Posters that you hate!

[Ambiguous Turd]

I dont hate Lord sidious but the guy does my head in, he does love to keep advocating for the attitude era and more adult orientated product, he would be a better poster if he just though more positive

Having a management background, I tend to see the glass as half empty as opposed to half full.

I keep seeing people wanting me to be more positive, but to be frank, there is very little I find positive about the PG Era. Very, very little. Believe me, if there were more I enjoyed about it, I would definitely state as such.

The only thing I can really give Vince credit for is the quality of wrestling has been improved dramatically. However, if all of WWE's energy goes into improving the quality of wrestling, while everything else goes to Hell, what good is it?

The major things I am upset about, don't really have as much to do with the PG rating. Although I personally feel there needs to be a more adult-oriented product somewhere in the WWE equation, it still is not at the crux of my frustrations.

This are the essentials I feel Vince needs to do to get the WWE back in gear, none of which have anything to do with the rating:


1) Invest more time into creating not just feuds, but actual storylines to help get the talent over with the fans. In doing so, go back to the traditional method of making the weekly television storyline-based, while the House Shows and PPV's are feud-based. Storyline-based shows gets the audience to care about the talent, while the Feud-based shows like the PPV's allows the audience the satisfaction of seeing an actual match take place to the buildup on TV.

2) Create riveting, more complex characters/gimmicks ... and stop creating stale personalities the fans could care less about, like Charlie Haas, Shelton Benjamin, Ricky Ortiz, Paul Burchill, etc. When WWE creates a character, they need to answer on paper "Why the audience should cheer or boo for this particular talent". I can't necessarily do that with probably half the roster today. Why should I boo Ricky Ortiz, Charlie Haas, Paul Burchill, Tyson Kidd, etc.? WWE does not give people enough reason to become emotionally vested with the matches.

3) Bring back the ringside managers (including male managers ... not just Valets) and assign them to about 50% of the heels on the rosters. This will create even more interesting characters and scenarios between the talent, as well as bring a lot more entertainment to the matches ... while providing a variance to the match finishes.

4) Bring back the jobbers. Some are not going to like this, but it is for the long-term good. Jobber matches allow the talent to get their faces shown on TV each week, but also prolongs the feuds from taking place ... which prevents the stale, repetitive feuds we see done over, and over, and over again. I would recommend WWE putting 2 jobber matches on per 2 hour show.

5) Invest in both the Midcard and Tag Team Division. Tag Teams allow the fans to see some variance in the cards, instead of just seeing one singles match after another. This is a perfect way to introduce new talent into the company. The Midcard should be invested into so we don't get into the situation the company is in now, with people who feel very apathetic towards the product. Investing in talent while they are in the Midcard and even Lower Midcard, will make the public care that much more about them when they eventually enter the Upper Midcard and possibly Main Event.

6) Bring back Face/Heel commentary teams. This provided for a much more entertaining broadcast and actually helped turn bad matches into tolerable ones, based on the banter between the commentators (if they were good enough).


As far as whether I "hate" anyone on the forum or not, not really. There are 2 or 3 people on here that have really rubbed me the wrong way as a result of personality conflicts .... unnecessary nastiness, arrogant "I'm better than you" attitudes, etc. But I don't hate anyone on here. The other forum I posted on before coming here, yes I can safely say that I hated at least 3 posters on there.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

So, who DO you hate Sidious?

 

[The Doctor]

Holy hell, Sidious, where did you come from?

I agree that we need more colorful characters and such, but I think you're a little too negative is all.I get it though, it's just your personality. And Ricky Ortiz' gimmick/personality is that of an annoying workout instructor/self-esteem video host.

I hope you've read my thoughts on you in this thread. I know we've clashed quite a few times and had our differences, but I really do respect you a lot.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

Having a management background, I tend to see the glass as half empty as opposed to half full.

I keep seeing people wanting me to be more positive, but to be frank, there is very little I find positive about the PG Era. Very, very little. Believe me, if there were more I enjoyed about it, I would definitely state as such.

The only thing I can really give Vince credit for is the quality of wrestling has been improved dramatically. However, if all of WWE's energy goes into improving the quality of wrestling, while everything else goes to Hell, what good is it?

The major things I am upset about, don't really have as much to do with the PG rating. Although I personally feel there needs to be a more adult-oriented product somewhere in the WWE equation, it still is not at the crux of my frustrations.

