PJ Power

If you're standing in downtown St. John's, the capital city of Newfoundland & Labrador in Canada (specifically in this example, the Anglican Cathedral), you are standing closer to Dublin, London, Paris, Berlin, Lisbon, Zurich, Prague, Madrid, Casablanca, Algiers and even Vienna & Ljubljana than you are to Vancouver, British Columbia, on the other side of the country, with Rome, Bratislava, Zagreb and Warsaw all only being less than 100km more further away. Meanwhile, still at the same spot, you are closer to London than you are to either Calgary or Edmonton in Alberta, or Saskatoon in Saskatchewan, and you'd still be closer to Galway than to Winnipeg, Manitoba.

It's a big country, eh.

Resurrecting this thread as I heard this for the first time in nearly two decades last weekend and had forgot how good it was.

Prince Charles is now in self-isolation with Covid-19. Meanwhile, Prince Andrew is in self-isolation with Elisa-15.

(Wrong thread)

Sorry for your loss Neil. What you've mentioned about your g/friend's family sounds utterly grim.

For Jehova's sake! 😂😂

2 hours ago, SuperBacon said:

Just get in the shower like a normal human being.

And if your home doesn't have a shower?

Given the news concerning Wrestlemania, I wonder how the US TV contracts work in this current situation given that the WWE are supposed to supply "original programming"? If there is going to be a prolonged lock down thanks to COVID-19 that will go beyond the end of April (looking likely at this stage), then I wonder if they will "do an Impact" and try to film several episodes of Raw & Smackdown as a block over several days at the PC to give around 4 to 8 weeks or so of programming to supply? It might be something to consider given that if any of the roster are confirmed positive for coronavirus then that will surely halt production for an indefinite amount of time.

TIL: That North Korea has its own IPTV content delivery service. Just a shame about its name.

Manbang

56 minutes ago, Uncle Zeb said:

Anyone know if 55-year-old Johnson has any pre-existing health conditions? Wondering how hard I need to be crossing my fingers here.

Nymphomaniac

Schoolchildren in Wuhan under quarantine still get assigned homework via smartphone app, conspire to flood it with one star reviews to get it taken offline!

https://mashable.com/article/wuhan-kids-app-coronavirus/?europe=true

The UK: Stocking up on bog roll and hand sanitiser.

The Merkins?

IIRC Buh Buh Ray Dudley referred to "you people" in his pre-match promo at ECW's Heatwave 99 before dishing out offensive insults to several folks in the crowd. It was pretty cheap heat, but bah gawd did he generate it that night.

2 hours ago, jazzygeofferz said:

https://youtu.be/D4FAqqBFSYg

It surely has to be the tag team of the 90s. Stunnin' Steve & Flyin' Brian. The Hollywood Blondes.

Tag teams didn't get more 90s than these two.

9 minutes ago, Onyx2 said:

18 years of Jericho. (reminds me  of the WHATS ME BEST LOOK threads)

I think you mean 28 years of Jericho? 18 years would imply he only started out in 2002.

(Sorry for being a nitpicking git.)

I like the nice drum and bass beat in the background of the RTC entrance music.

17 hours ago, Kaz Hayashi said:

Fully agree, and in addition to this, becoming ‘famous’ has become so much more achievable and accessible. People have become rabid with trying to become famous. They will attempt YouTube channels, or social media accounts in the attempt to become noticed. 
They will say and do incredible stupid shit, because unfortunately, it’s a proven formula.

One of the Paul brothers (YouTubers) are synonyms with being absolute cretins. Trashing rented properties, general verbal abuse towards others, scripted bedlam, all on video, gaining millions of views and advertising revenue in the process. One of them went to Japan, to a forest associated to people hanging themselves. They found a dead hanging body, filmed it, and put it on their YouTube channel. 
It obviously had backlash, people kicking off, calling them out for it, giving them lots of shit for it and Youtube stepped in. It equated to fuck all, they still have one of the most successful channels, are living incredibly wealthy, famous lifestyles and soak up any negative shit they get, because it all adds to potential views, and therefore ad revenue.

