|
Post by Dave the Dave on Aug 26, 2013 15:04:30 GMT -5
I've stopped tryin'. I wish I could try again, but I can't.
"Once you go Bryan, there's no point in tryin'"
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 26, 2013 15:40:10 GMT -5
I honestly hated Bryan at first. Like people were saying he was one of the best wrestlers in the world and all I saw was a guy with no personality, so when he won Money in the Bank I wasn't too optimistic about him getting screentime. Then he started celebrating every single contout win like he had won the title all over again and I couldn't help but laugh because that was exactly what I want out of wrestling. He started taking it up to 11 and I started enjoying him a lot more. He lost to Sheamus at Wrestlemania and though I remember this place(and the internet as a whole) going nuts over it...I loved it. It cemented his character to me because it was such a cartoonish way for him to lose and he was such a cartoonish character, everything just kind of fit together. To me, it became this: Then came team Hell No, and again I loved the living hell out of it because it was genuinely funny for the most part. As far as I'm concerned, HUG IT OUT is Bryan's 3:16 moment as far as how much it affected me. It made me swear undying loyalty to that strange goat shaped man who did not at all look like a goat. With his current Cena feud, I have to admit, I kind of disliked it at first because it felt a lot like pandering with the "real wrestler" talk. Parody, Bryan? You are a f***ing cartoon, how is Cena the parody? You are the parody, EMBRACE IT! But then came his epiphany where he realized his beard was more important than getting liked by his boss(that might have been before that, not sure). That was brilliantly cartoonish in a self-aware "I'm aware this is dumb but this is MY TYPE OF DUMB AND I'LL DEFEND IT" kind of way. His strangely paced Japan-slap promo came full circle with the match and culminated in one of the best matches in recent history in terms of storytelling. So, Bryan? From someone who honestly couldn't stand you before Yesmania? Depending on what time of the day you ask me, you are my favorite wrestler. Well, let's not take anything away from Pre-YES! Bryan. He had his moments. He shined on NXT with Derrick Bateman. Remember, Daniel Bryan is the reason the Bellas turned heel, with that angle where they tried to take his Veganity. And let's not forget his never ending feud with the dearly departed Ted DiBiase.
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Aug 26, 2013 15:43:14 GMT -5
You can see which ever Bella falling in love with him in that GIF
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 26, 2013 20:05:34 GMT -5
A preconceived notion is deciding ahead of time that you will never change your opinion no matter what the scenario. He can say he doesn't think, based on what he's seen, that he ever will, but to consciously decide that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING Bryan can do to ever entertain him is flawed because he has not seen that situation yet. He has not judged that hypothetical yet. You can only judge what you've seen. Not what hasn't happened yet. You do not know what the future holds. It's stubborn, absolute thinking like this which has been the root of every war, issue and problem in the entire history of the world. It is not a positive. It is short-sighted ignorance. Its the basis of blind hate and every negative result that flawed thinking brings. That said, Buzzkill can like or dislike anything he wants right now. That's not the issue. But if you say when questioned that you do not care to ever change your mind no matter what, you can't expect to have your opinion respected. Because you have no logical base to argue from. You're just a fool babbling nonsense. It's funny to me to see someone criticize someone else for how they express their opinion when they invoke what is, somehow, an even more extreme version of Godwin's Law while seriously dumbing down every problem the world has ever faced to stubbornness, like some sort of pre-school Disney lesson. There's just such a complete lack of perspective there and makes me wonder if you're going to compare my dislike of slasher movies to the Trail of Tears next. No, all that's going on is that he is making an educated guess based on an opinion that is built from his viewing of the wrestler up to now, and you're trying to make it into something larger so that you can disregard his opinion. I really have a hard time understanding why there are still adults who have to hear the words "I think" before they will recognize something someone said as an opinion and I know you're smart enough that you have reasoning abilities and can figure out what someone is saying even if they don't identify everything they say as fact or opinion or conjecture or guess. Is it hyperbole? Probably, but being able to perform some basic reasoning rather than automatically assuming the worst about someone is what makes you a mature thinker. He is phrasing his educated guess in the form of an absolute. His verbiage suggested he has no intention of ever entertaining a possibility. That's where our difference of opinion is coming from. You're defending his stance, I'm arguing that how he put it eliminates the rational possibility of having one's mind changed in the future by events or efforts he is not yet aware of. There's nothing educated about that. To be educated requires full facts to draw a conclusion. And none of us have those facts yet. We literally do not know what the future holds. There are ALWAYS possibilities. Unless you consciously decide you do not care to entertain them. That was my point. And as for the other symbolic point I made; are you trying to say that the root of said problems I mentioned is not birthed from stubbornness and an inflexibility to keep oneself open-minded? I was simply speaking of a mindset. And to me, thinking in absolutes is the root of ignorance. It's the seed that nurtures all problems and misunderstandings -- small or large.
|
|
|
Post by The Portable Stove on Aug 26, 2013 20:35:09 GMT -5
Here's a thought.