This are the essentials I feel Vince needs to do to get the WWE back in gear, none of which have anything to do with the rating:


1) Invest more time into creating not just feuds, but actual storylines to help get the talent over with the fans. In doing so, go back to the traditional method of making the weekly television storyline-based, while the House Shows and PPV's are feud-based. Storyline-based shows gets the audience to care about the talent, while the Feud-based shows like the PPV's allows the audience the satisfaction of seeing an actual match take place to the buildup on TV.

2) Create riveting, more complex characters/gimmicks ... and stop creating stale personalities the fans could care less about, like Charlie Haas, Shelton Benjamin, Ricky Ortiz, Paul Burchill, etc. When WWE creates a character, they need to answer on paper "Why the audience should cheer or boo for this particular talent". I can't necessarily do that with probably half the roster today. Why should I boo Ricky Ortiz, Charlie Haas, Paul Burchill, Tyson Kidd, etc.? WWE does not give people enough reason to become emotionally vested with the matches.

3) Bring back the ringside managers (including male managers ... not just Valets) and assign them to about 50% of the heels on the rosters. This will create even more interesting characters and scenarios between the talent, as well as bring a lot more entertainment to the matches ... while providing a variance to the match finishes.

4) Bring back the jobbers. Some are not going to like this, but it is for the long-term good. Jobber matches allow the talent to get their faces shown on TV each week, but also prolongs the feuds from taking place ... which prevents the stale, repetitive feuds we see done over, and over, and over again. I would recommend WWE putting 2 jobber matches on per 2 hour show.

5) Invest in both the Midcard and Tag Team Division. Tag Teams allow the fans to see some variance in the cards, instead of just seeing one singles match after another. This is a perfect way to introduce new talent into the company. The Midcard should be invested into so we don't get into the situation the company is in now, with people who feel very apathetic towards the product. Investing in talent while they are in the Midcard and even Lower Midcard, will make the public care that much more about them when they eventually enter the Upper Midcard and possibly Main Event.

6) Bring back Face/Heel commentary teams. This provided for a much more entertaining broadcast and actually helped turn bad matches into tolerable ones, based on the banter between the commentators (if they were good enough).


As far as whether I "hate" anyone on the forum or not, not really. There are 2 or 3 people on here that have really rubbed me the wrong way as a result of personality conflicts .... unnecessary nastiness, arrogant "I'm better than you" attitudes, etc. But I don't hate anyone on here. The other forum I posted on before coming here, yes I can safely say that I hated at least 3 posters on there.

I hope im not one of them sidious, Because as i stated you do annoy the hell out of me for the whole PG era must die approach but more then once i have been on the same page with you if you remember clearly.

I respect you as a poster just cant get my head round the whole anti pg era thing, and to me it seems like you want vince to fail, Im just saying

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

I can tell you a poster that i love dearly :
[115]FalKon: she shares my love for mickey james amongst other things, FALKON RULES!!!!

 

[Viola Moonlight]

I can tell you a poster that i love dearly :
[115]FalKon: she shares my love for mickey james amongst other things, FALKON RULES!!!!

Thankyou for the comment. It is in my sig... Degeneration Deej

 

[My$terio_Fan]

Thankyou for the comment. It is in my sig... Degeneration Deej

I like you! Diva fans for life!

 

[Mantaur Rodeo Clown]

Having a management background, I tend to see the glass as half empty as opposed to half full.

I keep seeing people wanting me to be more positive, but to be frank, there is very little I find positive about the PG Era. Very, very little. Believe me, if there were more I enjoyed about it, I would definitely state as such.

The only thing I can really give Vince credit for is the quality of wrestling has been improved dramatically. However, if all of WWE's energy goes into improving the quality of wrestling, while everything else goes to Hell, what good is it?

The major things I am upset about, don't really have as much to do with the PG rating. Although I personally feel there needs to be a more adult-oriented product somewhere in the WWE equation, it still is not at the crux of my frustrations.

This are the essentials I feel Vince needs to do to get the WWE back in gear, none of which have anything to do with the rating:


1) Invest more time into creating not just feuds, but actual storylines to help get the talent over with the fans. In doing so, go back to the traditional method of making the weekly television storyline-based, while the House Shows and PPV's are feud-based. Storyline-based shows gets the audience to care about the talent, while the Feud-based shows like the PPV's allows the audience the satisfaction of seeing an actual match take place to the buildup on TV.

