Hive

Interesting stuff, I had no idea. Those sneaky bastards.

No I haven't read any novels, nor have I seen the Enterprise show... so I'm just a sub-geek compared to you.

Have you watched every single episode of TNG, DS9 and VOY like geeky me? ~8 seasons of ~22 episodes of ~45 min each times 3... only to have JJ Abrams come tell me "lolz none of that ever happened, that entire universe with all those beloved characters you have grown fond of are hereby whiped from existance!!!!"...

I waited untill I actually saw the movie before I complained about it. Terrible, terrible decision to retcon away nearly 50 years of Star Trek history... and I doubt I'll be watching any new movies in this franchise. But that's OT...

Samoa Joe last, The Pope second last, AJ Styles third last... I'm beginning to suspect TNA of purposely trying their best to prevent me from watching their show.

Huh. I was certain that there were a comic thread already... Anyway, Colbert's response to the black/hispanic Spidey thing is hilarious: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/393822/august-03-2011/multiracial-spider-man?xrs=playershare_twitter Does anyone really care about the Ultimate universe, though? And are the people complaining actually complaining about the ethnicity of this new Spidey, or over the fact that they killed off and replaced beloved Peter Parker? There's a huge difference.

Good point. Even the more reason to have The Rock win at WM and have Cena win a rematch at SummerSlam (which I could definately see them doing). But yeah as others have pointed out, it *is* a bit early to speculate... many things can change.

Because having the biggest *active* wrestling star in the world, the promotion's flagship and moneymaker, beat cleanly by a retired wrestler and current actor who hasn't wrestled for what, 5 years, and have no interest in going back to WWE full-time, is a bad business decision...? The Rock needs to pass the torch, just like Hogan did to him. And I repeat: this said by someone who on a personal level hates the Cena character and wants to see The Rock kick the crap out of him.

I completely agree. Have someone else cost Cena the match at Wrestlemania, then have that person feud with Cena untill SommerSlam, at which point Cena will finally go over Rock. I love Rock, I think he's the greatest entertainer ever to set foot in wrestling (though he's not much better than Cena in the ring, but that's a different story). On the other hand, I dislike Cena's character with a vengeance. But having said that, having Cena eventually go over The Rock is the only right thing to do for WWE.

Some months ago, his mom talked about him probably going into MMA.

Maybe it turns out to be Johnny Ace?

It's semi-old by now, but I hadn't seen it before. Pretty funny. David Arquette vs. Chris Jericho:

Ah, so you're the one guy who actually liked that match.

Heh yeah. Though why they haven't thrown him into the Christian/Orton feud as they at one point teased is beyond me.

Oh yeah, that's right. Haha. I like Sheamus. He's got a different look from the rest, good signature moves, a cool accent and a fairly menacing look. I just don't think WWE has been booking him all that well ever since his first title reign.

You know... I honestly cannot remember right now how the discussion started. I agree with you, you shouldn't have done that. But I forgive you. No worries. Please do.

I ask you for the fourth time now to show you are better than what you accuse me of being, and present a post in which I present stories of HBK as 100 % facts - like you claim I did.

When did I do that in my last post exactly? And again... you claim that I presented those rumors of HBK as facts. So I ask you for the third time without response: show me when. Because I'm sure you're not one to put words in other people's mouths yourself, are you? Fair enough then, I misunderstood.

No. By calling it "fantasy", you are implying that it's all just stuff we are imagining in our heads. It's quite frankly pretty provocative. It's not fantasy, it's based on comments made by HBK's peers. They may not all be true, I don't know - but when several people close to HBK allude to the same things, I find it perfectly fair to discuss. And I ask you: when did I ever present it as a sure fact? When have Undertaker directly buried anyone? Have you even seen the interview in question? He doesn't bury HBK and actually speaks very little of it. I can't help but wonder how many people would have argued against me had it been Hogan or Vince Russo I spoke ill of...

