Daniel Bryan Fans, take heed. Our moment may be drawing near
Jun 9, 2013 11:27:47 GMT -5
Threadkiller [Classic], stealthamo, and 9 more like this
Post by Society of the Spectacle on Jun 9, 2013 11:27:47 GMT -5
I think the unwillingness to see things from the other side is the problem here. Zaq, your opinion is your opinion, and though refusing to yield an inch when seeing things from the opposite perspective is your prerogative, it at times in this thread has taken on the auspices of obsession.
I mean, your introduction into this thread on pg. 1 was:
"Thank god I might be away during July. My hope is that he has one of the worst matches of all time on PPV and is so ashamed and humiliated that he gets shoved down to Superstars where he belongs and I won't have to watch his overrated ass anymore."
Sure that is your opinion, but the venom in that statement is somewhat frightening. Maybe you're speaking in hyperbole for effect, or you're layering some sarcasm in there, but I can't possibly see that not being an attempt to rile up fans of Bryan. I'm not a fan of words like "trolling" or "flaming" or whatever you want to call it, but coming out of the gate like that feels like you are responding to the "cult" of Bryan rather than the post at hand.
I think you could have phrased it differently, and we likely wouldn't have a seven page thread here on the front page to remind you everyday.
Elsewhere, when you were prodded for elaboration, your second statement was somewhat similar in tone to the first:
"I find his ring work boring and with no substance. His promos sound forced and uninspired, his character is annoying, and the storyliens he's been put with just have not been that good.
Plus a large portion of his fan base irritates me but that seems to have died down a bit thankfully."
Again your opinion, and a perfectly fine one on it's face. However, to me, words like "boring" "annoying" "uninspired" and "no substance" demand some elaboration, as they are discussion enders. If you want to be secretly married to your opinion, that's fine, but in terms of discussion, you have to explain what those words mean in the context on Daniel Bryan.
If I may construct a hypothetical post for you:
"Although I know a lot of people around here like Bryan, I still can't seem to get into him much. I prefer the big bruiser type offense of someone like Ryback, so in that sense, Bryan doesn't do it for me. His offense seems to be too reliant on kicks for me to see him as a well rounded wrestler as well. As far as his character goes, I don't think his character is believable at all, mostly because it's not been booked very consistently. He's all over the place, and I don't think the "YES/NO" is enough to be considered an overriding character or gimmick."
I didn't address the storyline complaint, because I don't think Bryan has control over his storylines, but I think that kind of statement works in that it is your opinion ( including mentioning Ryback, who elsewhere in the thread, you said you preferred) while still allowing it weave into the discussion. I'm not trying to be a jackass by writing the above, but in essence, two things are possible by allowing your opinion to be expressed less matter of factly:
1) You wouldn't have to see a thread about someone you don't like continue to float around on the front page. I mean the off-topic discussion on both sides in this thread has caused it to balloon to something it shouldn't have been, with a lot of things that were better left unsaid.
2) You might actually start to come around on Bryan while going back and forth on a discussion. I can say that though I'm not as steadfast on the subject, I am still learning to like Ryback as a worker, but I would be more than willing to hear you make a case for why I should get more into him on another thread. I might be mixed on him now, but there have been many instances of me coming around on something I didn't like before and now respect at least (ECW being most prominent in my mind) and that's what I see as the whole point of a board like this.
Basically, I'm not telling you to change your opinion, or that you're wrong, but I am asking that you keep an open mind and contribute to discussion rather than boastfully stake your claim on an opinion, and in essence dare someone to disagree with you. And believe me, I know that there are people here and elsewhere who share an equally voracious and unmovable opinion in favor of someone like Bryan. Some of them also go into appreciation threads for someone like Ryback or Sheamus and enagage in similar fire fights as we have had here. I would reply to them the same way I have replied to you.
I mean, your introduction into this thread on pg. 1 was:
"Thank god I might be away during July. My hope is that he has one of the worst matches of all time on PPV and is so ashamed and humiliated that he gets shoved down to Superstars where he belongs and I won't have to watch his overrated ass anymore."
Sure that is your opinion, but the venom in that statement is somewhat frightening. Maybe you're speaking in hyperbole for effect, or you're layering some sarcasm in there, but I can't possibly see that not being an attempt to rile up fans of Bryan. I'm not a fan of words like "trolling" or "flaming" or whatever you want to call it, but coming out of the gate like that feels like you are responding to the "cult" of Bryan rather than the post at hand.
I think you could have phrased it differently, and we likely wouldn't have a seven page thread here on the front page to remind you everyday.
Elsewhere, when you were prodded for elaboration, your second statement was somewhat similar in tone to the first:
"I find his ring work boring and with no substance. His promos sound forced and uninspired, his character is annoying, and the storyliens he's been put with just have not been that good.
Plus a large portion of his fan base irritates me but that seems to have died down a bit thankfully."
Again your opinion, and a perfectly fine one on it's face. However, to me, words like "boring" "annoying" "uninspired" and "no substance" demand some elaboration, as they are discussion enders. If you want to be secretly married to your opinion, that's fine, but in terms of discussion, you have to explain what those words mean in the context on Daniel Bryan.
If I may construct a hypothetical post for you:
"Although I know a lot of people around here like Bryan, I still can't seem to get into him much. I prefer the big bruiser type offense of someone like Ryback, so in that sense, Bryan doesn't do it for me. His offense seems to be too reliant on kicks for me to see him as a well rounded wrestler as well. As far as his character goes, I don't think his character is believable at all, mostly because it's not been booked very consistently. He's all over the place, and I don't think the "YES/NO" is enough to be considered an overriding character or gimmick."
I didn't address the storyline complaint, because I don't think Bryan has control over his storylines, but I think that kind of statement works in that it is your opinion ( including mentioning Ryback, who elsewhere in the thread, you said you preferred) while still allowing it weave into the discussion. I'm not trying to be a jackass by writing the above, but in essence, two things are possible by allowing your opinion to be expressed less matter of factly:
1) You wouldn't have to see a thread about someone you don't like continue to float around on the front page. I mean the off-topic discussion on both sides in this thread has caused it to balloon to something it shouldn't have been, with a lot of things that were better left unsaid.
2) You might actually start to come around on Bryan while going back and forth on a discussion. I can say that though I'm not as steadfast on the subject, I am still learning to like Ryback as a worker, but I would be more than willing to hear you make a case for why I should get more into him on another thread. I might be mixed on him now, but there have been many instances of me coming around on something I didn't like before and now respect at least (ECW being most prominent in my mind) and that's what I see as the whole point of a board like this.
Basically, I'm not telling you to change your opinion, or that you're wrong, but I am asking that you keep an open mind and contribute to discussion rather than boastfully stake your claim on an opinion, and in essence dare someone to disagree with you. And believe me, I know that there are people here and elsewhere who share an equally voracious and unmovable opinion in favor of someone like Bryan. Some of them also go into appreciation threads for someone like Ryback or Sheamus and enagage in similar fire fights as we have had here. I would reply to them the same way I have replied to you.