Does anyone else ever get frustrated when the WWE or others use the term internet fans? Am I the only one who gets annoyed every time I see the term IWC? Who else finds it annoying every time they see the word mark or smark? Considering everyone who watches Wrestling these days has the internet, it seems like a silly term to me. Anyway, I would like to know what you guys think about this. Cheers.
"Internet" fans
- Thread starter Ashw825
- Start date
Anyone who discusses or reads about wrestling on the internet is an IWC
Internet , Wrestling community. Anyone reading this is an IWC
anyone who goes on WZ. IWC
Yet everyone thinks even on the internet its a reference to a sub group.
It would be equivalent if, lets say your an american, see some hicks and say " Go americans are stupid"
No one I know has refereed to a sub group of people by the entire populations name and its grammatical annoying.
Another problem is everyone immediately assumes your a total smark if
A: You praise DB or CM punk
B: say something bad about Cena
Im sure all those people love when non wrestling fans accuse them of being stupid and not knowing wrestlings fake
Internet , Wrestling community. Anyone reading this is an IWC
anyone who goes on WZ. IWC
Yet everyone thinks even on the internet its a reference to a sub group.
It would be equivalent if, lets say your an american, see some hicks and say " Go americans are stupid"
No one I know has refereed to a sub group of people by the entire populations name and its grammatical annoying.
Another problem is everyone immediately assumes your a total smark if
A: You praise DB or CM punk
B: say something bad about Cena
Im sure all those people love when non wrestling fans accuse them of being stupid and not knowing wrestlings fake
Mongoose McQueen
Pre-Show Stalwart
Well technically anyone who participates in online Wrestling sites are "internet fans" so the term just needs to die IMO. I think there is a general perception of a small minority which I am NOT apart of where a certain "niche" of fans absolutely despise John Cena, Triple H, Randy Orton and Batista but worship Dolph Ziggler, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan and all other talent who have yet to reach that level. There is a split group of fans who like different things, I have also noticed that those who are Cena, Orton, Batista and HHH fans tend to bash those who support the guys I mentioned above. To be honest, I am indifferent, I like Bryan but I am not his biggest fan, like Cena, like Batista but am not too keen on Dolph Ziggler. It's just a matter of preference IMO, some people like some things and others like different things.
BestWrestlingOpinions
Getting Noticed By Management
It's simple, really. I believe that the old IWC were the fans that used the internet to learn news not from just the WWE, but from other wrestling promotions as well. Therefore, those fans liked the independent circuit, thus liking wrestlers like Punk. This trend of the "indy" fans carries on to today, so we have people liking the indy wrestlers, like Cesaro, Rollins, Ambrose, Bryan etc. But in the land of the giants, the WWE, the bigger guys get handed more opportunities to be at a top spot, therefore the smart fans who know more wrestling, backstage politics etc tend to turn on those guys for not trying as much as they should.
Going on, everyone uses the internet now, no matter if you like indies or not. Therefore, NOW,the term IWC is not the same group of people as it used to be. The IWC now is split in 3 parts. The indy lovers who hate every big guy, basically they hate everyone being handed opportunities, but love the spot monkies, the WWE sheep, who IMO are most trolls, and they love big guys and hate smaller ones because "it's still real to me dammit", and the third group, which I consider myself part of, the fans that actually appreciate talent and hard work.
I like Bryan for getting to the top from the total bottom by hard work. I like Punk for not being afraid to speak his mind. I liked Batista up to a point,because he worked, even though he was handed opportunities, like Cena, Orton and HHH. But when Batista comes back and steals the spot from Bryan by doing nothing, then of course people will turn on him. Reigns is a big guy, supposedly, but I appreciate his talentand want to see him succeed. Lesnar is a big guy, but I feel the same way.
In general, the term IWC is just thrown around by the trolls of the second group mostly who try to use it as an insult to attack those who prefer the wrestlers they don't like. If someone likes the "indy vanilla midget Bryan" then he is part of the IWC and has "no hope in life". These kinds of things are stupid and is one of the reasons why pro wrestling is fading to nothing. Thank god there was Cm Punk to make WWE interesting again and Bryan to have every arena on fire.
