So this week I come to ponder another column and I'm not (usually) short of topics, but the one that's gotten my attention this week the most is actually something that started as a joke on the WrestleCrap forums. You may have seen that RD as a bit of joke posted a thread saying he was going to pitch a Death of TNA book to Bryan Alvarez and most people thought it was quite amusing.
And Like I said, I don't find it fucking funny! Why? Cause I hear a variation of this shit every fucking day of every fucking week of every fucking month of every fucking year, and now I'm suppose to relax cause "dear old Mr. Reynolds" made it?! No, I won't! Why the fuck should humor anyone when I find this fucking stupid?!? Are you seriously telling me that I have to take this shit even when it's stupid?!
Sinister1 from the same thread
Most people as I said.
Now if you think I quoted that just to bash Sinister you're wrong because actually, I do like his passion for TNA. I definitely disagree with almost all of his opinions but hey, if we all had the same opinion the WrestleCrap forums would be boring (Minus the 7 Billion Batista photoshop threads). I highlighted Sinister's post in particular as an example of the extremes of wrestling opinion, which you see a lot on the TNA forum in particular, but it's not limited to TNA as these passions run the gamut of wrestling fans in all of us.
The first is the Hardcore Promotional Fan, note I didn't say "Mark" because you don't have to be a mark to fall into this category at all. These are the people who have chosen a clear side in the conflict of the Big Two [or Three or Four? etc.] and they will back their choice to the hilt. Woe betide ANYONE who bashes their promotion when this guy's around because there's going to be a big battle coming. Again, note I say "Battle" and not "Flame War". There's a lot of times where the defender does raise good points, but he lets himself down however by hardly accepting anything that casts their guys in a bad light and that's when the problems start. The more people argue the case, the more defensive the hardcore fan becomes and the whole thing degenerates until you can't actually remember what the fuck you were arguing about in the first place. There's nothing wrong with the hardcore fan; if you love your chosen promotion you have every right to show it. But a lot of times the fan lets himself down by the inability to take criticism of their promotion's product.
Group two are the Bashers, almost a sub-group of the Hardcore Fan. These are the guys who like nothing better than to point out how inferior the competition is to their chosen promotion. You see this all the time in the TNA forum, so much so the mods had to crack down. These are the kind of people who would turn down having sex with a porn star like Sophie Dee because they were a Jessie Jane fan or if they did take up the offer they'd jump on the 'net the first chance they got and spread the word that Ms. Dee was a terrible lay. Their major problem is almost the polar opposite of the hardcore fan; they can't see the good of the competition because they'd rather laugh at them for even daring to compete in the first place. And they will resort to flaming when challenged and once again more degeneration occurs.
Next up are the Fence Sitters who, to paraphrase the late Richard Jeni, are a bunch of Flip-flopping, Half In, Half Out, Half Assed, won't pick a promotion so they can bitch no matter what each side puts out, hypocrites. Actually most fence sitters aren't that far gone; these are the people who want that competition because they believe it will make both companies better in the long run. The problem comes when in their eyes the people they want to see become the competition (in this case TNA) make a stupid mistake that might cost them the shot at becoming that competition (Say.....moving to Monday nights before they're ready for it).
SOUND THE ALARM!
When that happens they're WORSE than the first two groups because they want so badly to see success from TNA that they become hyper sensitive to screw ups and when they occur it's straight to the nuclear option (FIRE RUSSO! FIRE HOGAN! FIRE BISCHOFF! FIRE SO CAL VAL IF IT'LL HELP!). What's frustrating is the fence sitter actually raises the best points of all because having not picked a side he has the benefit of objectivity. However he comes off so hyper sensitive to the mistakes of TNA that his praise of the good stuff TNA is doing is forgotten and they get lumped in with the bashers by the TNA fans. This is where you'll find me by the way.
There's also a fourth group, a smaller splinter group that has popped up recently. I call them the "Grumpy Old Schoolers". To use my earlier example, these are the people who would turn down sex from Sophie Dee AND Jesse Jane because Jenna Jameson did it a whole lot better before she met up with the Antichrist (AKA Tito Ortiz). Nothing in the current product excites them; guys like HHH and Jericho were better in the Attitude Era, the Band is a second rate nWo, wrestling would be a whole lot better if we had guys like Jake "The Snake" Roberts still involved...There's no point arguing with them because for the most part they're harmless and deep down they still like wrestling, it's just they liked the olden days better.
So how do we all co-exist? With each side presenting compelling arguments there has to be a point where we all agree to disagree. After all differing opinions is what makes the world fun; you get to think, you get to participate and ultimately a better time is had by all. And in the end that's what's important, not whether WWE, TNA, RoH or anyone else rules or sucks.
Except for Nathaniel and Nintendo John, they can rot in hell :P
Clarence "Showstealer" Mason
No comments:
Post a Comment