Clear This Up For Me | Page 2 | WrestleZone Forums

Clear This Up For Me

Not really sure where all the drama is coming from in this thread, and I don't really understand why Nate is trying to stir up conflict that is not even there. The simple fact of the matter is, there was no shot taken at anyone. No conflict. No drama. Surely he cannot be suggesting that I am implying that Coco is overrated here on wrestlezone, because that would be crazy talk. I am sure Coco himself is not paranoid enough to think this is what I am saying. How could a guy who uses a word like "broheim" ever be considered to be overrated?

All I am saying is that here on wrestlezone, there are lots of guys who are excellent posters who probably don't get recognized as much as they should. Likewise, there are guys who in my opinion are not all that great, who get a reputation as being better than they truly are. Overrated, if you will. Consensus will be what consensus will be, I am not pointing fingers at anyone in particular.

It just seems like an odd place to discuss whether someone is overrated or not, when the general consensus amongst the wrestlezone posters is what likely determines this in the first place.
 
Way to blow a hole in my well thought out theory, Habs.

By the way, Notorious, I need to post in your Triple H thread later. That list pissed me off so much. Jerry Lawler overrated? Hulk Hogan overrated? Triple H overrated? Bah.
 
Well for me it depends. See you have to have a criteria for rating something to be able to rate it, because how highly rated something is can be modelled upon how closely it adheres to the criteria. Say for instance, some necessary criteria for a wrestler is to be able to sell well, to bump well, be able to talk well, if the guy then fulfills the criteria, they are a good wrestler without dispute.

The majority of things are like this. I've always thought the only exceptions to be artworks; paintings, music, dancing etc.... See a good song, in my eyes, is purely subjective, and if there is any criteria for what a good song is then I've yet to hear it. Moreover I'm yet to understand what the actual criteria is, and how if there is set criteria for what makes good music, why it isn't the first thing artists learn when writing music, how is it possible that any music can be considered bad if there is a set way to write a good song?

For me artworks are the only subjective things, rating them as good or bad is pointless unless you can actually muster the answer as to why, which few people attempt to. So more popular pieces of art, which are traditionally considered "better", just have a higher proportion of people that like them. I've always made sure to say "I like this song" as opposed to "this song is good" for thought that I may not have any reason as to believing it to be good other than me liking it which is no grounds at all, which would in turn all mean there is no grounds for people claiming to have a better "taste" in music/art.

I could be wrong about all of this, but only if there is actually set criteria for what makes a art "good", but as I've never been able to find any I've come to the above conclusion. So yes in my view the statement is correct in the vast majority of cases, but not always. That's just my view.
 
hatehabsforever said:
Not really sure where all the drama is coming from in this thread, and I don't really understand why Nate is trying to stir up conflict that is not even there.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't know me. I was just dicking around.

Friendly Neighborhood JGlass said:
By the way, Notorious, I need to post in your Triple H thread later. That list pissed me off so much. Jerry Lawler overrated? Hulk Hogan overrated? Triple H overrated? Bah.
Click to expand...

Notorious? Really? At least HHF knew who I was. LOL. It says Noticeably, by the way.
 
Alex'eddytiger'Waters said:
Well for me it depends. See you have to have a criteria for rating something to be able to rate it, because how highly rated something is can be modelled upon how closely it adheres to the criteria. Say for instance, some necessary criteria for a wrestler is to be able to sell well, to bump well, be able to talk well, if the guy then fulfills the criteria, they are a good wrestler without dispute.

The majority of things are like this. I've always thought the only exceptions to be artworks; paintings, music, dancing etc.... See a good song, in my eyes, is purely subjective, and if there is any criteria for what a good song is then I've yet to hear it. Moreover I'm yet to understand what the actual criteria is, and how if there is set criteria for what makes good music, why it isn't the first thing artists learn when writing music, how is it possible that any music can be considered bad if there is a set way to write a good song?

For me artworks are the only subjective things, rating them as good or bad is pointless unless you can actually muster the answer as to why, which few people attempt to. So more popular pieces of art, which are traditionally considered "better", just have a higher proportion of people that like them. I've always made sure to say "I like this song" as opposed to "this song is good" for thought that I may not have any reason as to believing it to be good other than me liking it which is no grounds at all, which would in turn all mean there is no grounds for people claiming to have a better "taste" in music/art.

I could be wrong about all of this, but only if there is actually set criteria for what makes a art "good", but as I've never been able to find any I've come to the above conclusion. So yes in my view the statement is correct in the vast majority of cases, but not always. That's just my view.
Click to expand...

This.

I mean, you can make an argument for anything to be subjective, just as you can make an equally valid argument for "majority rules", public opinion-type of situations. It's something that there's really no "right or wrong". If there was, there would never be any debates.
 
Alex'eddytiger'Waters said:
Well for me it depends. See you have to have a criteria for rating something to be able to rate it, because how highly rated something is can be modelled upon how closely it adheres to the criteria. Say for instance, some necessary criteria for a wrestler is to be able to sell well, to bump well, be able to talk well, if the guy then fulfills the criteria, they are a good wrestler without dispute.

The majority of things are like this. I've always thought the only exceptions to be artworks; paintings, music, dancing etc.... See a good song, in my eyes, is purely subjective, and if there is any criteria for what a good song is then I've yet to hear it. Moreover I'm yet to understand what the actual criteria is, and how if there is set criteria for what makes good music, why it isn't the first thing artists learn when writing music, how is it possible that any music can be considered bad if there is a set way to write a good song?

For me artworks are the only subjective things, rating them as good or bad is pointless unless you can actually muster the answer as to why, which few people attempt to. So more popular pieces of art, which are traditionally considered "better", just have a higher proportion of people that like them. I've always made sure to say "I like this song" as opposed to "this song is good" for thought that I may not have any reason as to believing it to be good other than me liking it which is no grounds at all, which would in turn all mean there is no grounds for people claiming to have a better "taste" in music/art.

I could be wrong about all of this, but only if there is actually set criteria for what makes a art "good", but as I've never been able to find any I've come to the above conclusion. So yes in my view the statement is correct in the vast majority of cases, but not always. That's just my view.
Click to expand...
Could you be any more annoying?
 
Y 2 Jane said:
[youtube]<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HSj4_8MR2lI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/youtube]
Click to expand...

Jane: So out practice, a Youtube video is a challenge.

:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Can someone clear this up for me?
Replies
10
Views
3K
"Cool Guy" Jensen
C
G
The Chicago Bears: Over or Under rated?
Replies
11
Views
2K
George Steele's Barber
G
S
I've Had Enough With 'Ratings' Talk
Replies
14
Views
4K
MistaSynista
M
Lee
Should voting be compulsory?
Replies
15
Views
2K
Razor
R
J
WZ Forums - Battle Royale
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
Mantaur Rodeo Clown
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 0 (members: 0, guests: 0)

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 1,221 (members: 0, guests: 1,221)

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego

Share this page

Back
Top