Going on, everyone uses the internet now, no matter if you like indies or not. Therefore, NOW,the term IWC is not the same group of people as it used to be. The IWC now is split in 3 parts. The indy lovers who hate every big guy, basically they hate everyone being handed opportunities, but love the spot monkies, the WWE sheep, who IMO are most trolls, and they love big guys and hate smaller ones because "it's still real to me dammit", and the third group, which I consider myself part of, the fans that actually appreciate talent and hard work.
I like Bryan for getting to the top from the total bottom by hard work. I like Punk for not being afraid to speak his mind. I liked Batista up to a point,because he worked, even though he was handed opportunities, like Cena, Orton and HHH. But when Batista comes back and steals the spot from Bryan by doing nothing, then of course people will turn on him. Reigns is a big guy, supposedly, but I appreciate his talentand want to see him succeed. Lesnar is a big guy, but I feel the same way.
In general, the term IWC is just thrown around by the trolls of the second group mostly who try to use it as an insult to attack those who prefer the wrestlers they don't like. If someone likes the "indy vanilla midget Bryan" then he is part of the IWC and has "no hope in life". These kinds of things are stupid and is one of the reasons why pro wrestling is fading to nothing. Thank god there was Cm Punk to make WWE interesting again and Bryan to have every arena on fire.
Jack-Hammer
YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
Not really. To me, you have internet fans who happen to be fans who make use of the internet to some degree and then you have fans who use the internet to find out all that they can about what's going on in wrestling. If you're someone who frequently posts on forums like this one, you fall into the latter and those are generally the "internet fans" that WWE refers to.
Is it meant to be taken as something of an insult? Yeah, it's generally meant as a negative. While all internet fans tend to get boxed into the same category, it's not as if wrestling companies aren't wrong about some of them. For instance, how often have you read posts in which the poster asserts that he knows more about wrestling than men & women who've worked in it their entire adult lives? How often have posters suggested that they themselves have some grand vision and that only their vision makes for good wrestling television? How many believe that pro wrestling is supposed to operate under similar rules to some fantasy football league? How many simply want to see what they want to see regardless of whether or not it makes a shred of sense? How many do nothing more than bitch about anything a company does just for the sheer sake of complaining about it? Ever hear the old chestnut "it only takes one rotten apple to spoil the whole barrel?" That's pretty much how it is with internet fans. Most fans are fans who like to debate, talk about what they like or don't like, suggest what they think might work, etc. while a much smaller minority makes the rest of us come off like a buncha goons.
Is it meant to be taken as something of an insult? Yeah, it's generally meant as a negative. While all internet fans tend to get boxed into the same category, it's not as if wrestling companies aren't wrong about some of them. For instance, how often have you read posts in which the poster asserts that he knows more about wrestling than men & women who've worked in it their entire adult lives? How often have posters suggested that they themselves have some grand vision and that only their vision makes for good wrestling television? How many believe that pro wrestling is supposed to operate under similar rules to some fantasy football league? How many simply want to see what they want to see regardless of whether or not it makes a shred of sense? How many do nothing more than bitch about anything a company does just for the sheer sake of complaining about it? Ever hear the old chestnut "it only takes one rotten apple to spoil the whole barrel?" That's pretty much how it is with internet fans. Most fans are fans who like to debate, talk about what they like or don't like, suggest what they think might work, etc. while a much smaller minority makes the rest of us come off like a buncha goons.
pratrullz098
Dark Match Winner
The term IWC should be narrowed to people who discuss wrestling on the internet, like us. Not every fan that is on the internet. Otherwise 99% of the WWE fans will be IWC.
Also, the term "mark" should stop being used. Anyone above 7 years isn't a mark. I started watching wrestling when I was 5, and even then i knew it was scripted.
Also, the term "mark" should stop being used. Anyone above 7 years isn't a mark. I started watching wrestling when I was 5, and even then i knew it was scripted.
JoeFromTomsRiver
Championship Contender
The only time it "annoys" me, or makes me scratch my head, is when someone who has been a member of a wrestling message board for years, and has hundreds if not thousands of posts, makes fun of "the IWC" as if they aren't part of it.
