Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2010 20:31:29 GMT -5
This isn't a court of law - its just two nerds yelling at each other. That whole "carry the burden of proof" only matters during a trial. And TNA can "win" - they can put up or shut up, as the phrase goes. No it doesn't. It matters in argumentation in general. If I make a statement, or I posit something, I have the burden of proof. If I say, Jeff Hardy is on drugs, I have the burden to find ways to prove, or at least demonstrate, that he is on drugs. If I say, Jeff Hardy is on drugs, and you need to show me that he's not on drugs, that's me shifting the burden of proof. Which is a logical fallacy. You say: "Jeff Hardy is on drugs." Someone else says: "Jeff Hardy is not on drugs." Both require factual evidence to support. Just because one is a reaction to another statement does not mean it is off the hook when it comes to providing evidence. The "burden of proof" is on anyone who joins in the conversation as both sides make statements that require facts to support. If the conversation went like this: You: "Jeff Hardy is on drugs." Someone else: "You have no evidence to support that." Then, yeah, that works. But because Bischoff made baseless claims of his own, he falls into the same logical fallacy.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 20, 2010 20:41:06 GMT -5
This isn't a court of law - its just two nerds yelling at each other. That whole "carry the burden of proof" only matters during a trial. And TNA can "win" - they can put up or shut up, as the phrase goes. Seconded. TNA isn't judged any more harshly than any other promotion. Actually, it is, cause there's a bunch of stuff that TNA gets that other feds don't, mostly cause other feds like WWE, ROH, etc, aren't in the position TNA is in, namely as a growing promotion. Honestly, if you compare the threads in the WWE, TNA, and (W)rest of section, you'll see different things that don't appear in one section, that are rampant in another. Also, it doesn't help that the three most notorious boogeymen of wrestling are all employed by them.
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on Dec 20, 2010 20:48:12 GMT -5
Do you even see Jim Cornette doing the same thing? I feel like Jim Cornette either A: doesn't really do anything with the internet, because he's so old B: Actually uses the internet to bash Russo, but he uses fake names. ______ Either way I don't think he's above doing what Eric is doing
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 20, 2010 20:49:41 GMT -5
Really? ROH isn't a growing promotion? Chikara? PWG? Let me rephrase that: Growing television-based promotion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2010 22:45:59 GMT -5
Seconded. TNA isn't judged any more harshly than any other promotion. Actually, it is, cause there's a bunch of stuff that TNA gets that other feds don't, mostly cause other feds like WWE, ROH, etc, aren't in the position TNA is in, namely as a growing promotion. Honestly, if you compare the threads in the WWE, TNA, and (W)rest of section, you'll see different things that don't appear in one section, that are rampant in another. Also, it doesn't help that the three most notorious boogeymen of wrestling are all employed by them. The w(rest) of wrestling comparison isn't a very good comparison as its about everything but TNA and WWE so its too broad to draw from.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Dec 20, 2010 22:46:43 GMT -5
Honestly, if you compare the threads in the WWE, TNA, and (W)rest of section, you'll see different things that don't appear in one section, that are rampant in another. The other promotions have all seen their share of criticisms. WWE is often derided for making John Cena the company's focal point. ROH is lately accused of being...boring. TNA getting MORE criticism doesn't necessarily mean everyone just likes picking on them. It could mean, and stay with me here because this is REALLY crazy, they actually deserve it. Perhaps not, but if WWE, ROH, Chikara, PWG or just about any other promotion in America did the same, they'd be treated just as TNA is now.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 20, 2010 23:03:35 GMT -5
The other promotions have all seen their share of criticisms. WWE is often derided for making John Cena the company's focal point. ROH is lately accused of being...boring. TNA getting MORE criticism doesn't necessarily mean everyone just likes picking on them. It could mean, and stay with me here because this is REALLY crazy, they actually deserve it. I never acted like WWE or anyone else avoids criticism. Yeah, those other feds get their own criticism to deal with. However, and I'm not alone on this, it's much more blatant and more numerous here, either by number or just by repeated mentions. Personally, I blame the lack of photoshop threads in this section. But they don't, which was kind of my point.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Dec 21, 2010 8:56:54 GMT -5
