The W
Views: 98995729
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.9.07 0454
The 7 - Site Bashing - Screw you, Scott Keith, I'm suing.
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(491 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (25 total)
A Fan
Liverwurst
Level: 68

Posts: 164/1164
EXP: 2705271
For next: 23543

Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 3522 days
Last activity: 3522 days
#1 Posted on 28.5.02 2327.02
Reposted on: 28.5.09 2329.07
I want to thank 411 particullarly Hyatte for finding this at Amazon.com for me.

Tonight... in This Very Ring: A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling
by Scott Keith


Hey pal, I've read your columns you are about as much a fan of wrestling as Bush is a fan of the BBC. I think its funny that a second rate wrestling writer gets a book deal. It proves my theory that anyone can get published. Maybe I will write a tell all book about how stupid wrestling net writers and their legion of wrestling sheep message board fans polluate the interenet with their fantasy booking cum. At least, the title of my book will be true, because a fan you know someone who enjoys sports entertainment even though they see the flaws, instead of a hack net writer with apperantly too many high connections.

A Fan- The real one.
Promote this thread!
Madame Manga
Kolbasz
Level: 47

Posts: 56/482
EXP: 719895
For next: 46314

Since: 16.1.02
From: Silicon Valley

Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#2 Posted on 29.5.02 0039.56
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0041.05
You can self-publish a book through an online printing house and have it listed on Amazon. A cousin of mine did that for her (pretty crappy) novel. If anyone orders it, they print up a copy and mail it. If you're an aspiring author, it only costs a couple of hundred bucks to set up. You can get an editor to work on it for an additional fee and they even design a color cover for you.

Note that the blurb for Keith's book (I looked) says "Publisher: Unknown." I'd be willing to bet that the above scenario is in action...

MM
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 747/5402
EXP: 27049115
For next: 82889

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 49 days
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 29.5.02 0051.54
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0053.25
God help me for doing this, but I think I am about to defend Scott Keith.

People say Scott doesn't like wrestling. Actually, this seems to happen on the net anytime someone expresses more negative than positive opinion about the current WWE product. And I've railed and complained about this for a while, but no one seems to listen.

Then I was thinking about the matter, and began to think in analogies. There are probably between 10-15 major/semi-major and a couple of hundred small/independent wrestling promotions in the world today, all providing different products. There have been many major promotions which have left the scene in the last 15 years (WCW, ECW, Smoky, Global, Stampede, FMW, USWA, WCCW, Don Owen's Pacific NW). Yet the standard for being a wrestling fan in the eyes of net fans is enjoying the current product of one particular major promotion. To put this in movie terms, there are a few big studios and some semi-big studios making movies right now. There are many smaller studios putting out niche films. And there are studios which have gone under or merged over the years. Now I enjoy movies, and like to watch many movies of different types. I like some of the current big studio movies, but generally prefer smaller movies and older movies. But according to this logic, if I am not a big fan of most of what Warner Brothers, the top grossing studio in 2001 produces, then I am just not a fan of movies and shouldn't talk about movies at all. As if popularity is somehow the sole indicator of legitimacy and quality.
Jackson
Sujuk
Level: 63

Posts: 211/976
EXP: 2076999
For next: 20164

Since: 4.1.02

Since last post: 1955 days
Last activity: 1480 days
#4 Posted on 29.5.02 0110.47
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0112.51

    Originally posted by A Fan
    Hey pal, I've read your columns you are about as much a fan of wrestling as Bush is a fan of the BBC.


Okay, this makes two threads today that have confused me. Why would Dubbya have a beef with the British Broadcasting Channel? Sorry if it's a stupid question but I have been enjoying the holiday and one the best parts of it was not worrying about the news.
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 253/1084
EXP: 2430409
For next: 31455

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2952 days
Last activity: 2949 days
#5 Posted on 29.5.02 0112.56
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0115.03
that makes sense, but I don't go see movies that I'm not gonna's like. Wait. I don't pay to see movies that I don't like, and only see them because someone I'm with wants to. I don't dedicate a hafty amount of my time to watching and complaining about movies I don't like, whereas Scott Keith seems to dedicate a fair amoung of his time to watching wrestling and complaining about how much he hates it.
The Masked Hungarian
Pickled pork
Level: 31

Posts: 115/192
EXP: 180841
For next: 4524

Since: 23.1.02
From: Staten Island NY USA

Since last post: 3354 days
Last activity: 3354 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 29.5.02 0129.55
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0149.40
This is ridiculous.

