Today's WWF.com poll: Should Stephanie get another chance to return to Federation programming?
Results: 57% against, 42% in favor
Wow. Maybe the net community really IS out of touch with the rest of the fanbase (assuming casual fans are visiting wwf.com). Or maybe the poll is rigged. Whatever the case, I think we've got it right on this one. Keep her off my damn TV.
Also worth noting is this quote from another wwf.com article:
"I've heard that trades can happen, but as far as Ron and I reuniting, I've had no indication that will ever happen. I don't know. I'd be for it. I think we can both do well as singles, but it'd be good to have a reunion tour sometime in the future. That'd be a lot of fun."
Said Faarooq: "I haven't heard anything and I don't know anything about it. But I would sure like to see it, and I think the people do too. I think you saw the reaction there in Philadelphia (on SmackDown!). They weren't in favor of (us splitting up). The only thing I know is this: I've had a lot of partners throughout the years, by far he's been the best one. We've been close together, just like brothers."
(edited by PalpatineW on 30.3.02 0005)
I didn't expect to find a salesman drinking coffee this late in the morning. How long you been here, Joe?
Number one, we've been down this road every time WWF.COM has a poll. Of course they're rigged. When you see something on that website, it's really the same as seeing it on WWF television; it's a work. It's the reality that they want us to see. In this case, they want us to actually believe that a goodly percentage of WWF fans actually want to see Steph back on TV. This is, of course, due to Steph herself. I think she already misses the spotlight. That is, after all, why she booked Trip and Angle to talk about her even though she's gone.
Of course, she realizes that (especially on the net), the hatred for her is pretty much universal... somewhere in the 95% range. So even she isn't audacious enough to rig the poll to the point that the majority of fans want to see her back. Just that 42%.
I take back my prediction of 3 months. We'll be lucky to get one month Steph-Free
You know, I've never consciously wished harm on a Sports Entertainment personality, but if Stephanie returns before I've had a good 3 or 4 months not seeing of hearing her, I'd really love to see her brutally blow a spot and break something. Nothing that would cause paralysis or death, just a broken arm or leg. Something that'll hurt a lot, take a few months of recovery and scare her away from ring appearances. I think I, and everyone else, have taken a lot of horrible acting and annoying facial expressions from her, and frankly I'm tired of it.
Sign idea: "Die, Stephanie, Die!"
EDIT: Just corrected some misspellings...
(edited by EastCoastAvenger on 30.3.02 1901)
There are no facts-only observational postulates in an endlessly regenerative hodgepodge of predictions. Consensus reality requires a fixed frame of reference. In a multilevel, infinite universe, there can be no fixity; thus, no absolute consensus reality. In a relativistic universe, it appears impossible to test the reliability of any expert by requiring him to agree with another expert. Both can be correct, each in his own inertial system.
-Bene Gesserit Azhar Book
"Go Away!" "You Suck" "SLUT" or just plain and simple... "You're Ugly!"
Holden: Judging by the buzz, that movie's gonna make some serious bank. Jay: What buzz? Holden: The internet buzz. Jay: What the f*ck is the internet? [Holden (Ben Affleck) & Jay (Jason Mewes) in Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back]
Their poll set-up is really non-scientific. You are allowed to vote as often as you would like to.
You can do this the really low tech way by hitting f5 repeatedly in the results screen, or you can be a little more high tech about it and figure out a better way to do it.
I went about in the middle ground. I wrote 3 web pages. The first page was simply a web page with a meta tag that had a refresh target of the url to vote for. This way opening this page up would do a redirect back to the voting gateway.
The next step was to make a page using frames that opened this page in a 3 x 3 frameset, for a total of 9 votes per page. I set this page up to refresh itself every 3 seconds.
Then, I copied that code into a third page opening 3 x 3 frames of the 3 x 3 frameset, for 3^4 votes per load (81 votes per load) and then I let it run.
The result is that every 3 seconds, up to 81 votes for no were being cast by my system.
BTW - you could do an even better job if you simply set up a job on a server to send the url request ... I'm pretty sure the vote was tallied whether or not the page displayed. So - you could just fire off the votes and not even pay attention to what came back from the other side... This was beyond my skill. But its very doable.
If the WWF doesn't want me to vote like that, they can do any of the following;
a) Design a real poll that only allows one vote per IP b) Make me accept a usage agreement to vote, which would make me agree not to do it c) Ask me not to do it.
Otherwise, I'll keep voting.
You can too It's fun and easy when you know how.
I used to vote for options that didn't exist on the polls offered by the Channel 4 Padres broadcasts, so that when you added up the % it would be less than 100%. To this day I'm still not sure they have figured out why this happened.
(edited by Guru Zim on 30.3.02 1857)
I love it when a plan comes together
Just the thought that the WWF asked the question is disturbing, since it entertains the thought of Steph coming back and screeching her melodrama to us all. Why does she deserve another chance to come back? What part of "We hate Steph" do they not understand? Maybe Taker should kick Shane's ass in a restroom so Vince will decide not put his daughter on TV.
"Say 'what' again. SAY 'WHAT' AGAIN! I dare you, I double dare you, motherf--ker! Say 'what' one more goddamn time!" -- Samuel L. Jackson, Pulp Fiction (1994)
Well, not EVERYBODY hates her. Go around, there are plenty of sites dedicated to her. And I've always been sure she is not as hated near as much everywhere else as she is on these internet boards. That being said, the WWF shouldn't put any stock into polls that are so easily tampered with.
I don't hate Stephanie either. I would accept her character back IF, AND ONLY IF she has a decent creative direction to go with it. But for right now, she needs to concentrate on writing the shows, and not getting back on TV, IMHO.
I actually don't have a problem with Stephanie as long as she doesn't overexpose herself *cough - ok, that is a phrase that takes a whole new meaning now* too much on television. I think she is an effective heel that can get the job done as long as she doesn't resort to screaching and/or overacting.
As for the poll thing, it's not that hard.. just a simple php script with a for loop.. for i<120000 have it execute the vote script thing.. er, whatever.
I wouldn't mind seeing her back in about a year. But she's been on WWF straight since early 1999. Except for the period after HHH got hurt but before the InVasion began, she has been on continuously, first getting kidnapped by Taker, then marrying Test, then married to HHH, then owning ECW. NOBODY has been more regular than her, except maybe Jim Ross and Michael Cole. I can't think of any big-name wrestlers who haven't been injured or taken some time off during that period. Vince and Shane have always been on and off But every week, there she's been. She must have been doing something right, but for after this time anybody would be really annoying (especially her). So if she's off a year and comes back, I won't complain.
"Don't eat crackers in the bed of your future, or you might get scratchy" - The Tick
I totally don't know anything about html, php, java, or anything, really, but I'd sure like to be able to fuck with these polls. Is there any way some generous person could post the actual script, so I could just steal it and use it for my own enjoyment? I'd give you a nickel...
Yes. I'm looking at you. You slimy fuck.
I may have been blocked by CRZ, but I like me, and you like me, so pee on he!
While those matches were good to very good I don't know if you could categorize them as great. But you're entitled to your opinion...and even if both matches were regarded as great, the point is the great matches on RAW are few and far between.