F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

WWE, TNA, and all U.S./Canada based graps talk
User avatar
ODonnell
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:48 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by ODonnell » Thu Dec 08, 2016 11:28 pm

ErinQuinn wrote:I think I'm going to cancel my subscription after this month because I can't stand listening to one more "Dasha is a robot" rant

...who am i kidding, i'll keep my sub so i can read the observer and listen to DKP...

...but the robot tirades need to be put to rest

I agree with you....but then I saw the Dasha/Joe promo backstage last week when Tye slapped Joe, and I have to say....holy shit she's a robot. She literally doesn't change her face and looks like a robot.

The Bryan/Dave not understanding the crowd was being ironic with the "you deserve it" chant is fucking weird tho

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Bix » Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:37 am

Jeff Hawkins wrote:As a mod on the F4w board...the sheer amounts of reporting, bitching, vendettas we get....we do our best to be fair and discuss a lot of these kinds of things
That is so far from the truth that it's not even funny.

User avatar
rovert
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:45 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by rovert » Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:42 am

Don't be a cuck, Bix.

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Bix » Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:22 am

Joe Lanza wrote:People are going to focus the the reverse racism line and bash dave, but he's shredding Bix in that debate.

It basically went like this:

Bix - "Butch Reed couldn't be NWA champ because of racism"
dave - "Promoters would push anyone who they felt could make them money."
Bix - "But a lot of promoters were racists who saw blacks as interchangable. Watts tried to replace JYD with George Welles & Snowman."
dave - "That's my point"
Bix - "Watts said & did racist things."
dave - "THAT'S MY POINT"
You didn't misunderstand it as much as Dave did,but you still misunderstood it even though you have a better grasp of Twitter than he does. Also, you both missed my own "Oh, screw it, 140 character limits are stupid" clarification:



This is how the discussion actually went, and I pulled up the tweets to make sure I didn't get anything wrong:

Dave: Race had as much to do with Butch Reed not getting the title as it did with Windham/DiBiase/Brody/Keirn not getting the title.
Me: That's oversimplifying racism in wrestling. Even if Butch Reed could talk like Ric Flair, '80s wrestling promoters weren't going to give the NWA Title to a black guy.
Dave: There's no way of knowing that.
Me: Yes, we do, the n-word was "the business term" for black wrestlers at the time.
Dave: Ignores implications of standardized racism, says money conquered all.
Me: But what does it say for wrestling promoters as a whole when the best one for pushing black guys was a racist who saw them as interchangeable to fill a specific role?
Dave: You've got to be kidding me. Reverse racism. Also, they saw everyone as interchangeable.
Me: But there were no promotions that had a "no more than one white wrestler" rule.
Dave: Somehow thinks the conversation is about Butch Reed even though I was talking about a hypothetical different reason of Reed in the first place to make a larger point AND had moved on.
Me: Again, if the "best" promoter for black wrestlers was a racist/bigot, what does that say about everyone else?
Dave: Fixates on me using the word "liberal" (which I cop to being a fairly big mistake) argues Watts' blind attempts at replacing JYD had nothing to do with racism towards black people even though the definition you get from the most popular search service on earth is (emphasis mine) "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."

At this point Dave really starts reading things into my tweets that I didn't put there, and it becomes clear he's putting racism in, primarily, a denial of work and/or service box. That's he doesn't know he's wrong about the boundaries of racism isn't his fault personally, but it distorts the argument. Between that and his Twitter literacy issues, the end result was him saying I accused Watts of denying black wrestlers pushes because of their race, taking "if [Watts, as the promoter who positioned black wrestlers best], at the time, was still a racist, then everyone else sure as hell was racist." as literally as he possible could, and this, where he somehow read my reply to a very specific tweet about Stevie Ray as being about Butch Reed:



The whole thing got distorted by Dave being so on guard as to act like everyone who disagrees with him is trolling (can't really blame him for that, either, given how much trolling he gets) and his issues with deciphering Twitter threading, when someone is doing a multi-part tweet, etc.

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Bix » Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:24 am

rovert wrote:Don't be a cuck, Bix.
But I like Rusev.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by mlev76 » Fri Dec 09, 2016 1:29 pm

Bix wrote:
Joe Lanza wrote:People are going to focus the the reverse racism line and bash dave, but he's shredding Bix in that debate.

It basically went like this:

Bix - "Butch Reed couldn't be NWA champ because of racism"
dave - "Promoters would push anyone who they felt could make them money."
Bix - "But a lot of promoters were racists who saw blacks as interchangable. Watts tried to replace JYD with George Welles & Snowman."
dave - "That's my point"
Bix - "Watts said & did racist things."
dave - "THAT'S MY POINT"
You didn't misunderstand it as much as Dave did,but you still misunderstood it even though you have a better grasp of Twitter than he does. Also, you both missed my own "Oh, screw it, 140 character limits are stupid" clarification:



This is how the discussion actually went, and I pulled up the tweets to make sure I didn't get anything wrong:

Dave: Race had as much to do with Butch Reed not getting the title as it did with Windham/DiBiase/Brody/Keirn not getting the title.
Me: That's oversimplifying racism in wrestling. Even if Butch Reed could talk like Ric Flair, '80s wrestling promoters weren't going to give the NWA Title to a black guy.
Dave: There's no way of knowing that.
Me: Yes, we do, the n-word was "the business term" for black wrestlers at the time.
Dave: Ignores implications of standardized racism, says money conquered all.
Me: But what does it say for wrestling promoters as a whole when the best one for pushing black guys was a racist who saw them as interchangeable to fill a specific role?
Dave: You've got to be kidding me. Reverse racism. Also, they saw everyone as interchangeable.
Me: But there were no promotions that had a "no more than one white wrestler" rule.
Dave: Somehow thinks the conversation is about Butch Reed even though I was talking about a hypothetical different reason of Reed in the first place to make a larger point AND had moved on.
Me: Again, if the "best" promoter for black wrestlers was a racist/bigot, what does that say about everyone else?
Dave: Fixates on me using the word "liberal" (which I cop to being a fairly big mistake) argues Watts' blind attempts at replacing JYD had nothing to do with racism towards black people even though the definition you get from the most popular search service on earth is (emphasis mine) "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."

