Social WR Lounge v247: I ain't no sexy boy. I don't dance, son.

[Gregolian]

Maybe you're right in retrospect (and as a far more avid follower), I just recall the crowds not having that shit at all. I was a preteen though the Attitude era so a lot of my actual memories are vague, it's incredible and a testament to the product that I even remember what I do with such fondness. When did The Rock pull about even with him in terms of popularity, was it by WM17 or earlier than that? I don't even recall when Rock went full bore babyface, and it feels like he switched back and forth more than once between 1997-2001.

I think Rock's true babyface run I remember the most was sadly when him and Jericho were tearing down Steph/Shane along with Booker T and Rhyno during the Invasion storyline.

Rock's first face turn was in 1999 though when he lost the belt to SCSA :


I think he started pulling even with him around that same time in terms of popularity. SCSA, The Rock, and Mick Foley with Kurt Angle right behind them are what made the Attitude Era what it was.


"I'm here tonight, to tell you... that I think the McMahon Helmsley era... kind of sucks"

 

[My Spot]

Maybe you're right in retrospect (and as a far more avid follower), I just recall the crowds not having that shit at all. I was a preteen though the Attitude era so a lot of my actual memories are vague, it's incredible and a testament to the product that I even remember what I do with such fondness. When did The Rock pull about even with him in terms of popularity, was it by WM17 or earlier than that? I don't recall when Rock went full bore babyface, and it feels like he switched back and forth more than once between 1997-2001.

Well it didn’t help that WM17 was in Austin’s home state. The Rock had definitely passed him up though.

 

[My Spot]

I think Rock's true babyface run I remember the most was sadly when him and Jericho were tearing down Steph/Shane along with Booker T and Rhyno during the Invasion storyline.

Rock's first face turn was in 1999 though when he lost the belt to SCSA :


I think he started pulling even with him around that same time in terms of popularity. SCSA, The Rock, and Mick Foley with Kurt Angle right behind them are what made the Attitude Era what it was.


"I'm here tonight, to tell you... that I think the McMahon Helmsley era... kind of sucks"

Austin started getting stale in the summer of 99. He stopped feuding with Vince in July. It’s a good thing for his career that he took a year off.

 

[Gregolian]

Austin started getting stale in the summer of 99. He stopped feuding with Vince in July. It’s a good thing for his career that he took a year off.

He took his ball and went home.



The entire locker room coming out for Foley when he won was awesome.

 

[Trotsky]

If the CRA (which limits the free speech of all business owners for the public good) is liberal, then it's not illiberal to limit twitter's free speech (which comes at the expense of everyone else's).

 

[StoneColdSteveAustin]

Austin started getting stale in the summer of 99. He stopped feuding with Vince in July. It’s a good thing for his career that he took a year off.

He took time off because of injuries tho.

 

[My Spot]

The entire locker room coming out for Foley when he won was awesome.

I missed this when it happened live since my dad and I were at the Fingerpoke of Doom Nitro.

 

[My Spot]

He took time off because of injuries tho.

I know, but it was best for his career too. His reactions were getting a lot quieter during the HHH feud.

 

[Gregolian]

I missed this when it happened live since my dad and I were at the Fingerpoke of Doom Nitro.

You poor bastard.

The only shows I saw live was WM19 and the Raw the day after live.

 

[My Spot]

You poor bastard.

The only shows I saw live was WM19 and the Raw the day after live.

Nitro March 97 (final show in the Omni)
Nitro January 98 (saw Vincent behind the giant curtain in the Georgia Dome and he gave me a too sweet)
Nitro July 98 (Goldberg beating Hogan)
Nitro January 99
Raw Oct 99 (Rock vs Bulldog with Foley as the ref where the loser had to eat dog shit; first WWF show in Atlanta since 92)
Raw Feb 2000
Raw July 2000

 

[Trotsky]

@Gregolian @HockeyBjj @LazaRRus

NFL.com finally released their NFL Draft prospect database where they aggregate all their analyst rankings into a prospect score.

Things of note:

• Trevor Lawrence is by far the highest rated prospect of any position
• Devonta Smith (#3 overall, #1 WR) is rated higher than Ja'Marr Chase (#4 overall, #2 WR)
• Penei Sewell is rated as the #10 prospect, below Rashawn Slater
• Rashod Bateman is ranked as the #9 WR, below Tylan Wallace, Nico Collins, and Elijah Moore
• Trey Lance just barely edges out Justin Fields; all of Wilson/Lance/Fields are really close to each other but far down from Lawrence
• Asante Samuel is the #11 CB, and Greg Newsome is the #3

 

[StoneColdSteveAustin]

I know, but it was best for his career too. His reactions were getting a lot quieter during the HHH feud.

Maybe because the storyline wasn’t as good and possibly because it involved HHH.

Austin’s best years were 98-99.

 

[My Spot]

Maybe because the storyline wasn’t as good and possibly because it involved HHH.

Austin’s best years were 98-99.

This is late summer/early fall 99. He was definitely getting stale and it just wasn't the same without Vince. He had to leave the WWF "forever" in July but of course was back a few weeks later and Austin actually helped him win the WWF title.

 

[Gregolian]

That be a broken hip I would wager.

