NeverYield Posted June 30 Posted June 30 1 hour ago, TheScarlettChad said: I saw some lad outside of a show in like 2022, Pre All In and Pre Clash At The Castle, in Wales, Saying without a shred of irony, "AEW is copying what WE did in 1992." referencing Summerslam 1992. "We?" What the fuck is this we business? Football fans do it too. So cringe. I cringed just reading that. Quote
Members SuperBacon Posted June 30 Members Posted June 30 1 hour ago, TheScarlettChad said: I saw some lad outside of a show in like 2022, Pre All In and Pre Clash At The Castle, in Wales, Saying without a shred of irony, "AEW is copying what WE did in 1992." referencing Summerslam 1992. "We?" What the fuck is this we business? Football fans do it too. So cringe. AEWs gonna copy us, whether they want to or not. Quote
Paid Members Carbomb Posted June 30 Paid Members Posted June 30 1 hour ago, TheScarlettChad said: I saw some lad outside of a show in like 2022, Pre All In and Pre Clash At The Castle, in Wales, Saying without a shred of irony, "AEW is copying what WE did in 1992." referencing Summerslam 1992. "We?" What the fuck is this we business? Football fans do it too. So cringe. Perhaps this was someone so tribal, he pronounces the letters WWE like a word Quote
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted June 30 Paid Members Posted June 30 47 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: AEWs gonna copy us, whether they want to or not. They are BIZARRE Quote
simonworden Posted July 1 Posted July 1 Not the biggest marks but the ones who annoy me the most are the non-wrestler podcasters and alike who seem to have a huge dose of main character syndrome these days (I do appreciate I've said this before). Worst two are Denise Salecedo and Sean Ross Sapp who seem to think they are as important as the product the talk about, and both enjoy mugging off for the camera. The bigger marks are the people paying for their premium services that I expect deliver very, very little in value. Bigger still for me are those that get "invited" to join things like the Wrestlemania set revel which I've heard many (not all) paid absolute top dollar to do. They did the same pre the last Australia PPV as well and "allowed" (meaning sold) certain fans to come along and play interviewer for their socials, which many fucking did and paid enormous amounts for. Quote
Paid Members Supremo Posted July 1 Paid Members Posted July 1 Those reaction streamers might be a good shout for this. This lot. It’s not even the performative nature of it all. It’s not even the way in which I’ve never seen a single clip of any of them ever reacting in an insightful or engaging way. Never mind hot or cold takes, they don’t provide takes at all. It’s always just staring soullessly at the screen, waiting for the next opportunity to do a big, shocked face. The worst is how regularly I’ll see stories about WWE simultaneously using their content themselves, whilst submitting copyright strikes and getting their channels taken down. Seems like the saddest, most abusive relationship imaginable. I’m fully expecting it to eventually be part of the Club WWE thing, where WWE will only allow them to stream their stuff if they sign up. Select the Seth Rollins tier. Give us fifty percent of your earnings. Quote
NeverYield Posted July 1 Posted July 1 6 minutes ago, Supremo said: Those reaction streamers might be a good shout for this. This lot. It’s not even the performative nature of it all. It’s not even the way in which I’ve never seen a single clip of any of them ever reacting in an insightful or engaging way. Never mind hot or cold takes, they don’t provide takes at all. It’s always just staring soullessly at the screen, waiting for the next opportunity to do a big, shocked face. The worst is how regularly I’ll see stories about WWE simultaneously using their content themselves, whilst submitting copyright strikes and getting their channels taken down. Seems like the saddest, most abusive relationship imaginable. I’m fully expecting it to eventually be part of the Club WWE thing, where WWE will only allow them to stream their stuff if they sign up. Select the Seth Rollins tier. Give us fifty percent of your earnings. That chap in the bottom left is an absolute whopper. It's such bullshit I can't even deal with it. I saw a clip of him watching this weeks RAW, it was the Gable and JD McDonagh match, and he was reacting to standard stuff like he was witnessing possibly the most iconic moment in all of sport or TV history and I'm just thinking get a grip of yourself you fucking idiot, how do people even engage with this stuff? To watch these channels as a regular thing you definitely have to have the IQ of a walnut. Quote
Paid Members BomberPat Posted July 1 Paid Members Posted July 1 21 minutes ago, Supremo said: It’s not even the performative nature of it all. It’s not even the way in which I’ve never seen a single clip of any of them ever reacting in an insightful or engaging way. Never mind hot or cold takes, they don’t provide takes at all. It’s always just staring soullessly at the screen, waiting for the next opportunity to do a big, shocked face. On a bad day it genuinely gets me down that I have invested an awful lot of time and money into trying to write insightfully about wrestling, and to uncover niche little stories and bits of wrestling history, or little-discussed personalities that haven't been written about endlessly before, when I could have been more successful and be making more money just by reviewing RAW, doing big shocked faces, and calling things CINEMA. I think people tagging wrestlers and podcasters as if they're mates, or as if it's some kind of validation, are one of the types of fan I dislike the most. From "Cleaner I got this" to people snitch-tagging Jim Cornette at the slightest sign of silliness in wrestling. A few years ago, I booked a comedy match