Back in 1998 Scott Keith was anti WCW and pro WWF. All he did was bash Thunder/WCW ppvs and praise what he was seeing on WWF shows. Coincidentally WCW was sucking and the Attitude era was just starting.

Now, because he is pointing out how badly the WWF has been since WM X-7, he is a bitter columnist who should just quit watching. Coincidentally since WM X-7 the WWF has not only blown a GUARANTEED invasion angle but also blown the nWo invasion.

Oh yeah he's anti-Hogan because he points out that tvs across the nation are changing their channels when Hogan comes on. How dare he point out that Hogan cannot take a simple bump anymore?? After all Hogan MADE WRESTLING, at least that's what most of these 1998 fans have read all these years. These are also the same fans who were bashing the wcw Hogan a couple of years ago. But my how things change once McMahon gets a hold of things.

My point in this long winded reply is this. Go back and read his WWF ppv rants from 2000 and tell me he's bitter. Or maybe it's because the product has sucked for over a year. Things change when people voice their dissatisfaction, not when they go along with the company line.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple
Level: 127

Posts: 654/4929
EXP: 23575726
For next: 150905

Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 8 hours
#7 Posted on 29.5.02 0133.37
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0159.01
I don't think I follow your arguement at all.
Lexus
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 78/1821
EXP: 5294345
For next: 137899

Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#8 Posted on 29.5.02 0224.14
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0229.02
You know, lemme speak on this.

These days, I tend to agree that Keith has gotten out of hand, shooting off at the mouth, even telling the WWF to go fuck themselves at times, being overly critical, without anything nice to say about what the WWF has to offer.

But, he has every right to complain. He did the same to WCW when it was crap, and if you watch right now, WWE is starting to produce the same crap that WCW was promoting a couple of years ago, that being HOGAN, HOGAN, HOGAN. Hogan isn't bad, in fact, he's downright useful for TV. Not in the main event though. Not fighting guys in their prime for the title. Vince McMahon made the WWF work without Hogan in the major scene. Hell, do the names Bret, Shawn, Yokozuna, Diesel, Steve, Rocky, Hunter, Kurt, or Don (as in Don the Undertaker) mean anything? Appearantly not. 9 men who carried your company, working the big main event story lines, while that lowlifed, fourflushing, backstabbing Goblin ran away after snitching on you to the government?

Kinda questions what Vince knows. Vince went out of his way to beat WCW. He did. He beat Hogan with it. Now, keep Hogan on TV, but definitely not as a main eventer. Sure, he's a fabulous wrestler. Hell, how many injuries has he sustained or caused, and if his body can still take it at near 50, good for him.

At least, though, Hogan's win/loss record since his return, has been a scosh bit higher on the loss side. And still, the prominent name he did beat, HHH, could use a little humbling, to say the least.

Now, as Keith would see it.

Hogan should die. Why isn't Benoit in the main event?

I rest my case. He's obviously good at what he does, because he starts a buzz. I don't know if that's what he aims for, but he definitely starts a buzz, letting you guess the rest.

And hey, I happen to like what he's doing with the Superhero bit. It's not fantasy booking, it's whimsy. It's good to see he actually has a cheery side left to him.
Tom Dean
Bockwurst
Level: 50

Posts: 116/573
EXP: 910051
For next: 37273

Since: 30.8.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3271 days
Last activity: 2640 days
AIM:  
#9 Posted on 29.5.02 0245.30
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0259.02
I don't think Keith is sitting there watching the show and thinking, "How can I figure out a way to dislike this?". But I think he definitely is sitting there thinking, "What sarcastic comment can I make about this?" I don't think he is even thinking about whether he likes it or not, he just wants to say something "edgy" about it. He's usually interesting to read, but I certainly don't see him as an "analyst" at all... I probably wouldn't buy his book, because the last time he wrote anything with substance was many years ago, and he has coasted on that ever since so I don't see why he'd stop now.
Jackson
Sujuk
Level: 63

Posts: 212/976
EXP: 2076999
For next: 20164

Since: 4.1.02

Since last post: 1955 days
Last activity: 1480 days
#10 Posted on 29.5.02 0512.17
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0513.25
Point 1-

while that lowlifed, fourflushing, backstabbing Goblin ran away after snitching on you to the government?