The other promotions have all seen their share of criticisms. WWE is often derided for making John Cena the company's focal point. ROH is lately accused of being...boring. TNA getting MORE criticism doesn't necessarily mean everyone just likes picking on them. It could mean, and stay with me here because this is REALLY crazy, they actually deserve it. I never acted like WWE or anyone else avoids criticism. Yeah, those other feds get their own criticism to deal with. However, and I'm not alone on this, it's much more blatant and more numerous here, either by number or just by repeated mentions. Personally, I blame the lack of photoshop threads in this section. I guess I'm just not clear on the whole "blatant" thing. Is it blatant to call Orlando Jordan's character offensive? Is it blatant to say the Suicide character was a stupid idea? Or that TNA dropped the ball with Samoa Joe? Or that the majority of angles involving Abyss lately have been ridiculous? I just don't see how that's any different than people criticizing WWE or ROH for angles and directions they don't enjoy. If TNA could finally strike gold with a popular angle or wrestler (unlikely, given almost all of wrestling's inability to stop living in the past), those criticisms will finally be scaled back. There is no mean-spirited group of fans, journalists, and bloggers with grandiose conspiracy plans against TNA. Eventually, there comes a point when people have to stop, look at what they're doing, and say "Ya know...maybe they're right?" But they don't, which was kind of my point. [/quote] I understand your point. Mine was simply that TNA knew the reputations these guys had when they hired them. They should've been ready to weather the storm of controversy that came with that decision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2010 11:19:52 GMT -5
TNA getting MORE criticism doesn't necessarily mean everyone just likes picking on them. It could mean, and stay with me here because this is REALLY crazy, they actually deserve it. This is what I think too. I mean - what do people hope to gain out of blindly criticising TNA? There's no profit in it. No one gains anything so why would they do it? There's no motive. When TNA was doing good - I was a huge advocate of theirs. When they suck - I will blast them for the things I think are stupid. I think most people fall into this category. If TNA gets an excess or more blantant amount of criticism from people - its because they deserve it. If TNA were doing things that people liked - you'd see less criticism. I mean, there will always be critics who hate it, but the volume shifts depending upon the product TNA puts out. I think I said this in another thread, but TNA is selling a product. In sales - you can't point to the buyer/customer and say "You're wrong." You either have to sell better or sell a better product.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 21, 2010 12:22:01 GMT -5
How can you both not notice the difference in blatant anger and character assassination around here? Hell, look at the first page in this section, and the first page in WWE's and you will see more vitriol and anger here by double.
And a lot of the hate goes far from being justified. I understand angles that you don't like (unless they haven't happened), but when you spend a bunch of energy going on about wanting to see someone dead or calling somebody a scumbag with no merit, it goes way too far to justify as "calling TNA out".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2010 12:33:00 GMT -5
How can you both not notice the difference in blatant anger and character assassination around here? Hell, look at the first page in this section, and the first page in WWE's and you will see more vitriol and anger here by double. And a lot of the hate goes far from being justified. I understand angles that you don't like (unless they haven't happened), but when you spend a bunch of energy going on about wanting to see someone dead or calling somebody a scumbag with no merit, it goes way too far to justify as "calling TNA out". Using the phrase, "with no merit" is a little presumptive. Perhaps the person who said that has good reason to. I see the vitriol. No one is saying it doesn't exist. I'm just saying that its not that people hate TNA for no reason - TNA has given them plenty of reasons for the aggression. People care about the product and want to see it do good things. When it does crap (in their opinion) it makes them angry. If anything, its a testament to how much they care about TNA - not how much they blindly hate it.
