Why do we complain so much as wrestling fans?

[The OP]

Whoa whoa whoa, nobody said anything of the sort. Or at least I didn't. I was just making an example and I didn't (and wouldn't) even use the person's name, or even the name of the wrestler! Even if I had, it would be a stretch to call it a "personal attack". I get your point, but let's not get carried away.

[Piccolo]

Jan 3, 2012 23:41:27 GMT -5 The OP said:

Whoa whoa whoa, nobody said anything of the sort. Or at least I didn't. I was just making an example and I didn't (and wouldn't) even use the person's name, or even the name of the wrestler! Even if I had, it would be a stretch to call it a "personal attack". I get your point, but let's not get carried away.

Oh, I'm not saying you did; sorry if I misphrased it. I was referencing some of the personal attacks that were leveled last night, in conjunction with the idea that some people's negativity is very strong and repetitive... ie, would this be a potential justification for those kinds of attacks. That was all I meant; your post wasn't a personal attack at all.

[King Boo]

Jan 3, 2012 23:13:00 GMT -5 Piccolo said:

Jan 3, 2012 20:46:20 GMT -5 King Boo said:

I read more than one person, sometimes the same person more than once, speak as though their criticisms are an irrefutable fact and thus, problem as opposed to the opinions that they really are. I kept reading that the "problem" is that Jericho is "boring", "uninteresting" and "runs gimmicks into the ground a few months after debuting it". While that may be a true sentiment for the person stating it, it's not a universal truth. Their opinion is spoken like it's the reality of a situation and it always rings as elitist and know it all. You don't speak for me and your opinion doesn't carry any more weight than mine, either.

2 - The defense is never applied to any positive opinions. If I have a positive opinion that differs from your negative one, I'm just as allowed to have it and voice it as you are. I shouldn't be met with constant barrages of negativity - you can discuss why you don't agree, but you should also let me be excited in peace the way I'm supposed to let you hate in peace. I also shouldn't be told that the reason I like something is for some untrue reason like I'm a blind fan or whathaveyou.

1 - This is a message board. It is implicit that people are stating their opinions. I didn't see you, or anyone who thought the segment was great, qualifying every single statement in every single post with "IMO". That doesn't mean you were stating your opinions as facts. It just means you were posting normally on a message board. The same goes for the people you're talking about. "Jericho is boring" is a completely reasonable way to state an opinion.

2 - No one is exempt from hearing a dissenting opinion. "I shouldn't be met with constant barrages of negativity" and "you should also let me be excited in peace" seem to imply that you shouldn't have to hear any opinion that differs from your own... that the very act of expressing that opinion is "raining on your parade." Is that what you meant to imply?

Also, plenty of untrue statements were made about people who expressed negative opinions. Ie, they just didn't understand it, or they're morons, or they're thickheaded, or they have no patience, or they hate everything and should stop watching. Very aggressive, unkind words, leveled at people for no good reason.

Basically, I think the guiding principle should be that we respect each others' right to feel the way we feel, and to voice it.

There's a difference between saying "I didn't care for that" and saying "the problem is that so&so is blah blah blah and they need to fix that to make it good." There's also a difference in saying you don't like something once and saying it over and over again. There are plenty of things I've read around here on a variety of topics where people's opinions are stated as fact (ex: "fans of pop don't know real music"), blanket statements that are untrue (ex: "if it was anyone other than Punk, you wouldn't care") and plenty of times someone felt compelled to repeat their negative opinion over and over again (ex: it begins being Jericho). While I'll challenge someone on where there coming from to elicit a conversation, I would never, ever resort to making them feel stupid because they don't agree with me. (ex: I went out of my way in the Supernatural thread after explaining why I didn't care for a particular storyline to be clear to someone who disagreed with me that I respected them and their opinion, I just didn't share it.)

I'm not saying I'm "exempt" from anything. I welcome a differing opinion when it's voiced maturely and a valid discussion can be had. But there's having an adult conversation and then there's being negative for the sake of being negative, or because it bothers you that someone else doesn't share your opinion.

I "read a room." If there's a topic about "When is Brodus Clay finally appearing?" I stay out of it because there's nothing whatsoever to be gained from me saying "I don't care." It's true, I don't care, but my saying something doesn't add to the conversation and would probably annoy people who I don't want to annoy. I let them wonder and hope in peace. Also because if I know I'm not a fan of a person/show/book/movie/artist, I'm generally not compelled to discuss it. I prefer to discuss things I DO enjoy.

I've dealt with people saying mean things about things I like and me as an extension around here for years and no one seems to feel bad or care that I'm offended. The people holding negative opinions want that granted to them but they don't seem to care about reciprocating in kind.

[Hugh Mungus]

[Bub (BLM)]

Short answer - Because so often there's a popular and logical direction to take the product, and WWE won't do it.

[clashofchampains]

Because wrestling right now is in a huge downturn. But it's the same with every magor field of entertainment recently from music to movies, etc.... It's fake run by fake people and the people running things are too stubborn and spoiled brats to realise that what they are doing sucks. And don't want to change it.

Once upon a time those in charge would listen to the fans and by doing that they would know what they want and change their stuff to catter to them but now with the advent of the internet there's so many people with opinions that those in charge are overwhelmed by it so they decide to shut every voices heard or every voices that don't agree with them. So they listen to no voices anymore. As such they can't know for sure what the fans want so they go on their own things. But it's like a captain on a boat during a great storm who rides his ship without seeing anything: He's lost at sea.

People like Vince and Dixie Carter can't know who's really popular or who really draws heat so they cannot truly make money because they carefuly control everything in their product and they don't want to hear what the fans really want. Just watch a random Impact for example to see most of the fans there are plants. So it's not a real voice from your audience and as such you can't know if they're mad or happy. And the direct voice from the fans is what wrestling was build on. It's what makes wrestling, wrestling. Because to properly see who's loved and who's hated, it's the fans that have to say it to you. That's how you can create legendary enormously successful heels and faces. Stone Cold became big when the fans decided Austin was popular. He was cheered even as a heel so they built on this, made him do something heroic at Mania against Bret Hart and he became uber face. If it was today it would never work because Vince doesn't want his heels to be cheered at all and he let no true emotion come from the crowd, he controls the sound, the signs, wrestlers are stuck in their sanitized "compartments" as far as roles.

[Hugh Mungus]

This is how the IWC sees the WWE (and current wrestling in general):