There are many people who hate Triple H. Think Triple H is the worst and most of that stems from being exposed to him from 2002-on. They think he detracts from the program. And honestly, I was one of them. I thought that as long as he was on TV, I would always hate him because he wasn't entertaining and nothing could change my mind.
To say, "Triple H being a heel now sucks because it's Triple H and I hate him" would be defeating the point of having an opinion. It could be "Triple H hiring Sami Callihan sucks because it's Triple H and I hate him" or "Triple H firing the Miz, the Bella Twins and Hornswoggle sucks because it's Triple H and I hate him", and all it means is simply that, they're blindly hating and not looking at anything they do. It's the J. Jonah Jameson syndrome.
In my case, Triple H being a heel has been more entertaining than the past eleven years of him being around, and I never thought I'd use Triple H and entertaining in the same sentence. So. Never say never, unless you're outright planning to bait all of his fans or his detractors to look at your ten page thread.
And I know I'm not helping.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2013 20:43:40 GMT -5
I just don't get how a negative thread devolved into arguments about the validity of someone's opinion. If you don't have a negative opinion, I'm not sure why you would be in this thread in the first place. If this was an appreciation thread it would have been locked already.
|
|
|
Post by Pgarodactyl on Aug 26, 2013 20:56:49 GMT -5
I just don't get how a negative thread devolved into arguments about the validity of someone's opinion. If you don't have a negative opinion, I'm not sure why you would be in this thread in the first place. If this was an appreciation thread it would have been locked already. To be fair, it's not like the thread had a very high plateau to devolve from to begin with.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2013 21:02:23 GMT -5
I just don't get how a negative thread devolved into arguments about the validity of someone's opinion. If you don't have a negative opinion, I'm not sure why you would be in this thread in the first place. If this was an appreciation thread it would have been locked already. To be fair, it's not like the thread had a very high plateau to devolve from to begin with. Not sure why that matters.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Aug 26, 2013 21:05:59 GMT -5
It's funny to me to see someone criticize someone else for how they express their opinion when they invoke what is, somehow, an even more extreme version of Godwin's Law while seriously dumbing down every problem the world has ever faced to stubbornness, like some sort of pre-school Disney lesson. There's just such a complete lack of perspective there and makes me wonder if you're going to compare my dislike of slasher movies to the Trail of Tears next. No, all that's going on is that he is making an educated guess based on an opinion that is built from his viewing of the wrestler up to now, and you're trying to make it into something larger so that you can disregard his opinion. I really have a hard time understanding why there are still adults who have to hear the words "I think" before they will recognize something someone said as an opinion and I know you're smart enough that you have reasoning abilities and can figure out what someone is saying even if they don't identify everything they say as fact or opinion or conjecture or guess. Is it hyperbole? Probably, but being able to perform some basic reasoning rather than automatically assuming the worst about someone is what makes you a mature thinker. He is phrasing his educated guess in the form of an absolute. His verbiage suggested he has no intention of ever entertaining a possibility. That's where our difference of opinion is coming from. You're defending his stance, I'm arguing that how he put it eliminates the rational possibility of having one's mind changed in the future by events or efforts he is not yet aware of. There's nothing educated about that. To be educated requires full facts to draw a conclusion. And none of us have those facts yet. We literally do not know what the future holds. There are ALWAYS possibilities. Unless you consciously decide you do not care to entertain them. That was my point. And as for the other symbolic point I made; are you trying to say that the root of said problems I mentioned is not birthed from stubbornness and an inflexibility to keep oneself open-minded? I was simply speaking of a mindset. And to me, thinking in absolutes is the root of ignorance. It's the seed that nurtures all problems and misunderstandings -- small or large. The difference of opinion actually comes from two things. First, you are right in that I'm defending his stance, because I do not buy for a second that any of the anti-Buzzkill responses in this thread have come from any reason other than the fact that it was Daniel Bryan he criticized. If he had made this exact thread but replaced Daniel Bryan with Curtis Axel, I am confident that we wouldn't have seen the people here complain about him. But the second difference is that it's asinine to me to pretend that it's all a diction issue and that he wasn't stating an opinion. We evolved with advance communication capabilities precisely so we wouldn't be so incredibly shallow when communicating and actually had the ability to reason. I'll say this again, just because someone doesn't take their time to write out "this is an opinion, it may