They have made a conscious decision to swallow whole whatever WWE Creative spoon feeds them, and they look down their nose at those who come on the internet and actually express dissastisfaction with the product.
So although they are actually participating IN the IWC, they dis-associate themselves with that label because they are WWE-apologists and they think that if you don't like certain booking decisions, you should just stop watching, and not express your complaints online.
HELL YES! Every time I see someone using terms like MARK, SMARK, or IWC, I just want to pull my hair out and punch them in the face. They're just pointless buzzwords that stupid people use to make themselves sound important.
The saddest thing is that you often see moderators on this site, and people like Labar and Madden who write articles for this site, using these same silly terms as if they themselves aren't fans who have access to the internet.
Let it be known from here on that there is no such thing as a mark, a smark, or the IWC. Never was. There is, was, and has always only ever been FANS. Whatever label you want to slap on people, go ahead, but at the end of the day a fan is a fan.
If this was the 80's, everyone on this site would be subscribing to the old wrestling magazines like Pro Wrestling Illustrated. But since print media is dead and the internet is king, this is now where fans convene to discuss the industry they're passionate about.
Using a term like IWC implies that the internet is this exclusive secret society that only certain people have access to. What sorcery is this "internet" you speak of?
Nothing's really changed in the world of wrestling fandom, except fans no longer need to subscribe and write into magazines because they have the internet. I for one really think this internet thing is gonna catch on.
Next time you see someone using terms like smarks, marks, or IWC, point out how stupid they sound. We're all just fans.
enviousdominous
Behold my diction
It annoyed me the second I saw it, because even then it was obvious enough of what it actually was.
I didn't see mention of the IWC in an issue of Pro-Wrestling Illustrated. I saw it mentioned, over and over again, online by smarks.
Is there a more stupid pseudonym out there? Every time I see that term mentioned, it's in regard to a story line development that goes against the grain of the author's preference.
The internet is an indulgence, that for some is an entire lifestyle. Some people indulge in their internet lifestyle by spending an entire day scouting and baiting individuals so they can mock them for indulging in the internet for lack of an actual lifestyle. Human beings rarely hold themselves to the social standard that they hold other people, if some of us met ourselves it would be a blood bath after a few verbal exchanges.
If I disagreed with everyone on this thread regarding the issue, it would be my burden to explain exactly why I disagree so as to be taken seriously enough for a discussion. Explanations are difficult to pin down with words, you have to be of a certain level of determination and intellect if you're going to provide an effective explanation. What if you didn't have to try that hard though? Sure, take the easy way out. All of you are wrong, because you're IWC marks. Ahhhh. That was easy, and now I can hide behind a smug emoticon
as though providing a lower life form like anyone who isn't me with an explanation for my diagnosis would be a waste of my superior intellect.
I'm not saying that the WWE has never appealed to the internet for suggestions, Jim Cornette tore into them for doing that before. I will say that people have been getting too liberal with the use of the term as a scapegoat for an actual explanation for why their better interest is more legitimate than what's being portrayed.
I didn't see mention of the IWC in an issue of Pro-Wrestling Illustrated. I saw it mentioned, over and over again, online by smarks.
Is there a more stupid pseudonym out there? Every time I see that term mentioned, it's in regard to a story line development that goes against the grain of the author's preference.
The internet is an indulgence, that for some is an entire lifestyle. Some people indulge in their internet lifestyle by spending an entire day scouting and baiting individuals so they can mock them for indulging in the internet for lack of an actual lifestyle. Human beings rarely hold themselves to the social standard that they hold other people, if some of us met ourselves it would be a blood bath after a few verbal exchanges.
If I disagreed with everyone on this thread regarding the issue, it would be my burden to explain exactly why I disagree so as to be taken seriously enough for a discussion. Explanations are difficult to pin down with words, you have to be of a certain level of determination and intellect if you're going to provide an effective explanation. What if you didn't have to try that hard though? Sure, take the easy way out. All of you are wrong, because you're IWC marks. Ahhhh. That was easy, and now I can hide behind a smug emoticon
as though providing a lower life form like anyone who isn't me with an explanation for my diagnosis would be a waste of my superior intellect.I'm not saying that the WWE has never appealed to the internet for suggestions, Jim Cornette tore into them for doing that before. I will say that people have been getting too liberal with the use of the term as a scapegoat for an actual explanation for why their better interest is more legitimate than what's being portrayed.
