This guy rips Scooter up, pretty much picking the whole book apart. Or so I assume, since I haven't read the book myself. I quit reading the review about halfway through just because I'd gotten the point: Keith is stupid and doesn't know anything and is lazy and a liar and a committer of libel and didn't cite his sources and has a tendency to burn his French toast and doesn't use the right powdered sugar. Todd must have something personal against Scott, either that or he's just a stickler for correct information. The article is lengthy and comes across as Martin's way of showing what he knows about the business, but I thought I'd toss some flame bait or whatnot out for y'all.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should state that I usually read SKeith's rants/show reports because I enjoy them; however I've yet to read either of his books.
You know, the bit about the powdered sugar really hurts.
As for the review, hey, it's a free country. I wrote the book basically for my fanbase, and the sales and feedback have been strong enough to indicate that they enjoyed it, so I'm happy. He seems to be galled that it's not an objective look at things, which kind of misses the point to begin with. If Todd's got an axe to grind there's probably not much I could have wrote that would have changed his mind anyway. The publisher liked it enough to give me another book, and that's what counts.
"Netcop" Scott Keith / Author / Reviewer / Swell Guy www.thesmarks.com / www.411wrestling.com / www.onlineonslaught.com Want to see my DVD collection? http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Netcop "Tonight...In This Very Ring, A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling", now in bookstores near YOU!
The big question for WWE's future: "Will you, Stephanie Marie McMahon, accept the purity of evil and take the Lord of Darkness as your Master and your spouse?"
I had the book fact-checked to the best of my ability via multiple checkings by two longtime WON readers, and any accuracy problems that remained I didn't consider important enough to get worked up about. Apparently Todd did, and if he has an encyclopedic memory about this stuff, then great. I would whole-heartedly agree that people looking for an objective view at the Clique years should not buy the book anyway.
"Netcop" Scott Keith / Author / Reviewer / Swell Guy www.thesmarks.com / www.411wrestling.com / www.onlineonslaught.com Want to see my DVD collection? http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Netcop "Tonight...In This Very Ring, A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling", now in bookstores near YOU!
I had the book fact-checked to the best of my ability via multiple checkings by two longtime WON readers, and any accuracy problems that remained I didn't consider important enough to get worked up about.
Nice work ethic, Sparky.
So if I wrote a piece about Beniot and stated he was never a WCW title holder, because I didn't think it was important, would that count?
Those who make spelling errors in their posts shouldn't make catty remarks about accuracy.
"Netcop" Scott Keith / Author / Reviewer / Swell Guy www.thesmarks.com / www.411wrestling.com / www.onlineonslaught.com Want to see my DVD collection? http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Netcop "Tonight...In This Very Ring, A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling", now in bookstores near YOU!
Originally posted by rspwfaqThose who make spelling errors in their posts shouldn't make catty remarks about accuracy.
Well smite me for not spelling the lord's name correctly, I had a typo.
Research. Not hard. Try it sometime. Oh, silly me, that would be a first. Sex, Lies and Headlocks was more accurate than you. If They Only Knew was more entertaining.
(edited by hardygrrl on 29.4.03 1801) Punk Rock Girly Girl and Angelic Sexpot
Originally posted by rspwfaqThose who make spelling errors in their posts shouldn't make catty remarks about accuracy.
Well smite me for not spelling the lord's name correctly, I had a typo.
Research. Not hard. Try it sometime. Oh, silly me, that would be a first. Sex, Lies and Headlocks was more accurate than you. If They Only Knew was more entertaining.
(edited by hardygrrl on 29.4.03 1801)
I think all the hanky-code jokes are coming back to bite you in the ass, Scott.
Guys like Scott are one of my main gripes against the net. Here is a guy who has never once set foot in a ring, yet he is, in his own mind, an expert. He takes himself entirely too seriously, and thinks that just because he has a book deal, he is king shit. Scott, you found a niche at the right time, plain and simple. I hope that you do realize that.
Originally posted by hardygrrlScooter, if you're going to appoint yourself the wrestling expert, why not go to Click Here (wrestlingclassics.com) and answer some questions?
After all, anyone can get a book contract.
So then, when can we expect yours to hit the shelves?
God, by the way people go on about this guy, you'd think he was spitting on cancer patients and kicking puppies.
He wrote a damned book, for crying out loud. Take it easy.
Someone ripped it, he responded somewhat constructively, yet you still jump down his throat at every oppurtunity.
By the way, if you're going to have a pissing contest, there are far more interesting and entertaining ways. Wrestling history trivia? Come on.
If I did write a book, I would make sure it was as accurate as possible. Why put your name on a hodgepodge of errors?
Plus, I don't act like I'm the end-all, be-all of wrestling. If I make a factual error, I admit it, not toss it aside because "it's not important enough."
Arrogance combined with laziness (a simple fecking Google search could have fixed the mistakes) is a sign of bad writing.
No Jeff Hardy book for me - maybe a history of the Von Erich family though...
Originally posted by hardygrrlPlus, I don't act like I'm the end-all, be-all of wrestling. If I make a factual error, I admit it, not toss it aside because "it's not important enough."
How is stating a valid opinion acting like "the end all, be all" of wrestling?
Originally posted by hardygrrlPlus, I don't act like I'm the end-all, be-all of wrestling. If I make a factual error, I admit it, not toss it aside because "it's not important enough."
How is stating a valid opinion acting like "the end all, be all" of wrestling?
Naming a book a History of anything implies fact. A better title would have been an Opinion or Oh oh OHHHHHHHHHHHHH Benoit, you sweaty Canadian manbeast!
Just to clarify something else, my title was "Tonight...In This Very Ring" and that was it. The publisher added the subtitle on as a way to make it seem more "historical". It was always written from the perspective of a giant rant rather than a history book.
"Netcop" Scott Keith / Author / Reviewer / Swell Guy www.thesmarks.com / www.411wrestling.com / www.onlineonslaught.com Want to see my DVD collection? http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Netcop "Tonight...In This Very Ring, A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling", now in bookstores near YOU!
Originally posted by rspwfaqJust to clarify something else, my title was "Tonight...In This Very Ring" and that was it. The publisher added the subtitle on as a way to make it seem more "historical". It was always written from the perspective of a giant rant rather than a history book.
Nope, sorry Scott. Evidently you've messed up this woman's life to the point that only a self-induced bloodletting on the beautiful streets of Elgin, Illinois will satisfy.
George Washington gave his signature The Government gave its hand They said for now and ever more that this was Indian Land
"As long as the moon shall rise" "As long as the rivers flow" "As long as the sun will shine" "As long as the grass shall grow"