be different than yours and that's OK" doesn't make it any less of an opinion. An opinion is always an opinion and an educated guess is always an educated guess. Him "stating it as an absolute" just means he used hyperbole, he said later that nothing he had seen makes him think it'd change and that should have been the end of the ridiculous attempts to try to undermine his opinion because some people can pretend they have logic on their side when it was only ever, and will always be, a matter of pure taste. For your second point, do I think the entire root of every single problem in the history of the world, every single element of human suffering and pain and torment, is all rooted in stubbornness? No, that's actually a very silly notion. That's why I said you were using hyperbole just as he was, because I was pretty sure you were just drastically overreaching to try to prove a point. You said every war, issue and problem, not even just every war and armed conflict. Even if you had scaled it back to just wars, it still would have fallen flat anyways because you're still invoking Godwin's law in response to someone saying they get no enjoyment out of a wrestler's work, which by default means that we have to take you less seriously. But more to the point, is stubbornness at the root of all world hunger? All poverty? The tens of thousands of break ins that occur every day? Malaria in Africa? Potable water shortages in Darfur? That time my phone was stolen from my locker at the gym? The Spanish Flu epidemic? Pompeii? Every fatal car accident? When you say all problems, it means all problems and if you really think every ill in the world just wouldn't have happened if people just weren't so darned stubborn then, I'm afraid, it really just becomes impossible to take this debate seriously. So to me it only makes sense that you were using hyperbole too, and you didn't really mean every single problem because I think you're smarter than that. But it also means that the absolute that you just invoked is leaps and bounds bigger than the one you say he invoked. This has really derailed this thread enough, which ultimately just goes further to prove that people can't stand it when their favorites get attacked and have to lash back. The fact that I have to defend someone I don't even agree and say that their opinion isn't meaningless because of such a nonsense point is just silly. You don't get to be the judge on who's opinion has worth, none of us do.
|
|
stealthamo
King Koopa
Something stupid
#AJAll
Posts: 11,247
|
Post by stealthamo on Aug 26, 2013 21:19:34 GMT -5
On the actual point of the topic, I will second the many who want Bryan to go back to the offense he used to have, and have way fewer kicks than he had before. Also, it does look like he's close to breaking fairly often.
On the topic that this thread has somehow evolved into, I started off thinking that this was essentially a troll topic, but I think I can see why Zaq feels the way he does. It may just be a matter of over-saturation. For example, I know plenty of people both online and in real life that absolutely love the show Workaholics. At first seeing stuff about it was fine, same as any show, but seeing stuff over and over and over again got annoying after a while, and even though I've barely seen the show, I can't stand it. Now, I may actually like the show, but seeing it nonstop has gotten me to the point where it doesn't seem likely. So if this is why Zaq hates Daniel Bryan, I completely understand it. If it's not, then I guess this whole chunk of text was incredibly worthless. Oh well.
|
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on Aug 26, 2013 21:22:03 GMT -5
The beard is kind of stupid.
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Aug 26, 2013 21:51:28 GMT -5
Well, let's not take anything away from Pre-YES! Bryan. He had his moments. DAMN THAT CENA WITH HIS SPORTZ ENTERTAINMENTZ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2013 21:56:55 GMT -5
Well, let's not take anything away from Pre-YES! Bryan. He had his moments. DAMN THAT CENA WITH HIS SPORTZ ENTERTAINMENTZ I laughed pretty hard.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 26, 2013 22:31:21 GMT -5
He is phrasing his educated guess in the form of an absolute. His verbiage suggested he has no intention of ever entertaining a possibility. That's where our difference of opinion is coming from. You're defending his stance, I'm arguing that how he put it eliminates the rational possibility of having one's mind changed in the future by events or efforts he is not yet aware of. There's nothing educated about that. To be educated requires full facts to draw a conclusion. And none of us have those facts yet. We literally do not know what the future holds. There are ALWAYS possibilities. Unless you consciously decide you do not care to entertain them. That was my point. And as for the other symbolic point I made; are you trying to say that the root of said problems I mentioned is not birthed from stubbornness and an inflexibility to keep oneself open-minded? I was simply speaking of a mindset. And to me, thinking in absolutes is the root of ignorance. It's the seed that nurtures all problems and misunderstandings -- small or large. The difference of opinion actually comes from two things. First, you are right in that I'm defending his stance, because I do not buy for a second that any of the anti-Buzzkill responses in this thread have come from any reason other than the fact that it was Daniel Bryan he criticized. If