2) Create riveting, more complex characters/gimmicks ... and stop creating stale personalities the fans could care less about, like Charlie Haas, Shelton Benjamin, Ricky Ortiz, Paul Burchill, etc. When WWE creates a character, they need to answer on paper "Why the audience should cheer or boo for this particular talent". I can't necessarily do that with probably half the roster today. Why should I boo Ricky Ortiz, Charlie Haas, Paul Burchill, Tyson Kidd, etc.? WWE does not give people enough reason to become emotionally vested with the matches.

3) Bring back the ringside managers (including male managers ... not just Valets) and assign them to about 50% of the heels on the rosters. This will create even more interesting characters and scenarios between the talent, as well as bring a lot more entertainment to the matches ... while providing a variance to the match finishes.

4) Bring back the jobbers. Some are not going to like this, but it is for the long-term good. Jobber matches allow the talent to get their faces shown on TV each week, but also prolongs the feuds from taking place ... which prevents the stale, repetitive feuds we see done over, and over, and over again. I would recommend WWE putting 2 jobber matches on per 2 hour show.

5) Invest in both the Midcard and Tag Team Division. Tag Teams allow the fans to see some variance in the cards, instead of just seeing one singles match after another. This is a perfect way to introduce new talent into the company. The Midcard should be invested into so we don't get into the situation the company is in now, with people who feel very apathetic towards the product. Investing in talent while they are in the Midcard and even Lower Midcard, will make the public care that much more about them when they eventually enter the Upper Midcard and possibly Main Event.

6) Bring back Face/Heel commentary teams. This provided for a much more entertaining broadcast and actually helped turn bad matches into tolerable ones, based on the banter between the commentators (if they were good enough).


As far as whether I "hate" anyone on the forum or not, not really. There are 2 or 3 people on here that have really rubbed me the wrong way as a result of personality conflicts .... unnecessary nastiness, arrogant "I'm better than you" attitudes, etc. But I don't hate anyone on here. The other forum I posted on before coming here, yes I can safely say that I hated at least 3 posters on there.

Ahe. Exactly the reason he's disliked. Writing an essay in a Bar Room thread to do with posters you dislike and you turned it into a preach-a-thon. Fun stuff.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I hope im not one of them sidious, Because as i stated you do annoy the hell out of me for the whole PG era must die approach but more then once i have been on the same page with you if you remember clearly.

Absolutely not. I take no issue with anyone in this thread, whatsoever.

I have no problem with people who disagree with me. What I have a problem with is arrogant and conceited people who deliberately insult other posters while giving off an "I'm better than you" attitude. Even though I may disagree with people, I am no better or view myself as higher in status than anyone else on these forums. All I do is give my opinions, and stand by them.

I respect you as a poster just cant get my head round the whole anti pg era thing, and to me it seems like you want vince to fail, Im just saying

I don't want Vince to fail. And nor do I necessarily want his PG initiative to fail, although I admit that I am not a fan of it, by a long-shot. But, as you can see from my post above, I have outlined the basic things I want to see changed with the product. None of those things necessarily have anything to do with the PG rating, whatsoever. However, yes as I have stated for some time now, I do feel there should be at least one edgy show out there for WWE fans. But that is not even amongst my primary gripes.

 

[Slyfox696]

I've never hated anyone on here, I find it silly to hate people you don't know. I have, though, felt many posters are stupid and worthless. But, as I've gotten older the last two years, something has changed in me. For whatever reason, I've become more accepting of others and get along better. But, at various times, I've e-hated: xfearbefore (you know, when I first got here), DIAR, HBK-aholic, Y 2 Jake, CM and I'm sure a couple others whose names I've forgotten.

Xfear: We had a war on a YouTube video, and he wouldn't get it through his thick skull that Cena was better than Danielson. He's better now, so we get along.

DIAR: Not really sure why our online personalities clash, but they did...often. I still remember having a Miley Cyrus debate with him. Don't ask why, I don't know.

HBK-aholic: The constant ass kissing she got when she first got here (you know, a female on a message board) caused her to have quite a large ego, one that was completely undeserved in my opinion. As time as gone on, I've felt like she's had less of an ego, and more quality to support it.