Calling Hogan a Goblin makes you sound like a Keith mark right off the bat and tends to render everything else moot.

Point 2- Move this stuff to the site bashing thread.
anibanging
Italian
Level: 35

Posts: 7/246
EXP: 261109
For next: 18829

Since: 5.3.02

Since last post: 1981 days
Last activity: 27 days
#11 Posted on 29.5.02 0907.37
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0909.04

    Originally posted by Jackson

    Okay, this makes two threads today that have confused me. Why would Dubbya have a beef with the British Broadcasting Channel?



Not sure this adds so much to the discussion (which is a no no i hear) but it's not that often i can answer someone's questions round these parts so here goes:

Bush ain't exactly the sharpest pencil in the drawer, the BBC on the otherhand is considered to be highbrow programing - at least here in the Americas i don't know that the brits think of it - therefore dumdum the president ain't no fan of the BBC.
Mild Mannered Madman
Toulouse
Level: 71

Posts: 33/1274
EXP: 3078671
For next: 88458

Since: 1.3.02
From: Westminster, CA

Since last post: 434 days
Last activity: 152 days
#12 Posted on 29.5.02 0917.55
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0920.40

    Originally posted by Jackson
    Point 1-

    while that lowlifed, fourflushing, backstabbing Goblin ran away after snitching on you to the government?

    Calling Hogan a Goblin makes you sound like a Keith mark right off the bat and tends to render everything else moot.




Counterpoint: If you think Scott Keith was remotely the first person to call Hogan a "Goblin", you don't have much room to talk either.

Slestak
Salami
Level: 32

Posts: 115/201
EXP: 194149
For next: 12295

Since: 2.1.02
From: Oklahoma City

Since last post: 4394 days
Last activity: 4328 days
#13 Posted on 29.5.02 0926.44
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0929.01

    Originally posted by A Fan
    I want to thank 411 particullarly Hyatte for finding this at Amazon.com for me.

    Tonight... in This Very Ring: A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling
    by Scott Keith


    Hey pal, I've read your columns you are about as much a fan of wrestling as Bush is a fan of the BBC. I think its funny that a second rate wrestling writer gets a book deal. It proves my theory that anyone can get published.


Judging by your post, you don't seem to think it's funny. In fact, you seem rather angry.

    Originally posted by A Fan
    Maybe I will write a tell all book about how stupid wrestling net writers and their legion of wrestling sheep message board fans polluate the interenet with their fantasy booking cum. At least, the title of my book will be true, because a fan you know someone who enjoys sports entertainment even though they see the flaws, instead of a hack net writer with apperantly too many high connections.


Writing like that isn't going to get you published.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so fun about Keith-hating. If he's so horrible, then just ignore him. That's how I handle Bruce Mitchell and Tommy Fierro.
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 136/1494
EXP: 3932046
For next: 74033

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 20 hours
#14 Posted on 29.5.02 0931.45
Reposted on: 29.5.09 0932.56
Great, someone has figured out a way to bash Bush in a wrestling thread about Scott Keith.........sigh.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong
Level: 78

Posts: 243/1597
EXP: 4331247
For next: 50998

Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3372 days
Last activity: 3153 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on 29.5.02 1008.10
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1011.07
Better idea: How about we mark this thread as closed before we get to off topic?

tarnish
Frankfurter
Level: 60

Posts: 81/859
EXP: 1707495
For next: 65293

Since: 13.2.02
From: Back in the Heart of Hali

Since last post: 465 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on 29.5.02 1504.34
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1506.44

www.m-w.com says:


    Main Entry: critic
    Pronunciation: 'kri-tik
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Latin criticus, from Greek kritikos, from kritikos able to discern or judge, from krinein
    Date: 1588
    1 a : one who expresses a reasoned opinion on any matter especially involving a judgment of its value, truth, righteousness, beauty, or technique b : one who engages often professionally in the analysis, evaluation, or appreciation of works of art or artistic performances
    2 : one given to harsh or captious judgment



Definition 2 came around when people got fed up with those who they felt no longer fit definitions 1a and 1b. Calling Scott Keith out as #2 just means you don't agree with him.