Internet fans, more so forum fans, I believe are considered generally the ones that bash the product constantly, boo the faces, and cheer the heels. Try to force their opinions and beliefs like "Hijack Raw"
Outside of these forums, at non televised live shows, wwe.com, twitter, and just generally the people who watch WWE but don't go on the internet to talk about it, usually favor guys like Cena, Orton and Sheamus. And they enjoy the shows, unless their favorite loses. They don't worry about politics or booking.
Outside of these forums, at non televised live shows, wwe.com, twitter, and just generally the people who watch WWE but don't go on the internet to talk about it, usually favor guys like Cena, Orton and Sheamus. And they enjoy the shows, unless their favorite loses. They don't worry about politics or booking.
I dont get offended at all. They can use the term internet fans all they want. True enough,we typically do get boxed into the same category as know-it-all's or people with no lives.. But most of us are just indeed fans.. IWC or whatever you wanna call it,we love to come on here and debate and discuss.
These forums give us an opportunity to do this.
These forums give us an opportunity to do this.
d_henderson1810
Mid-Card Championship Winner
It annoyed me the second I saw it, because even then it was obvious enough of what it actually was.
I didn't see mention of the IWC in an issue of Pro-Wrestling Illustrated. I saw it mentioned, over and over again, online by smarks.
Is there a more stupid pseudonym out there? Every time I see that term mentioned, it's in regard to a story line development that goes against the grain of the author's preference.
The internet is an indulgence, that for some is an entire lifestyle. Some people indulge in their internet lifestyle by spending an entire day scouting and baiting individuals so they can mock them for indulging in the internet for lack of an actual lifestyle. Human beings rarely hold themselves to the social standard that they hold other people, if some of us met ourselves it would be a blood bath after a few verbal exchanges.
If I disagreed with everyone on this thread regarding the issue, it would be my burden to explain exactly why I disagree so as to be taken seriously enough for a discussion. Explanations are difficult to pin down with words, you have to be of a certain level of determination and intellect if you're going to provide an effective explanation. What if you didn't have to try that hard though? Sure, take the easy way out. All of you are wrong, because you're IWC marks. Ahhhh. That was easy, and now I can hide behind a smug emoticon
I'm not saying that the WWE has never appealed to the internet for suggestions, Jim Cornette tore into them for doing that before. I will say that people have been getting too liberal with the use of the term as a scapegoat for an actual explanation for why their better interest is more legitimate than what's being portrayed.
You don't see "IWC" being mentioned in Pro-Wrestling Illustrated? That's your argument..
PWI is a kayfabe mag which still talks about wrestling like it is all real, and everything they do is real.
The last time I looked at it, it was still indulging in kayfabe. I don't know how you can take a magazine seriously that once said in its "Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down" column that Rikishi needed to go to prison for running down "Stone Cold" Steve Austin in 2000....and they were serious!
Next time,cite a credible source for your argument.
Not really, I like the term IWC more than smark. If you are on the internet and you are part of a wrestling forum then you are part of an internet wrestling community. There is nothing wrong with it. Usually there is a differentiation between dedicated fans and casual fans in any fandom. IWC and Casual are the two categories for wrestling fans. Smark is just derogatory towards someone who thinks they are smarter than the business.
I like PWI...I indulge in kayfabe a lot though...
I like PWI...I indulge in kayfabe a lot though...
Cats Pajamas
Serenity now!!!
I've never had a company ask me to go on the internet as much as the WWE does (though Lowes and Cigna would be a close second and third).
I don't get annoyed by any of this because I don't understand why I should? Actually, internet fan is a pretty accurate description for me.
I don't get annoyed by any of this because I don't understand why I should? Actually, internet fan is a pretty accurate description for me.