress at Japanese restaurant looked exactly the same as the waitress from Benihana on The Office).

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

According to HTQ, Meltzer is more reliable than the people who actually work with the WWE. Fucking brainwashed sheep.

 

I like how in response to HTQ finally answering why he gives credence to Meltzer's writing, you just continue to go: Wahhh sheep. Shut up.

 

What makes this quote of his even more ridiculous is that there's nothing I said, even with the biggest of exaggerations, that would come anywhere close to making his quote even remotely accurate. Scroby seems hell bent on hating Meltzer and maintaining his vendetta against anyone who reports insider news. It really is pathetic and if we didn't know better, I'd swear Scroby was 13.

[Scroby 0]

According to HTQ, Meltzer is more reliable than the people who actually work with the WWE. Fucking brainwashed sheep.

 

I like how in response to HTQ finally answering why he gives credence to Meltzer's writing, you just continue to go: Wahhh sheep. Shut up.

 

What makes this quote of his even more ridiculous is that there's nothing I said, even with the biggest of exaggerations, that would come anywhere close to making his quote even remotely accurate. Scroby seems hell bent on hating Meltzer and maintaining his vendetta against anyone who reports insider news. It really is pathetic and if we didn't know better, I'd swear Scroby was 13.

Again, I have no problem with Meltzer or any other jackass who makes reports on the internet about pro wrestling. I have a problem with the people who believes Meltzer or anyone else similar to what Meltzer does, is absolutely right with everything that gets reported.

 

Like here would be an example: I know D'lo Brown. I've worked with him on a few indy shows, he's held a training seminar at my home wrestling promotion, and I've hung with him a few times in between those times.

 

Now if I said that I've recently spoke with D'lo and he told me that he was going to get a giant push pretty quickly on Raw and feud with someone over the IC title. Then someone who didn't believe me e-mailed Meltzer, asked Meltzer about that, and Meltzer told that peson "well I don't think that's true, no one has told me that.". So then that person believes Meltzer over me. Which would not make any sense.

 

Which is what pissed me off about Enigma and the whole "I believe Meltzer over that lying bitch Batista" statement and there are others on this board who do the same thing.

[Dandy 0]

Scroby, I agree with you in theory, but there is a major flaw in that design. Credibility is built up over time, and Meltzer has that credibility. You know what D'Lo says is true because it comes from you. However, those who do not know you will equate you with the thousands of others on the internet who make false stories just to be quoted. If you broke several news stories in a row due to your sources, you would gain credibility and thus be given the benefit of the doubt over time. Meltzer is the number one relater of news from sources in the industry, so he is given the benefit of the doubt. If he starts making things up constantly that don't pan out, he loses credibility and doesn't sell as many newsletters.

 

I have read enough books and watched enough shoot interviews from wrestlers to know that they contradict each others' stories and go into business for themselves and toe the company line when they want or are told. For me, that makes it hard to believe what some of them might say when they come right out and say it in a book that is published by the company they work for. Some of the more accurate stories are going to come from those who can pass news anonymously without repercussions from the company. It's not always that way, however.

[Guest Czecherbear]

[Dandy 0]

That was directed at me?

[Shooter in a Wedding Dress 0]

Clearly that was a present for all of us.

[Guest Czecherbear]

Oh, whoops, I meant to post this in Pictures I Like. that came up on my youtube front page just now! Why?

[Shooter in a Wedding Dress 0]

Was her name Gina or was it in the sense I'm imagining?

[Boner Kawanger 0]

She got hit in the 'gina dude. That's short for VA-gina. As in her pussy.

 

 

 

Canadian Destroyer has a huge avatar and I don't and since I'm drunk it vexes me. There were a lot of misspelled words in this post but I'm a perfectionist with spellcheck.

[Kinetic 0]

Okay, so would you rather awake to the sensation of an unfamiliar finger in your butthole or watch the entirety of Behind Enemy Lines: Colombia, starring Mr. Kennedy? You have to choose one. Bear in mind that the finger could belong to anyone, from an underwear model to Jack Black to Marvin.

 

I'm taking my chances with the finger.

[At Home 0]

Butthole thing.

[bob_barron 0]

Again, I have no problem with Meltzer or any other jackass who makes reports on the internet about pro wrestling.

 

Meltzer's been publishing the newsletter since the 80s, before almost anyone had internet. And why is someone a jackass for writing about wrestling,

 

I have a problem with the people who believes Meltzer or anyone else similar to what Meltzer does, is absolutely right with everything that gets reported.

 

This has been refuted by both me and HTQ. And now Dandy.

 

Like here would be an example: I know D'lo Brown. I've worked with him on a few indy shows, he's held a training seminar at my home wrestling promotion, and I've hung with him a few times in between those times.

 

Now if I said that I've recently spoke with D'lo and he told me that he was going to get a giant push pretty quickly on Raw and feud with someone over the IC title. Then someone who didn't believe me e-mailed Meltzer, asked Meltzer about that, and Meltzer told that peson "well I don't think that's true, no one has told me that.". So then that person believes Meltzer over me. Which would not make any sense.

 

Wrestlers are notorious for working people or believing things that aren't there, so I would take what D-Lo said with a grain of salt, but not outright dismiss it.

 

Which is what pissed me off about Enigma and the whole "I believe Meltzer over that lying bitch Batista" statement and there are others on this board who do the same thing.

 

Enigma being an idiot doesn't make Meltzer any less credible. And after reading Batista Unleashed again, I'd take Meltz's word over his.