Then that lad on a flight last week, who stood up on the flight and said out loud along the lines of, “Hi everyone, I’ve just been to Wuhan and I feel very sick, just letting you know”.

He filmed himself doing it, then admitted afterwards it was a stunt for his social media accounts.

Being abusive has become part and parcel of this new style of fame. Whether it’s the viewers trying to be shocking from behind a keyboard, or whether it’s out YouTube presenters slagging off other channels, encouraging their fans to join in the slagging match, in preparation for a staged boxing match 😐

Some of us now at a certain age might remember "The Word" on Channel 4 back in the early to mid 90's, and it's segment of "The Hopefuls", featuring young adults whom would proudly proclaim that they'd do anything to get on the telly, wherever it would be by french-kissing a granny, drinking the liquid from a sponge just used by an obese man to wash himself with, or drink one's own vomit. It certainly raised some disgust back in its time, even if it was late Friday night on Channel 4, but these days with what certain YouTube "celebs", non-entities and all in between now do to try and get noticed, most on the stuff done on The Hopefuls would now be considered lame.

The sad thing is that there is actually decent stuff on YT made by knowledgeable people enthusiastic about what they do that is as well as entertaining is also either educational, informative or well written. You just have to try and wade through a ton of shite first before finding at least the half decent stuff, and that's before daring to even look at the comments section on most videos that might make you hope that the Coronavirus will wipe out all of humanity so nature can hit the reset button and start it all over again. In the past you had people acting as some sort of barrier between producers and viewers/listeners that ensured nearly all of the crap was filed before it was made available to audiences albeit with some collateral damage along the way. I suppose it's a bit like the alleged "filter" that Vince McMahon and some of the other writes the WWE had back in the late 90's that ensured that some of Vince Russo's worst ideas never made it to air.

On 1/28/2020 at 12:10 PM, BomberPat said:

I've always put it done to the overwhelming nature of choice - when the music you hear is dictated by radio, the music press, and what you can find in the shops, your experience is being curated. To find an album by an obscure band you love in a local record shop, or to hear a new track that blew your mind on the radio, was a moment you'd remember, and would dictate your purchases, and therefore your taste. Now, with Amazon, YouTube or Spotify open in front of me, I could find every single one of those albums by obscure bands and have them all in an instant, but there's just so much of it that I don't know where to begin, so I end up not listening to any of it, just retreating to a safer choice. That seems like a near universal experience for all but my most committed muso friends, and I see it reflected in the tastes of students at work, and younger people I know.

I've seen this described elsewhere as a "paradox of choice" whereby when a person is confronted with more choices than they can reasonably decide upon, they become anxious that their choice is not the right one for them and/or to do so would be exhausting and resource consuming.

A simple example would be tomato ketchup in a local supermarket - in an ordinary supermarket, when you get to the condiments isle and look for tomato ketchup you spot the supermarket's own brand, Heinz, Daddies and maybe one or two more brands. If a single new brand of tomato ketchup is brought in for sale, you may be tempted to buy a bottle and try it to see if it tastes better than what you usually buy.

Now say instead the supermarket goes from stocking 3-5 different brands of tomato ketchup to stocking 40 different brands overnight - suddenly, many shoppers now popping in to buy their usual tomato ketchup will find themselves overwhelmed with the options available, wondering how out of all these choices which one will be the "best". Some shoppers will (at least initially) not feel too bothered and will just buy their usual brand, but many of them will at some point later on wonder if any of these new brands are any better, or at least as good but much cheaper than the brand they presently buy, having seen the supermarket have one such brand on a special offer or from talking to others who've tried them. For many others, the choice now available is too overwhelming for them to make a conclusive judgment on their own in terms of cost, the time taken to make comparisons and holding the mental knowledge of what different tomato ketchup's tasted like which may have been several weeks ago.