That liquid I first thought was blood... but looking at it again, pretty sure it's black paint.

 

[Jack V Savage]

So the key part is that you don't care about the issue, and not that you've dismissed the concerns? Ok.

The key part is you claimed that I usually scoff at blah blah blah, when I don't even usually get in those threads because it's an issue I don't care about (that is completely unrelated to this one, and that you only brought up as a deflection).

My position has nothing to do with Trump. It's that simple.

And lol at how you word that last sentence. Kinda smarmy, but typical.

Your position that Twitter should be shut down because they pointed out that the president was saying something untrue? I don't see you arguing that we need to shut down criticism of Biden to protect freedom of speech. Odd how that works.

That quote doesn't back up your claim. It does however show me exploring what's philosophically and legally consistent.

??? I know that you're spinning it as we need to limit some people's freedom of speech for the greater good, but you are, in fact, arguing that we need to limit some people's freedom of speech.

People who use the term "whataboutism" as some kind of attack pretty much do so to deflect from their own hypocrisy. But since you bring it up, isn't that what your initial post is doing?

"People who criticize whataboutism are hypocrites, but your whataboutism is bad." Good lord. How do you type that kind of thing and still feel good about yourself? I don't think it's generally a good idea to defend bad behavior by citing other behavior that you think is bad because I'm a man and not a little boy. Further, your deflection wasn't even related to the topic, while I'm pointing out inconsistency in people like you who claim to support freedom of speech *as a principle* but clearly only support it for practical reasons and only when it is convenient from a partisan perspective.

Saying "what about this" as an attempt to show inconsistency in the application of free speech on the part of "right wingers"? And to further that, what are your thoughts on Citizen's United and is it inconsistent to decry that ruling while citing the 1st Amendment on corporate speech here?

No, to the first question. "You're inconsistent when you claim to support the principle of free speech, but only when doing so is convenient" is what I said, and your response was, "you're anti-gun or some shit." It's the "look over there!" defense. I have no thoughts on CU specifically. I generally support allowing people to make political contributions without limitations (and frequently take heat from leftists on the issue).

That aside, there was none of that in my criticism of the actions of the government officials. Advocating they be removed from office is pretty clear and the harshest remedy possible.

You sandwiched your criticism between two irrelevant points--one a bit of whataboutism and the other about how tax breaks are not owed (OK. So?).

The comment on tax breaks is relevant and you should be embarrassed for saying it isn't. If one wants to think circumspectly on this matter, and not just bleat out a knee-jerk position, then one needs to examine the fact that there's a difference between being denied a right and not receiving special privilege. Whether that ultimately sways one's view on the matter is immaterial.

I proudly believe and will say that it's an irrelevant distraction that you bring up only to soften the criticism. The gov't should not be punishing people for political speech. Whatever one thinks about the merits of any particular bit of legislation, that's not how it should be used.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

I thought they were just the fringe?

The Jimmy Dore types?

I think they're pretty fringe as far as numbers go. But they're pretty outspoken and have an outsize presence in the media.

 

[Limbo Pete]

The key part is you claimed that I usually scoff at blah blah blah, when I don't even usually get in those threads because it's an issue I don't care about (that is completely unrelated to this one, and that you only brought up as a deflection).



Your position that Twitter should be shut down because they pointed out that the president was saying something untrue? I don't see you arguing that we need to shut down criticism of Biden to protect freedom of speech. Odd how that works.



??? I know that you're spinning it as we need to limit some people's freedom of speech for the greater good, but you are, in fact, arguing that we need to limit some people's freedom of speech.



"People who criticize whataboutism are hypocrites, but your whataboutism is bad." Good lord. How do you type that kind of thing and still feel good about yourself? I don't think it's generally a good idea to defend bad behavior by citing other behavior that you think is bad because I'm a man and not a little boy. Further, your deflection wasn't even related to the topic, while I'm pointing out inconsistency in people like you who claim to support freedom of speech *as a principle* but clearly only support it for practical reasons and only when it is convenient from a partisan perspective.



No, to the first question. "You're inconsistent when you claim to support the principle of free speech, but only when doing so is convenient" is what I said, and your response was, "you're anti-gun or some shit." It's the "look over there!" defense. I have no thoughts on CU specifically. I generally support allowing people to make political contributions without limitations (and frequently take heat from leftists on the issue).



You sandwiched your criticism between two irrelevant points--one a bit of whataboutism and the other about how tax breaks are not owed (OK. So?).



I proudly believe and will say that it's an irrelevant distraction that you bring up only to soften the criticism. The gov't should not be punishing people for political speech. Whatever one thinks about the merits of any particular bit of legislation, that's not how it should be used.

 

[Gregolian]

I want to play Skyrim again now.

Fuck

 

[irish_thug]

You poor bastard.

The only shows I saw live was WM19 and the Raw the day after live.

I was at wm 6 and X8. Summerslam 2004, unforgiven 2006, a few tv tapings and house shows. The independent shows were by far my favorite though

 

[Gregolian]

I was at wm 6 and X8. Summerslam 2004, unforgiven 2006, a few tv tapings and house shows. The independent shows were by far my favorite though

I wish I could see an NJPW show someday.