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Dec 21, 2010 12:35:10 GMT -5
And when did someone get death wished upon them? It's not only frowned on, I'm pretty sure that's a warnable offense at the very least.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 21, 2010 12:46:40 GMT -5
How can you both not notice the difference in blatant anger and character assassination around here? Hell, look at the first page in this section, and the first page in WWE's and you will see more vitriol and anger here by double. And a lot of the hate goes far from being justified. I understand angles that you don't like (unless they haven't happened), but when you spend a bunch of energy going on about wanting to see someone dead or calling somebody a scumbag with no merit, it goes way too far to justify as "calling TNA out". Using the phrase, "with no merit" is a little presumptive. Perhaps the person who said that has good reason to. I see the vitriol. No one is saying it doesn't exist. I'm just saying that its not that people hate TNA for no reason - TNA has given them plenty of reasons for the aggression. People care about the product and want to see it do good things. When it does crap (in their opinion) it makes them angry. If anything, its a testament to how much they care about TNA - not how much they blindly hate it. And, again, i call BS on it when it goes far beyond that into anything that would remotely be seen a constructive. You're trying to have two different things at the same time, trying to show TNA gets no different complaints than anoyone else, which is far from true, and that when they do get a lot more, it's justified, which is isn't. Again, it's not just complain about the show or a booking angle, this goes into personal territory and senseless attacks on character and family. The whole "they actually really care" is also BS to me. It's just trying to justify everything that's said here so you can say it without having to defend it or answer for it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 21, 2010 12:48:43 GMT -5
And when did someone get death wished upon them? It's not only frowned on, I'm pretty sure that's a warnable offense at the very least. Bischoff seems to get that attitude lately, and not to mention this issue with Cornette telling Taylor how much he wanted Russo dead, which was accepted by some people, which should have been none.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Dec 21, 2010 12:48:55 GMT -5
How can you both not notice the difference in blatant anger and character assassination around here? Hell, look at the first page in this section, and the first page in WWE's and you will see more vitriol and anger here by double. And a lot of the hate goes far from being justified. I understand angles that you don't like (unless they haven't happened), but when you spend a bunch of energy going on about wanting to see someone dead or calling somebody a scumbag with no merit, it goes way too far to justify as "calling TNA out". Let's just take a look at the first page then, shall we? Here's a handful of comments from it that were less than favorable toward poor ol' Bisch. Feel free to see if I left out anything major, as I didn't include ones that seemed to repeat others. "...I guess he doesn't like criticism." "He really needs to get a life." "He doesn't really need to respond to every inconsequential little attack, as he should have better things to do." "I think he just has too much time on his hands, personally." "The louder you have to be when defending yourself, the better the chances there's something that's wrong." "Wow, Bischoff's like a bizarro, pro-TNA Spoony." "It's pretty pathetic that he'd take time to argue with a dude whose podcast probably gets fifty people to check it out." So from that, general consensus from Page 1 seems to be...Bischoff doesn't like criticism, has too much spare time, is only making himself look bad by taking time to argue with a no-name podcaster and is like a bizarro, pro-TNA Spoony. The meanest comments seem to be that Bisch needs to get a life (debatable) and is only making himself look pathetic by taking the time to respond to someone with little to no credibility. (Kinda true, to be honest. He should be better than that.) But maybe things got nastier on Page 2? Well, not really. In fact, most of Page 2 has posts making fun of the podcaster, not Eric, and commenting on the poor level of "journalism" that's resulted from the internet. (Which, incidentally, I completely agree with.) But, it's not like this thread is totally devoid of venom. There was one post on Page 3. In all 5 pages of this thread, this is the one and only truly hateful comment made toward Eric Bischoff. The only thing that comes close is another comment saying "Eric Bischoff is done. This just proves he refuses to accept that." Other than that, it's just the usual, goofy humor that we always see on these forums, often poking fun at both parties in question. No one's wished him dead. No one's called him a scumbag. In a 5-page thread, with over 90 responses so far, we have one venomous comment toward Bisch. Plus one-half if you want to include the "he's done" comment."
