Person 2 adds that this will be bad for WWE's business.
Person 3 theorizes that this is a result of backstage politics based on various third- and fourth-hand reports.
Person 4 lays out in detail his own ideas on how to run the company and how this would please the fans.
Person 5 says everyone is a bunch of smarky non-fans and everyone on the internet sucks and why don't you stop watching the show if you don't like it?
Person 6 says if you don't like other people's opinions, why don't you stop reading them?
Eventually everyone is talking more about each other than the actual show that they saw.
Cubs said it better on his site than I'm trying to say it now:
"I think I figured out that it's best not to waste time to thinking about why or how these things come out of the WWE. There's a computer/match concept called a "black box" - you usually know what goes and what goes out, you just don't know - or care to know - how it happens. It doesn't matter to me if they're giving me these shows because X writer has this agenda or Y wrestler wants to do this, it just matters that they're giving me THESE SHOWS, and these aren't so fun."
I think I'm person 7. I watch hopefully to be entertained and enjoy reading other people's posts to see if they're witty, well-thought-out, or entertaining. If any of those words apply to any of my posts then I've gotten truly lucky.
Originally posted by DarrylTheHitmanI think I'm person 7. I watch hopefully to be entertained and enjoy reading other people's posts to see if they're witty, well-thought-out, or entertaining. If any of those words apply to any of my posts then I've gotten truly lucky.
In the end, I just hope that that's how you guys describe my posts.
Was this dictated by some committee or something? In your mind, The Rock might be #1. However, in other's minds, Joh Cena might be #1 or King Kong Bundy might be #1. Saying that someone shouldn't get pushed because "They're not #1! THIS GUY IS!!!...