Y 2 Jake: Always found him to be a little shady, even from my first night on the WZ forums. I remember I got infracted for spam because my post wasn't long enough, but he made a post that was nothing but "I hate so and so", which was obviously spam and apparently that was okay. There have been other examples, but that was just the first.

CM: My Corporate Sly gimmick was modeled after him. More of an erroneous opinion of CM than a deserved one.

As far as whether I "hate" anyone on the forum or not, not really. There are 2 or 3 people on here that have really rubbed me the wrong way as a result of personality conflicts .... unnecessary nastiness, arrogant "I'm better than you" attitudes, etc. But I don't hate anyone on here.

He's talking about me, in case anyone is wondering.

Oh Sidious, if you only understood what I was doing and how I went to bat for you when you first got here.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Oh Sidious, if you only understood what I was doing and how I went to bat for you when you first got here.

I still don't necessarily get the "I went to bat for you when you got here" line that you brought up a couple times now. This is not comparable to someone who is either seeking employment or trying to save their employment, in which someone needs to "go to bat for someone else".

This is a simple online forum where people talk about their views on the business. Realistically, why should anyone have to "go to bat" over a poster who is simply coming to the forums to post? I'm not trying to turn a hand away at the concept of someone who perhaps was trying to do a good deed, but at the same time, I'm really not that big of a deal with which someone needs to go to bat over. I'm just a poster like anyone else.

But be that as it may, you also mentioned "if I knew what you were trying to do". You see, the problem is that I do not get into bickerings like that with Moderators or Admins. Because it has been my experience that all too often, they use their authority as a crutch to treat people any way they want to .... yet they know damn well if I respond in the same fashion, then I am the one that gets the consequences, not them.

That is why I typically don't get into discussions with them. And with all due respect, that is what I felt you were doing on your last discussion with me. If I had responded to you in the same manner that you were responding to me, there was no doubt in my mind that I was going to either be issued an infraction and/or put under the microscope for all future postings, due to holding a grudge. And I wasn't going to allow myself to walk into that.

I realize you may have been trying to "fire me up for a debate", but that actually had the opposite affect on me because ...

1) Of the tone of your post
2) Of your position in regard to getting into a nasty fight with me on the forum.

So that was why I cut it off and refused to respond to your posts. As you know from my postings here and elsewhere, I have no problem with a good debate, but I respond much better where people don't make it personal. Because then, it only gets nasty, and then infractions are dished out and grudges are formed.

Be that as it may, I will likely still keep the same policy in tact of not debating any Mods or Admins for that very reason.



However, other than the one situation with Slyfox, I have gotten into it with Milyway!, TMexico, and Tastycles. Coco the Monkey and I go way back a number of years, however I have found him to be much more professional to interact with on here as compared to the other forum he and I posted on.

 

[Razor]

Yeah. So you're not going to take Sly's bait, huh? Coulda fooled me with that 5+ paragraph post.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I STILL like how people gives this guy shit, yet all he does is tell the damn truth. Funny.

 

[Slyfox696]

I still don't necessarily get the "I went to bat for you when you got here" line that you brought up a couple times now. This is not comparable to someone who is either seeking employment or trying to save their employment, in which someone needs to "go to bat for someone else".

This is a simple online forum where people talk about their views on the business. Realistically, why should anyone have to "go to bat" over a poster who is simply coming to the forums to post? I'm not trying to turn a hand away at the concept of someone who perhaps was trying to do a good deed, but at the same time, I'm really not that big of a deal with which someone needs to go to bat over. I'm just a poster like anyone else.

Yes, and some posters post here, and some get infracted and banned. And while no one on Staff shows favoritism, it never hurts to have someone promising that you will be a good poster. That's about as clear as I can make it.

But be that as it may, you also mentioned "if I knew what you were trying to do". You see, the problem is that I do not get into bickerings like that with Moderators or Admins. Because it has been my experience that all too often, they use their authority as a crutch to treat people any way they want to .... yet they know damn well if I respond in the same fashion, then I am the one that gets the consequences, not them.

I understand that line of thinking, but I'm the exact opposite. In fact, I request that posters be given more leeway when they debate me, because I DO try to escalate things. I actually had some infractions reversed when I was a G-Mod, simply because I didn't feel it was right to poke at people, and then infract them for flaming when they lash out.