Are you guys even reading what I'm posting? Just yesterday, I heard Triple H saying that HBK has indeed improved, but still from time to time show off his old self. This from one of HBK's closest friends. I can find the link, if anyone is interested. It's on the tube. But oh wait, I forgot that noone in the wrestling business saying anything at all can be trusted... my bad... And I saw with my own eyes what he did in the match against Hogan and heard others talk about a promo he did afterwards. That's not "backstage stuff from the 90's". Some people think what he did was justified, but he still did it. If he had really grown into a better man, why not take this chance to show Hogan - and the world - that he was a bigger man than Hogan? Yeah but in spite of shooting on guys like Cena, he didn't mess up their match. And Punk was, as already mentioned by Fantabulous, doing this as part of an ongoing storyline. And unless I recall incorrectly, he only took shots at people involved with WWE. Not people who had already left the company. Oh come on...! We get this from his friends and respected locker room leaders, how can you just dimiss it all? Ooooh. So *this* piece of information we can suddenly trust, because that one is *positive* when talking about HBK. This is unreal.

This: You say that the stuff we discuss from behind the scenes is fantasy, as if it were a universal fact. When did I repeat it as being the universal truth? And you talk about ME mistreating YOUR words... I'm still looking for reasonable arguments why what Undertaker said should *not* be trusted, btw.

What did I morph? Did you not jump in and claimed that all stories discussed about HBK are nothing but "fantasy"? That was a pretty arrogant claim which you really have no basis for saying. How can you be so sure that HBK did not do these things? I never said I was 100 % sure he did, I clearly stated that I had *heard* that he *reportedly* did those things. I cannot be sure that it's true, but you can't be sure that it's fantasy either. You accuse me of presenting the stories as sure facts while you at the same time feel capable of dismissing them as sure fantasy. How can you be in a position to do so? I never claimed that all stories we hear are true. But I have heard enough HBK stories to believe that there are at least some merit in them and that he probably is a jerk. You can choose to believe that he's the second coming of christ instead if you like (in fact, judging from the way people defend him around here, it seems that some people do). I strongly disagree. Such a story is proof that you cannot believe *everything* they say, but at the same time it does not mean you cannot believe *anything* they say. Byt that logic, you cannot EVER believe in newspapers, tv, politicians, etc. They all report false information, either by accident or on purpose, from time to time.

Whatever.

So your solution is to never believe anything people say, ever? Please tell me you see a difference between an outlandish claim as the sasquatch one and saying someone, who has a bad repetoire in the first place, refused to lose a wrestling match. Then why are you so determined to rule these backstage stories as fantasy lies? Don't you think there's a fair chance that at least some of the stories hold merit? Uhm yeah but the video highlights from the Hogan match pretty much speaks for themselves. It depends on the claims made. Let me ask you: why would a guy like The Undertaker lie about the incident? Would he even become the kind of locker room leader he is if he was prone to telling lies? And stating that they are all naturally fantasy lies is better than stating they are fact? Besides, I don't think anyone stated those things as facts. I'm pretty sure I myself merely mentioned that I had read multiple reports and that I see no reason not to believe them, given HBK's reputation and the fairly trustworthy people behind the statements (like Undertaker). Is there a chance that the story about HBK refusing to job to Austin is false? Sure, I guess. Is there a chance that the story about HBK being mad about jobbing to Hogan is false and him just happening to act like a spoiled brat in the ring being him having an off day? Well... maybe. But I refuse to believe that ALL stories about HBK being a jerk are 100 % fantasy. Heck, I watched an interview with his good pal Triple H yesterday in which he himself said that while HBK had definately improved after being "born again", but that he still showed his old self every now and then - and also that before HBK became "born again", Triple H hadn't talked to him for 2-3 years because he got fed up with him. And this from one of his closest friends in the business.

Is this the "fast" count in the Sting match? If so, I definately agree that Hogan was a major ass, if the rumor about him having the ref do a regular count instead of the agreed fast count is correct. And I have no reason to believe it isn't, since iirc both Bischoff and Hogan pretty much confirmed them doing it on purpose. But he didn't take any liberties with Sting in the ring, he didn't oversell, he didn't phone the match in... he screwed Sting, which I (with Sting being my favourite all-time wrestler) definately is not okay with. But there's still a difference between burying other workers through backstage stuff and ruining a match for the fans (the fake fast count does fall into the latter category imo). Though I have to say, Sting being insanely out of shape and deciding to stay prone after the "fast count" didn't exactly help the match in question either. And I say this as a major fan of Sting. But again... and I don't get why I have to repeat this: Hogan being a jerk towards the fans does not justify HBK being a jerk towards the fans as well. It's amazing how so many people think it's great when HBK does it just because it's Hogan. What if he had oversold like that against, say, CM Punk? How many people would then defend HBK?