If you don't like Scott Keith, don't read him. But don't sit on your high horse and talk shit about him. It just reeks of jealousy. If he's such a crappy, negative writer, how did he get where he is? Somebody reads him. If that isn't you, why do you care?

If nobody read and/or agreed with what Mr. Keith has to say, he would never have lasted as long as he has, nor would he have a book published, a book on the way (no matter how it was published), a spot on a recognized wrestling website, or comped tickets to WWF events in his area.

I don't much like him, I don't much like his writing, but I don't spend time giving him free press because he makes my penis feel small. Keith has every right to do what he does and make money at it. Complaining about him doesn't do anybody any good except him: you're giving him even more exposure. If you really, really don't like him, ignore him, because you really can't do anything about him, his existence, or his activities.
DJ FrostyFreeze
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 378/3380
EXP: 13387976
For next: 132567

Since: 2.1.02
From: Hawthorne, CA

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#17 Posted on 29.5.02 1728.30
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1729.01
Will that same "Dont like it? Dont read it!" theory apply to him the next time he trashes a WWE show?
Jackson
Sujuk
Level: 63

Posts: 213/976
EXP: 2076999
For next: 20164

Since: 4.1.02

Since last post: 1955 days
Last activity: 1480 days
#18 Posted on 29.5.02 1806.17
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1807.28

    Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman

      Originally posted by Jackson
      Point 1-

      while that lowlifed, fourflushing, backstabbing Goblin ran away after snitching on you to the government?

      Calling Hogan a Goblin makes you sound like a Keith mark right off the bat and tends to render everything else moot.




    Counterpoint: If you think Scott Keith was remotely the first person to call Hogan a "Goblin", you don't have much room to talk either.





True, but most people don't use it EVERY time they refer to him.
tarnish
Frankfurter
Level: 60

Posts: 85/859
EXP: 1707495
For next: 65293

Since: 13.2.02
From: Back in the Heart of Hali

Since last post: 465 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on 29.5.02 1821.47
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1826.07
DJ Frosty Freeze said:

    Will that same "Dont like it? Dont read it!" theory apply to him the next time he trashes a WWE show?


I'm assuming what you mean by this is something along the lines of ``Shouldn't the same reasoning apply to Scott Keith, i.e. if he doesn't like the WWE product, why does he watch it?''

He watches it because when he watches it and then spews off about it (good or bad), people read what he has to say and many of them respond with positive messages. This feeds his ego. People buy him shit. People buy his book. For all I know, 411 pays him for his work.

So Scott does get something out of posting what he posts. None of us get anything out of posting ``Scott sucks'' threads. In fact, we probably help him by giving him more exposure (bad press is still press).

If one thinks that he is an idiot and ``not a fan of wrestling'' and so totally wrong about everything he writes about wrestling, why doesn't one go about giving people an `good' alternative to his work rather than spending time and energy critiquing a critic? I.e. put up or shut up, but don't spend time and energy railing away on something that isn't going to change just because one doesn't like it.

I've been reading wrestling-related stuff on-line since RSPW's heyday in the early nineties. People have been posting the same (and different) complaints about SK (and others, including CRZ) since then. What hasn't changed in 8 years isn't going to change now with somebody's ``new take on why Scott Keith/The Torch/Wrestling Observer/411/CRZ/Hyatte/Your Mom sucks.'' There's nothing new about it, I assure you.

So one is free to give SK more website hits, thus guaranteeing his continued online presence, in order to come here and complain about it, but one would do well to think about what that will really accomplish.

And with that, I'm going to take my own advice and remove myself from this thread. I don't like it and I'm not going to change anyone's mind on the subject, so I'm going to ignore it :)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 212

Posts: 822/16214
EXP: 141020215
For next: 15571

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#20 Posted on 29.5.02 1831.49
Reposted on: 29.5.09 1838.57

    Originally posted by tarnish
    If one thinks that he is an idiot and ``not a fan of wrestling'' and so totally wrong about everything he writes about wrestling, why doesn't one go about giving people an `good' alternative to his work rather than spending time and energy critiquing a critic?
*raises hand* ;-)
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: How random is random?
Next thread: Midnight News is back on 411,
Previous thread: 411 gets violent
(491 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Site Bashing - Screw you, Scott Keith, I'm suing. Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.27 seconds.