Also, those brands which a significant batch of shoppers are negative on will likely see the product dumped before it is fully used. and a different one bought at the next supermarket trip, adding to food waste.

Over time, these 40 different brands will almost certainly be whittled down as the supermarket decides to no longer stock brands that are not selling enough, or that some brand manufacturers will stop production of tomato ketchup for whatever reason. Eventually this might go down to five or less but it is also possible (especially in an extremely busy & large supermarket) that there is enough justification to still stock anything from between 10 to 15 different brands if it makes business sense to do so. The regular shoppers in that supermarket will have a reasonable idea of what brand of tomato ketchup they want and will continue to buy - however for new shoppers (living away from home for the first time, or just recently moved into the area) this element of choice can still overwhelm many of them. In any case, this sense of being overwhelmed will often lead to feeling anxious about making the correct choice, especially if you are shopping for a family of picky eaters or money for shopping is tight, and when trying so many different brands none of them are at least as good as the main brand you used to buy - but you don't know if any of the other brands you've tried are better?

This "paradox of choice" is often used to refute right-libertarian & other free-market fundamentalist arguments concerning a claim that offering a consumer more choice is always good, and is a positive example of free markets at hand - of course, the above points mentioned show how it is impossible for most consumers to make a completely rational choice on what brand of tomato ketchup to buy, not to mention other factors outside of their own control e.g. one of the traditional brands responding using their capital resources by selling their product on a short term basis either on wafer thin margins or even at a loss in the hope of driving the new brands out of production and hence the market, putting the price back to normal or higher once most of the new competing brands have been eliminated for consumers to choose.

The Paradox Of Choice essentially claims that choice on its own isn't bad - it's that too much choice is nearly always not a good thing even within a consumer market - even if there is some sort of eventual "correction" from this overwhelming choice, it can't easily conclude that the end result is the right one given the doubts and resources of consumers as well as the behaviour of different brands selling their product to ensure long-term profitability based on their own resources, resulting in even modestly popular brands being eliminated and thus no longer an option to the shoppers.

Martina Hill, German comedian & actress.

1 hour ago, Porkchopcash said:

I find quite a high percentge of the people who voted remain can be very aggressive towards those who voted leave. And throwing about terms like “racist” and “stupid” does not do their cause any good. Just makes them seem bitter. 

Funny that. The majority of people that voted for the UK to leave the EU are in my experience the types whom are often very aggressive to pet peeves of theirs, love frauds like Farage for apparently "telling like it is", throwing around "woke" and "snowflake" as insults like there's no tomorrow, labelled "remoaners" as scum, traitors, unpatriotic, filth, against "the will of the people" etc. etc. So if some of their shit gets thrown back at them, then tough. Thin skinned bullies whom love to give it out but can't take it. And even if you did vote leave but don't honestly see yourself from the description above, then you have to fess up to your choice in (a) you have to take responsibility for looking to change the political status quo of the country in such a major way, and (b) realise that even of you chose with the best of intentions, you have helped enable some very undesirable people to not only celebrate a fairly narrow referendum victory that was tainted by all sorts of interference that had it been done during a general election would have seen the ballot declared void as a win to "own dem liburals" but also in effect start a culture war. There probably is a decent reason to wanting the UK to leave the EU for the betterment of the nation that is not tied in some way to racism or general stupidity (though I've yet to hear it beyond empty soundbites) but the cold truth was/is that "leave" was number one with racists and thick fucks.

1 hour ago, Porkchopcash said:

I don’t know, just like the people who voted remain have no idea how things will turn out.

