Obviously the part about putting the belt on anyone wasn't directed at me or at anyone, because again, no one said that shyt! That was my point. You start by saying you're "split" because on one hand guys that should've gotten runs never did, but on the other hand you shouldn't put the belt on nobodies. Nobody suggested that so I'm trying to figure out how you feel conflicted on this issue when the entire basis of the alleged internal conflict is a disingenuous strawman argument you invented out of thin air.
Sometimes in a conversation, everything doesn't necessarily have to a be a RESPONSE. Sometimes you can say things totally independent of what someone else is saying. I was discussing the topic as a whole, and the various views I have on the topic. You, in response, came on some huffing and puffing "w-w-w-what's THAT supposed to mean?" shyt... I know nobody suggested it, and I didn't say anyone did.
As I said, I genuinely did not know what you meant by amateur hour since you've been pretty dismissive of the entire story from the start w/ comments like these:
A term like "fake outrage" usually suggests that not only do you not see the big deal of an issue, but that those that do call it out do so from a place of ulterior motive or exaggeration. I wasn't defensive in my last post, I was direct and pointed on purpose, because I don't think it is fake outrage. Nobody's holding candlelight vigils and yes, its just goofy ass pro wrestling, but bottom line is a good man getting food essentially taken off his table over some bullshyt, is a very legitimate problem. The fact that its just the latest offense from a company whose history is built on similar cases of bullshyt, both racial and otherwise, is all the more reason this story SHOULD be getting attention.
I think it's ironic that although I ALSO said in this thread, more than once, that I agree that the suspension was excessive, nobody saw that... but they saw them "see ya in the Raw thread"/"fake outrage" posts and got tight. I said props to Batista on tellin' him to keep it movin' and good for Titus if he decides to... and who had a response to that? I said the black history month joke cause the idea of his suspension being wrong cause it's black history month is silly. I guess I'm supposed to be filled with rage about it, but I'm not. Especially during a week where white people are bein' petty as shyt about the Super Bowl, I've kinda extracted all my online 'anger' makin' them look stupid. But let some nikkas tell it I'm a pseudo white supremacist cause I don't think fukkin' Ahmed Johnson shoulda been champ or whateverthefukk. Can't please everybody.
Now I must've missed the amateur hour jokes but let's be honest here, TSC jokes and memes have been the best and, for many, only reason to even keep following the WWE for a long time now. So referring to those jokes with distain while finding the actual suspension story HILARIOUS, is an odd take indeed.
Finally, if we're saying the same things as you say, and you acknowledge the history and continuation of bullshyt in pro wrestling, you should understand why so many people remain wrestling fans while also remaining critical of many aspects of it.
The amateur hour shyt was, like most of the conversation today, way overblown. Was about one person's corny posts and nothing to do with the Coli as a whole or the suspension. And I don't find the suspension story hilarious, but I do find the endless vitriol about how evil the company is while still contributing to their weekly ratings RIOTOUS. And I've said that, and made it clear I was jokin', but I didn't expect nikkas to get all deep about it. But I'm not here to placate anybody's feelings in of all places, a wrestling board.