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 21, 2010 12:53:08 GMT -5
You're only looking at this thread, hollywood, when I said to look at the whole section. Really, you want hate, go to the threads about Jeff Hardy and his family, or any Dixie topic, or the Samoa Joe topic, the one about Nash's shoot, go through the iMPACT pbp thread, and even the joke threads like the christmas ones and the one about making up rumors. Go to any kind of "news" posted around here. Tell me then, alright?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2010 12:56:48 GMT -5
Using the phrase, "with no merit" is a little presumptive. Perhaps the person who said that has good reason to. I see the vitriol. No one is saying it doesn't exist. I'm just saying that its not that people hate TNA for no reason - TNA has given them plenty of reasons for the aggression. People care about the product and want to see it do good things. When it does crap (in their opinion) it makes them angry. If anything, its a testament to how much they care about TNA - not how much they blindly hate it. And, again, i call BS on it when it goes far beyond that into anything that would remotely be seen a constructive. You're trying to have two different things at the same time, trying to show TNA gets no different complaints than anoyone else, which is far from true, and that when they do get a lot more, it's justified, which is isn't. Again, it's not just complain about the show or a booking angle, this goes into personal territory and senseless attacks on character and family. The whole "they actually really care" is also BS to me. It's just trying to justify everything that's said here so you can say it without having to defend it or answer for it. They're not different things though. If any other federation did the same asinine stuff TNA does - they'd get called out for it too. TNA just does a lot more of it so they get called out more. People care - if they didn't, they wouldn't watch or talk about it. The fact that people have so much emotion about it means they care. No emotion = not caring. Emotion = caring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2010 12:58:09 GMT -5
You're only looking at this thread, hollywood, when I said to look at the whole section. Really, you want hate, go to the threads about Jeff Hardy and his family, or any Dixie topic, or the Samoa Joe topic, the one about Nash's shoot, go through the iMPACT pbp thread, and even the joke threads like the christmas ones and the one about making up rumors. Go to any kind of "news" posted around here. Tell me then, alright? I see - so when TNA or its employees do things people consider stupid - they shouldn't call them out on it or make fun of them for it?
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Dec 21, 2010 13:01:12 GMT -5
And when did someone get death wished upon them? It's not only frowned on, I'm pretty sure that's a warnable offense at the very least. Bischoff seems to get that attitude lately, and not to mention this issue with Cornette telling Taylor how much he wanted Russo dead, which was accepted by some people, which should have been none. Have you got specific instances of death being wished on Bischoff? Maybe I missed it.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Dec 21, 2010 13:02:06 GMT -5
You're only looking at this thread, hollywood, when I said to look at the whole section. Really, you want hate, go to the threads about Jeff Hardy and his family, or any Dixie topic, or the Samoa Joe topic, the one about Nash's shoot, go through the iMPACT pbp thread, and even the joke threads like the christmas ones and the one about making up rumors. Go to any kind of "news" posted around here. Tell me then, alright? I figured to wanted the first page of that thread. But ok. Fair enough. From Page 1 of "Yep, the Hardyz are sane alright.." "Jeff Hardy needs internet rage control counseling." "Some people should NOT be on the internet. Just saying..." "Jeff, please use the spacebar." "What?IDon'tseewhatthebigdealis" Or the thread about Samoa Joe resigning. "I don't want to blanket WWE in criticism, but I just cringe thinking about the awful samoan variant gimicks they'd have in store for Joe...if they wanted him at all" "I'm sure he'd like to go to WWE, but staying in TNA is Joe's best option." "Call me crazy, but I don't think he'll get a savage gimmick if he went to WWE." "It depends purely on what he wants, since he has a 2 year old kid and is recently married (Well, 2 years ago), so who knows if hed be willing to go with WWEs schedule." I just don't see the avalanche of blind hate you keep mentioning. Are there irrational people out there with an ax to grind? Sure. Is everyone on WrestleCrap and all of the wrestling community at large picking on TNA? A thousand times no.
|
|