Obviously, I don't expect people to know that, or even necessarily believe it, but it's true. I love heated debates, and I don't punish those who have them with me.

That is why I typically don't get into discussions with them. And with all due respect, that is what I felt you were doing on your last discussion with me. If I had responded to you in the same manner that you were responding to me, there was no doubt in my mind that I was going to be issued an infraction. And I wasn't going to allow myself to walk into that.

And there was no doubt in my mind that I would have let you receive an infraction. Or, anyone. But when two good posters have it out, more people read, more people learn, and then, more people post.

And, that philosophy actually occurs quite often around here. As a tip for anyone, don't always believe what you read, from Staff or even regular members.

 

[RKO18]

Sidious you bring up some relevant and factual points in most of the posts I've read from you. You obviously know the WWE product history. I just want you to briefly describe your thoughts on the PG WWE.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Yeah. So you're not going to take Sly's bait, huh? Coulda fooled me with that 5+ paragraph post.

I don't have a problem responding to things like this. What I am referencing is situations that lead to an actual debate. This is more so a conversation.

 

[Razor]

I don't have a problem responding to things like this. What I am referencing is situations that lead to an actual debate. This is more so a conversation.

Hmm. That makes sense. To each his own Sidious. Get at 'er.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Sidious you bring up some relevant and factual points in most of the posts I've read from you. You obviously know the WWE product history. I just want you to briefly describe your thoughts on the PG WWE.

I promise I will give you a brief PM tomorrow. It's 3:30 in the morning, and I'm getting ready to hit the sack.

But just check my posting history for my general thoughts on the PG Era. I will say this, though. I have less of a problem with the actual PG rating, as opposed to some of the creative (or lack thereof) things that have been done since the time the WWE began transitioning to PG television. For example, I loved the Hogan Era and I would take it back any day over this particular Era. I see people make comparisons between this Era and the Hogan Era, but I am just not seeing the similarities at all.

However at the same time, yes I definitely feel there should be at least one edgy WWE program on the air, today.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I promise I will give you a brief PM tomorrow. It's 3:30 in the morning, and I'm getting ready to hit the sack.

But just check my posting history for my general thoughts on the PG Era. I will say this, though. I have less of a problem with the actual PG rating, as opposed to some of the things that have been done since the time the WWE began transitioning to PG television.

Don't sweat any of these haters in here, man. There's an old saying.

"People like to hear you're doing good, but hate to hear you're doing better than they are."

You're a great poster who has some great opinions and conversation starters. Keep on keepin' on.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Don't sweat any of these haters in here, man. There's an old saying.

"People like to hear you're doing good, but hate to hear you're doing better than they are."

You're a great poster who has some great opinions and conversation starters. Keep on keepin' on.

Thank you, and I appreciate the kind words.

 

[Slyfox696]

Don't sweat any of these haters in here, man. There's an old saying.

"People like to hear you're doing good, but hate to hear you're doing better than they are."

You're a great poster who has some great opinions and conversation starters. Keep on keepin' on.

I'm kind of glad Sidious is going to bed now Lariat. I'm afraid if he had stayed, your next post would be offering unwavering love and willingness to drop to your knees and go down on him.

Give it a rest already.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I'm kind of glad Sidious is going to bed now Lariat. I'm afraid if he had stayed, your next post would be offering unwavering love and willingness to drop to your knees and go down on him.

Give it a rest already.

I can't take anyone who thinks Lex Luger's a 'Legend' seriously, Sly. We've been over this. And NOOOOOOO, not debating with you either. You locked the NWO thread and for that, you're awesome.

 

[Slyfox696]

I can't take anyone who thinks Lex Luger's a 'Legend' seriously, Sly. We've been over this. And NOOOOOOO, not debating with you either. You locked the NWO thread and for that, you're awesome.

Owned

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Luger is a legend. Here want proof?



Owned.

I like how you don't post their match at Halloween Havoc where Hansen beats him CLEAN! Clean Lariat. 1-2-3. Spivey threw shit into the ring, but Hansen didn't use it. Ended a long reign for Luger's US Title, too.

 

[RKO18]

If anyone thought I was giving Sidious a hard time, I wasn't. I just wanted to discuss the current product with him