I told "Michaelangelo" that not only was their a similarity of zero between our columns, that neither one of us came up with this so called infamous "GB&U" idea, but lastly that the entire thing was written solely to fit in the joke of "time honored tradition" of wrestling ideas getting stolen (and if Vince McMahon and the nWo doesn't put an exclamation point on that, nothing does)
First off, Chief, it's "there," not "their." And secondly, stolen or not, the words "good, bad and ugly" are in both columns. Though perhaps Derek Burgan, who clearly is too cool for the internet wrestling scene, is also too cool for making sense. But who needs to make sense (or use a spell-check) when you're an INTERNET WRESTLING PERSONALITY!!!111
Now picture this. I'm from the Northeast, so maybe American History is just a little more personal up here than out in cyberspace, and maybe you may think this is petty, but I don't give a shit.
he's a dangerous mind. Like Coolio, or Jodie Foster. Truly, Mr. Burgan's struggle is much like the American fight for Independence. A modern day George Washington is this man, and not only is he SUPER KNOWLEDGEABLE and PATRIOTIC, but Derek Burgan is DANGEROUS, and doesn't care about what you think! Hot damn...
My relative little time spent at slashwrestling has made m embarrassed to be an American.
I'm not taking sides or saying anyone copied anyone, but imitation is the highest form of flattery.
Still think the whole thing is silly, though.
I agree, and to me, it's not as if either of them are particularly interesting writers to get worked up over anyway. I've read Michaelangelo, and it seems to be a constant stream of one-liners that aren't funny. I read that Burgan article just to see what he was talking about, and it looked like a very uninspired, incomplete recap.
Is saying that I enjoy neither guy's articles taking sides or taking my own?
================================= Russ Ray Managing Editor www.shotgunreviews.com --------------------------------- "Where the women are hot, the men fight zombies, and the monkeys live like kings." =================================
I don't have any control as to whether people like my column or not. I do what I do and I do it as well as I can. If you don't like it, you don't read it and that suits me just fine.
The situation here was not about drawing attention to me or Burgan's columns. It was one of principle. He accused me of copping his style. I asked him to retract that comment. He refused and we are where we are.
Regardless, I will comment on his retort in my column this week and that will be the last I speak on this matter so we can all get on with our lives.
That sounds like a good plan, Mich. Take your column to make a statement, then forget about it. High road is always better.
I may be mistaken, but didn't "Michaelangelo" already use a column to "make a statement"? Isn't that what started all of this? Let me ask a better question, do you have any idea what "high road" means?
As for a person above who tried to insinuate that I posted a Guest Editorial as a way to avoid dealing with "Zim" on the message board all I can say is this: I tried twice to post a response and was quickly redirected to the main page with some sort of message telling me my post wasn't put on. I wrote a letter to CRZ asking him if I could just send a Guest Editorial so that everyone could just read what's going on and that I know a word document would make it to CRZ.
How can anyone claim a "high road" here? One guy has reacted to a statement that may not ven have been referring to him. One guy has responded to that with childish taunts to a guy expressing his opinion. There is no high road to be had.
This could have all been avoided with an email in the first case simply asking if Derek was taking a shot at him, not accusing him of it and asking for a retraction. The great escalation could have been avoided if Derek could post on the weiner, heck if I can do it anyone can, and when he couldn't, avoided the holier than though crap in the "editorial".
Both guys are guilty of being a tad too self important and should stay after class and write lines.
I did write him an e-mail asking him if he took a shot at me. He verified that he did amd offered a backhanded apology there.
My SECOND e-mail asked for the retraction. It was ignored and that is what eventually got us to where we are now.
It surprises me how my motives have been repeatedly misinterpreted here. I did not ever claim to have invented the GBU style. I simply did not wish to be accused of having stolen it from another writer.
The retraction I asked for could have been as ambiguous as the original comment. I never asked that I or the site be mentioned by name. I simply wanted some sort of acknowlegement of a mistake posted in the same place that the error occurred.
I guess it's all moot at this point anyway, since I will make a brief final comment about this in my column tomorrow and that will be the last I speak of it.
If you guys would just get with the 'net wrestling hive mind there wouldn't be these useless differences of opinion. Everyone would think the same thing and the world would be a happy place. Poor Aussies would not get confused about the timeline of events in "IWP fueds" either.
Remember "The One"? That gimmick/persona was never fully explicated, but for some reason, it got Billy Gunn really fuckin' over. What the hell was that? RD at Wrestlecrap even asked what was he The One of? The One with a bad haircut?