he had made this exact thread but replaced Daniel Bryan with Curtis Axel, I am confident that we wouldn't have seen the people here complain about him. But the second difference is that it's asinine to me to pretend that it's all a diction issue and that he wasn't stating an opinion. We evolved with advance communication capabilities precisely so we wouldn't be so incredibly shallow when communicating and actually had the ability to reason. I'll say this again, just because someone doesn't take their time to write out "this is an opinion, it may be different than yours and that's OK" doesn't make it any less of an opinion. An opinion is always an opinion and an educated guess is always an educated guess. Him "stating it as an absolute" just means he used hyperbole, he said later that nothing he had seen makes him think it'd change and that should have been the end of the ridiculous attempts to try to undermine his opinion because some people can pretend they have logic on their side when it was only ever, and will always be, a matter of pure taste. For your second point, do I think the entire root of every single problem in the history of the world, every single element of human suffering and pain and torment, is all rooted in stubbornness? No, that's actually a very silly notion. That's why I said you were using hyperbole just as he was, because I was pretty sure you were just drastically overreaching to try to prove a point. You said every war, issue and problem, not even just every war and armed conflict. Even if you had scaled it back to just wars, it still would have fallen flat anyways because you're still invoking Godwin's law in response to someone saying they get no enjoyment out of a wrestler's work, which by default means that we have to take you less seriously. But more to the point, is stubbornness at the root of all world hunger? All poverty? The tens of thousands of break ins that occur every day? Malaria in Africa? Potable water shortages in Darfur? That time my phone was stolen from my locker at the gym? The Spanish Flu epidemic? Pompeii? Every fatal car accident? When you say all problems, it means all problems and if you really think every ill in the world just wouldn't have happened if people just weren't so darned stubborn then, I'm afraid, it really just becomes impossible to take this debate seriously. So to me it only makes sense that you were using hyperbole too, and you didn't really mean every single problem because I think you're smarter than that. But it also means that the absolute that you just invoked is leaps and bounds bigger than the one you say he invoked. This has really derailed this thread enough, which ultimately just goes further to prove that people can't stand it when their favorites get attacked and have to lash back. The fact that I have to defend someone I don't even agree and say that their opinion isn't meaningless because of such a nonsense point is just silly. You don't get to be the judge on who's opinion has worth, none of us do. I agree with you that a lot of the anti-Buzzkill reactions in this thread are based on a knee-jerk reaction to someone criticizing a guy who is wildly popular right now. And I also agree with you when you said the opinions would sway in the negative favor if the topic was on someone like Curtis Axel. But I'm not one of those people. I haven't given my opinion in this thread one way or the other or based my comments on anger toward someone not feeling what I feel. And if the topic was on Axel, I'd still feel the same way about absolute thinking and the conscious denial of possibilities. I guess that was what I was reacting to; this particular comment: officialfan.proboards.com/post/9926958 . If it was hyperbole on his part, and not an absolute, I will willingly concede my argument. But if he truly felt the way he wrote, on the level, I wouldn't respect his opinion. And there would be no point in even listening to it. There would be no room for debate, because his hypothetical mind would already be made up ahead of time. And that is never a good base to argue from. As for your criticism of my other stance, you focused only on the stubbornness part and not the rest : "inflexibility to keep oneself open-minded." Even though I wasn't specific, I assumed you knew that my example was not a blanket statement covering natural disasters, acts of god and issues unrelated to human ego. It was simply a suggestion of a mindset. One that has bred intolerance and even worse because of pride, stubbornness, jealousy or any myriad of backwards-thinking wherein you are not willing to admit to possibility or ever accepting or changing or adapting. That said, you and I will obviously never come to an agreement on the crux of this debate so I'll leave it at that. But I do respect your opinion and quite frankly, the way you intelligently phrased your counter-points. It's been fun matching wits with you, sir.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,471
|
Post by Dub H on Aug 27, 2013 17:26:39 GMT -5
Whitout some kind of beard his face looks goofy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2013 17:39:42 GMT -5
I think his beard should be the same. But different, somehow.
|
|
percymania
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Percymania will live forever! Oh yeah!
Posts: 17,296
|
Post by percymania on Aug 27, 2013 22:32:39 GMT -5
How can he be on reality TV? HE DOESN'T EVEN OWN A TV!!!
|
|
|
Post by Cvslfc123 on Aug 28, 2013 5:12:01 GMT -5
Instead of a TV, he has antlers.
|
|