that went insanely viral on Twitter after the video got uploaded - millions of views on Twitter, a few hundred thousand on the full video on YouTube, became properly a thing for a while, with stuff that it kickstarted still going on today. The amount of people who replied to Tweets about it deciding that the joke was something it wasn't and then getting mad at the joke they made up in their head was one thing, and there was plenty of that kind of reaction face streamer at all, just pulling faces in the corner of a video someone else put a lot of effort into producing, and then a steady stream of people tagging Jim Cornette and gleefully telling him how awful and disrespectful and "outlaw mudshow" it was, as if having their own opinion on something didn't count for anything until it was validated by their Podcast Dad. What surprised me, though, was a handful of people tagging Dutch Mantel. Not enough to run to Cornette, you have to run to Diet Cornette too. Quote
Paid Members Lorne Malvo Posted July 1 Paid Members Posted July 1 Youtube reactions are just the worst in general. One popped up on my Facebook the other day of some guy hearing Smells Like Teen Spirit for the first time and doing the Shocked Face because he couldn't possibly believe what he was hearing. He was wearing a Nirvana shirt. And no, it wasn't a parody! Quote
DavidB6937 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 43 minutes ago, Supremo said: Those reaction streamers might be a good shout for this. This lot. It’s not even the performative nature of it all. It’s not even the way in which I’ve never seen a single clip of any of them ever reacting in an insightful or engaging way. Never mind hot or cold takes, they don’t provide takes at all. It’s always just staring soullessly at the screen, waiting for the next opportunity to do a big, shocked face. The worst is how regularly I’ll see stories about WWE simultaneously using their content themselves, whilst submitting copyright strikes and getting their channels taken down. Seems like the saddest, most abusive relationship imaginable. I’m fully expecting it to eventually be part of the Club WWE thing, where WWE will only allow them to stream their stuff if they sign up. Select the Seth Rollins tier. Give us fifty percent of your earnings. The one on the top right pops up on my socials all the time. I probably watched one once and now it thinks I actually like her. She's SO boring. She literally just sits there, says nothing for most of it, then gives a half arsed "reaction" to things. And for what? You're right. They genuinely offer nothing. No opinions. No analysis. Nothing. Just sitting there with a face. Quote
ThePepsiMan Posted July 2 Posted July 2 The meaning of the word "mark" seems to have morphed into a lot of different meanings today. Originally it just meant outsider or fan. That's it. Today it can mean so much. Got a wrestler who is up his own backside - "oh my character wouldn't do this" = a mark (for himself) A wrestler who is gonna do a death match for a hotdog and a handshake in front of 50 people = a mark (an idiot). It is inappropiate to call fans marks now. Aren't we all "marks" of something then? Wanna see the new Spider-Man movie? does that make you a mark? of course not. Quote
Paid Members BomberPat Posted July 2 Paid Members Posted July 2 2 hours ago, ThePepsiMan said: The meaning of the word "mark" seems to have morphed into a lot of different meanings today. Originally it just meant outsider or fan. That's it. It didn't really, though. The word "mark" comes from con artistry. It means the target of a con. An outsider isn't inherently a mark, and nor is a fan. What's changed is the nature of how wrestling relates to its audience, and historically one of the biggest misunderstandings of people looking in from the outside is the assumption that wrestling fans are marks to a con, that they watch wrestling because they think it's real. The reality is, and has been for the better part of a hundred years, that wrestling audiences either knew or strongly suspected that it wasn't on the level and they just didn't care. Especially today, a wrestling audience are co-conspirators, they're playing along, they're not marks. So the question of who the marks are today is who are the people getting suckered, or buying into the con? Is it the wrestlers who refuse to lose or do certain spots because they convince themselves that "if it were real, I'd win"? Is it the fans who believe planted stories in the dirtsheets? Or is it the people spending thousands of dollars for a "pasta making workshop" with unnamed WWE wrestlers, or for a signed steel chair from a match that didn't have steel chairs in it? Quote
TheScarlettChad Posted July 2 Posted July 2 3 hours ago, ThePepsiMan said: The meaning of the word "mark" seems to have morphed into a lot of different meanings today. Originally it just meant outsider or fan. That's it. Today it can mean so much. Got a wrestler who is up his own backside - "oh my character wouldn't do this" = a mark (for himself) A wrestler who is gonna do a death match for a hotdog and a handshake in front of 50 people = a mark (an idiot). It is inappropiate to call fans marks now. Aren't we all "marks" of something then? Wanna see the new Spider-Man movie? does that make you a mark? of course not. Alright Meltzer. Didn't he say Mark is a slur akin to a racial slur? Utter weapon. Quote
Paid Members garynysmon Posted July 2 Paid Members Posted July 2 (edited) What I find funny is fans who start parroting wrestlers about how much they “hate the dirt sheets”. I can understand why a wrestler would hate their existence back in the day, but for a fan to say that?! Mate, if it wasn’t for those I’d still be pondering why the Big Boss Man and El Matador stopped wrestling on WWF Superstars in 1993. Edited July 2 by garynysmon Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.