[The Niggardly King 0]

I'll be watching Behind Enemy Lines: Colombia. Hopefully I'll still be high when I wake up.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I was going to make the basic "someone leaking info from the office would have better knowledge of storylines than a wrestler being lied / placated to by management" argument but bob and HTQ already did, so good stuff.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

And Jesus, what crypt did JoeDirt crawl out of? That's not a "why the WWE folder sucks" comment, this just seemed like the place to ask. Does he still have that avatar of a drawn man wearing sunglasses, possibly instructing me to watch and review old school matches?

[The Niggardly King 0]

Man, that doesn't sound to good. Mr. Wrestling is agitated and confused. Be on alert, JoeDirt.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

No, nothing like that, I just find it odd when posters who dropped off the face of the earth in 2003 re-appear without a storyline to explain their absence.

[Tawren 0]

No, nothing like that, I just find it odd when posters who dropped off the face of the earth in 2003 re-appear without a storyline to explain their absence.

 

 

 

[Twisted Intestine 0]

No, nothing like that, I just find it odd when posters who dropped off the face of the earth in 2003 re-appear without a storyline to explain their absence.

 

Would you like for it to be explained that Kane kidnapped him and was torturing him, but he escaped ready to take on Kane at WM?

 

Also, if he dropped off the face of the earth in 2002 would it be any better for you? How about 2004?

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

Unknown at this time.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I was going to make the basic "someone leaking info from the office would have better knowledge of storylines than a wrestler being lied / placated to by management" argument but bob and HTQ already did, so good stuff.

I almost admire bob for his continued effort to argue against Scroby's irrationality, but at the same time it's obvious that nothing is going to convince Scroby to let go of his hatred of Meltzer and others like him. Let's just leave Scroby to feel comforted by his hatred.

[PILLS! PILLS! PILLS! 0]

Okay, so would you rather awake to the sensation of an unfamiliar finger in your butthole or watch the entirety of Behind Enemy Lines: Colombia, starring Mr. Kennedy? You have to choose one. Bear in mind that the finger could belong to anyone, from an underwear model to Jack Black to Marvin.

 

I'm taking my chances with the finger.

 

I could improve upon the movie thing by adding friends, drugs, alcohol, etc. and possibly make it a fun experience. I don't think that I could do anything to make the butthole thing enjoyable.

[King Cucaracha 0]

I like how we're debating over the credibility and integrity of a journalist. A wrestling journalist, no less. If you can't trust a journalist, who can you trust!?

 

 

Not a Meltzer knocker myself, but I can see Scroby's point about the trust some people put in him.

 

I was going to make the basic "someone leaking info from the office would have better knowledge of storylines than a wrestler being lied / placated to by management" argument but bob and HTQ already did, so good stuff.

 

I never get why we're automatically supposed to trust the word of someone leaking information? Surely if these people are leaking information behind the backs, they're by definition not very trustworthy to begin with. Plus you factor in reasons why they'd want to leak the information, which is probably not being over-enamoured with the company employing them. Fair enough, Meltzer's got a trustworthy record, but to me if you're going to take one piece of news with a pinch of salt you should take it all as such.

 

I know wrestlers work people, but come on, taking the word of an anonymous tipster over the person themselves is kinda cynical. If someone came up to you on the street saying "I'm an anonymous tipster and I've got some information you might find interesting, $20", I don't know about you but I'd be kinda suspicious. Put it into an internet newsletter and suddenly, no real suspicion?

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

Meltzer knocker

 

Sounds dirty

[Guest Czecherbear]

I never found out who Willie the Worker was.

[Scroby 0]

Thank you Cucaracha, I'm glad someone else understands the point I've been trying to make. Plus you explained it a lot better than I did so that's a plus as well.

 

Me and Bob are always going to disagree with each other when it comes to Meltzer and like I said before, it's not that I hate what Meltzer or any other wrestling news website does, it's the people who believe just about everything that gets reported and automatically assume that because Meltzer reported something differently, Meltzer is correct source of information.

 

And I will give Meltzer credit, he is right a good majority of the time but he also can very wrong and also not have all the correct information when it comes to a certain thing and the main thing is that we (fans who follow wrestling news/meltzer) don't know for sure if something that is going down or had went down unless we see it on screen.

 

Meltzer can report that Christian is backstage and is gonna run out during Edge's match and cost him the title, but we wouldn't know that for sure unless it happen and very well could happen but until it does, it should be a assumption that it's going to happen.

 

Now say Meltzer reported that a certain storyline was suppose to be done in a certain direction but got changed and the storyline went in another direction and Meltzer says the reason it got changed is because a certain wrestler pissed off a booker or something like that. The problem is that we (the fans again) don't know for sure, and most likely won't ever know for sure because you know, it happen off screen.

 

Then we go later down the road, that certain wrestler explains that the storyline was suppose to go this way but it got changed because the bookers felt the storyline would just work better going in the other direction, well certain people (HTQ, Enigma) throw their arms up in the air and scream out "WELL MELTZER SAYS IT HAPPEN SO I'M GONNA BELIEVE HIM AND YOU'RE A LYING BITCH!!". Which pretty much sparked this whole argument, but the problem with that reasoning is that Meltzer most likely got his information 3rd hand while the actual person involved with the storyline says it happen a bit differently than what Meltzer reported but people would rather take Meltzer's words to the grave with them over the wrestler.

 

Does that make more sense or am I still the guy who "hates Meltzer and internet wrestling news reporting!"?

[The Niggardly King 0]

I never found out who Willie the Worker was.

 

The top 3 suspects were RVD, Jeff Hardy, or Paul Heyman

[King Cucaracha 0]

Meltzer knocker

 

Sounds dirty

 

In a name for a bad German bondage pornstar way?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I never found out who Willie the Worker was.

It was RVD.