At this point Dave really starts reading things into my tweets that I didn't put there, and it becomes clear he's putting racism in, primarily, a denial of work and/or service box. That's he doesn't know he's wrong about the boundaries of racism isn't his fault personally, but it distorts the argument. Between that and his Twitter literacy issues, the end result was him saying I accused Watts of denying black wrestlers pushes because of their race, taking "if [Watts, as the promoter who positioned black wrestlers best], at the time, was still a racist, then everyone else sure as hell was racist." as literally as he possible could, and this, where he somehow read my reply to a very specific tweet about Stevie Ray as being about Butch Reed:



The whole thing got distorted by Dave being so on guard as to act like everyone who disagrees with him is trolling (can't really blame him for that, either, given how much trolling he gets) and his issues with deciphering Twitter threading, when someone is doing a multi-part tweet, etc.
To me, you're both right because you're both arguing different points. You are arguing that the institutional racism in wrestling would prohibit any black wrestler from being a world champion, most notably a traveling world champion in the days of the territories. If you consider two of the biggest gimmicks in the territories in the 80s were horribly racist characters portrayed by black men (Kamala and Abdullah the Butcher) and then consider the other stereotypical ethnic and racial stereotypes employed by promoters, there is no way the NWA (and the WWF) would have put the belt on a black wrestler.

On the other hand, Dave is right with regard to Reed and probably most black wrestlers in the 80s because from a purely in ring/on the mic perspective, they didn't fit the criteria needed to be world champion. Now, if we could transport a Rock or a Booker T to the 80s and let them be the 80s equivalent of who they were when they were champion, and they still couldn't come out on top, then I think your point would be correct.

Let's call a spade a spade and acknowledge that Dave, much like out president elect, would do everyone a great service including himself by staying off Twitter. I mean, we as a society would be better off locking that site down and never speaking of it again, but that's whole other issue.

User avatar
Jeff Hawkins
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:28 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Jeff Hawkins » Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:38 pm

Bix wrote:
Jeff Hawkins wrote:As a mod on the F4w board...the sheer amounts of reporting, bitching, vendettas we get....we do our best to be fair and discuss a lot of these kinds of things
That is so far from the truth that it's not even funny.
those of us who are not owners do

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Bix » Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:25 pm

Jeff Hawkins wrote:
Bix wrote:
Jeff Hawkins wrote:As a mod on the F4w board...the sheer amounts of reporting, bitching, vendettas we get....we do our best to be fair and discuss a lot of these kinds of things
That is so far from the truth that it's not even funny.
those of us who are not owners do
I can name at least one who it doesn't apply to and may or may not have a username evoking a current president.

somerandomguy
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 11:39 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by somerandomguy » Sun Dec 11, 2016 6:15 pm

i think bix is right here.

logs out*

User avatar
syxxpakk
Posts: 375
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:07 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by syxxpakk » Sun Dec 11, 2016 7:15 pm

Dave defending racism in the 80s should shock no one. Remember, he defends the rampant use of the word nigger to describe black wrestlers as just how it was.
"If I’m Neville or Aries, I definitely give a shit about the take of TJ “Career Trajectory Vanilla Midget” Perkins regarding my burning desire for advancement and steady income." - supersonic

User avatar
ODonnell
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:48 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by ODonnell » Sun Dec 11, 2016 9:57 pm

syxxpakk wrote:Dave defending racism in the 80s should shock no one. Remember, he defends the rampant use of the word nigger to describe black wrestlers as just how it was.
None of this is accurate

User avatar
syxxpakk
Posts: 375
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:07 am

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by syxxpakk » Sun Dec 11, 2016 10:23 pm

Yep. He's said before that Ric Flair used it but that was just the "term for black wrestlers in the lockerroom," as though that all of a sudden made it OK for Flair to refer to people like that. In the 80s.
"If I’m Neville or Aries, I definitely give a shit about the take of TJ “Career Trajectory Vanilla Midget” Perkins regarding my burning desire for advancement and steady income." - supersonic

User avatar
Goat
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 6:59 pm

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by Goat » Thu Jan 05, 2017 10:10 am

I got a kick out of Meltzer trolling twitter with his Okada vs Omega star rating, but I can see even people normally not bothered by it to be annoyed.

User avatar
MobbVanDam
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:36 pm
Location: MO/TN
Contact:

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by MobbVanDam » Thu Jan 05, 2017 10:31 am

I wish I had so little going on that I was annoyed by someone's wrestling opinions

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Post by mlev76 » Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:35 am

He's certainly entitled to his opinion and I thought it was a five star match. But best match ever? And claiming that immediately the day after? That seems like something he may walk back in the not-so-distant future.

Post Reply