And here is the problem with holding the referendum in the first place. In countries that have either some sort of popular ballot on a regular basis for local or regional matters, or whose written Constitution requires a referendum as part of the process to amend any part of it (so places like Rep. of Ireland, Switzerland, Australia, various states in the USA etc.) civics lessons that are taught in schools there empathise that in such a ballot, unless you have sufficient confidence in voting for a change  according to the terms laid out on the ballot, then you should vote to retain the status quo. And this is where your claim about remainers not knowing how things will turn out fails, and fails badly. Of course no one has a bona-fide crystal ball as to exactly what events turn out to be regardless of whatever outcome from a vote gives. However, staying on at least a predictable path gives a greater chance of planning for the future ahead. I'm going to have to swallow a gulp down my throat saying this, but this was one of the few things Margaret Thatcher was actually right about - holding populist referenda that seeks to take decisions out of lawmakers hands concerning matters of national governance in the context of the long standing system in the UK of Parliamentary Sovereignty in a representative democracy with no formal, written constitution is a recipe for utter disaster. This goes in parallel with the UK in general having no effective history of national referenda. Sure, there was the 1975 Common Market referendum, and the fig leaf of an AV voting reform referendum in 2011, as well as more local ballots concerning devolution and some local matters, but to sound like a stuck record there is no formal method within the British political constitution for popular referenda through the centuries, let alone decades. Therefore, there is no real need to cover this when educating people in the UK on civics and civil rights, thus most not being aware of the idea concerning voting in a referendum to change something - which the more mendacious elements of the leave campaign were only to happy to exploit with slogans like "project fear".

And you may not be aware of this, but admitting that you have no idea what the future holds, thanks to you contributing to the decision for the UK to leave the EU, can't be seen as anything other than being utterly stupid. Sure, Brexit could be the best thing to happen to the UK since the 1701 Act of Union, but the broad forecasts for the country ahead paint a bleak picture - we have one of the more prominent leave campaigners admitting that it could take the UK 50 years to economically recover from leaving the EU. FIFTY F**KING YEARS! So if you're "tired of experts" and want to risk not only the economic future of not only the UK, but the actual UK itself, by voting to go on a crap shoot, then quite honestly you should not be surprised that some people might call you stupid.

11pm tonight will not mark "Brexit getting done" - indeed there is still some way to go on that. What it will mark is the UK's - or at least England's - chickens finally coming home to roost.

16 hours ago, Kaz Hayashi said:

He’s basically the head of a company, taking the piss out of a female employee, suggesting she might have some kids she doesn’t know about, based on her sex life.
A sex life that was shared on the internet in graphic detail without her consent and caused her to have some wellbeing issues. 

That’s why it’s not the same as a dad joke. He’s not her dad, he’s her boss, and it was insensitive and unprofessional. He’s an idiot for saying it.

Ah, I wasn't really aware of this. If that's the case, then Mr. Levesque is at best an absent minded dufus whom should at least have apologised after realising what he said, otherwise he's just a complete cock that wouldn't come out of the same quip concerning the mother of his own children.

OK, I seem to be out of the loop here. Having watched that clip of Triple H on the previous page, what exactly did he say that appeared to either make him be a dick or be offensive? The joke he seemed to make about Paige appears to me to fall into the category of "awful dad jokes" like quiping how your mum ran away before you were born (logical fallacy, ovbs), so is there something I have missed?

Not only allegations of bullying & racism, but there's leaked audio that is claimed to be Tessa Blanchard doing a number two in a bathroom that she recorded, paid for by a fan with a 💩 fetish.

I would normally link to a tweet & the audio file in question but I'm not sure if that would be appropriate here - if you want to, search for "Tessa Blanchard audio" on Twitter for a link to the alleged sound dump, which is disturbingly almost six minutes long.

4 hours ago, Snitsky's back acne said:

Yeah their main event us the guy accused of domestic abuse v the woman accused of spitting on a black woman and calling her the 'n-word'.

God, who do I route for!?

I'd say that there's probably a few PPVs from the 80's & 90's (and maybe even later) where the main event featured an alleged domestic abuser up against a bullying foul racist. But yeah, it's not a good lock for Impact.