TheVileOne Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 25 minutes ago, The Natural said: All I could glean from this: * Contract issues * Heat on Sasha Banks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarrie Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 Fun fact: "moot" means, or at least originally meant, "debatable" or "up for debate", not "beside the point" or "irrelevant". The misuse has become common enough that it probably needs to be considered the standard definition now, but you do run the risk of annoying pedants if you use it in the sense used in that skit. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 Cody Rhodes gets through them. Third video I've posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 After the story first broke, my assumption was that, given the nature of the match, one of them was booked to go over the other, possibly to start a DISSENSION~! angle. So, good to see that confirmed. Totally understand why they would balk at that, considering how they were (reportedly) sold on this tag title run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyld Samurai Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 I do think it's rather laughable that Naomi and Sasha would be voicing concerns over unsafe workers when they would have had the least amount of experience of that advertised 6. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For Great Justice Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 I’m generally a big fan of “that doesn’t work for me, brother” because, you know, independent contractor. This one seems like a bad deal all the way around. On one hand, not cool to do this day of show when you’ve been advertised to the fans. On the other, it isn’t the talents’ fault that they only knew the creative in question the day of the show. In a sane world, talent has a general idea of the creative beforehand and hashes it out then. But in a world where creative on the operational treadmill just trying to get to the next show, it’s impossible to Hogan a scenario and not screw that night’s paying fans in the process. Lose/lose. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SturmCRF Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 Also, assuming most of what's been reported is roughly true, good on them for calling bullshit on a setup where talent are encouraged to discuss creative issues with Vince, only for him to feign agreement so that his underlings can play the bad cop and insist people go with the garbage they'd been told to perform in the first place. Get them on the rescue boat to AEW as soon as possible. It's only a slight exaggeration to say that the main reason they don't have multiple women's matches on Dynamite and a second hour of Rampage is that they don't have Sasha Banks yet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For Great Justice Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 8 minutes ago, AxB said: Who are these people that praised Ali and Pac but are hating on Sasha and Naomi? I must be missing someting. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 In the Internet Wrestling Community, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 1 hour ago, tbarrie said: Fun fact: "moot" means, or at least originally meant, "debatable" or "up for debate", not "beside the point" or "irrelevant". The misuse has become common enough that it probably needs to be considered the standard definition now, but you do run the risk of annoying pedants if you use it in the sense used in that skit. Oh man, don't teach me that. I've been hung up on "less" vs "fewer" for the longest time already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.H. Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 1 hour ago, tbarrie said: Fun fact: "moot" means, or at least originally meant, "debatable" or "up for debate", not "beside the point" or "irrelevant". The misuse has become common enough that it probably needs to be considered the standard definition now, but you do run the risk of annoying pedants if you use it in the sense used in that skit. The best way to teach the meaning of the word "Moot" comes from the 80s James 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 10 hours ago, EVA said: Considering the source, I would be skeptical of the safety concerns angle. A million percent. It stinks of the "(Name) had attitude problems" thing that always goes around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throat Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 54 minutes ago, J.H. said: The best way to teach the meaning of the word "Moot" comes from the 80s James This is exactly what I think of whenever I see or hear that word. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinit Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 3 hours ago, tbarrie said: Fun fact: "moot" means, or at least originally meant, "debatable" or "up for debate", not "beside the point" or "irrelevant". The misuse has become common enough that it probably needs to be considered the standard definition now, but you do run the risk of annoying pedants if you use it in the sense used in that skit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJ Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 All the bs aside, Sasha and Naomi are two performers that could so use a change of scenery. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shartnado Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Technico Support said: *Moot On an episode of My Name Is Earl, his brother explained that he always thought it was "mute" instead of "moot", since if the point is "mute" there's no point in arguing it, because you won't get a reply anyway! Earl thought it made good enough sense. Oops, I guess I should have written my reply outside of the quote box! Oh, well... Edited May 17, 2022 by Shartnado Technico Support said "*Moot" and that's all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFistsJustFlips Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 2 hours ago, Wyld Samurai said: I do think it's rather laughable that Naomi and Sasha would be voicing concerns over unsafe workers when they would have had the least amount of experience of that advertised 6. What does that have to do with anything? If Becky is big-timing people and roughing them up because she's above getting punished (not saying that's the case, just using it as an example), then the amount of experience someone has is irrelevant to Becky's actions. Let's keep in mind this is WWE's spin. So it shouldn't just be accepted as truth. But if it is the truth, let's hear Sasha & Naomi's reasoning before we just dismiss them as invalid based solely on how long their careers have been vs the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(BP) Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 This is classic catty Vince. “Asuka and Becky, it’s crazy how they took off like that, right? I didn’t want to say anything, but they were talking so much shit about you behind your backs.” 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarheel Moneghetti Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 5 hours ago, TheVileOne said: All I could glean from this: * Contract issues * Heat on Sasha Banks That video is Dave at his Meltzer-iest. 12 minutes of talking in circles, only for him to wrap it up by saying something like “Well, I can’t really comment on the issue because I don’t really know what the issue is, so I can’t comment on it.”. Ugh. I want those twelve minutes back, Dave. Dave did remind me that I forgot to go through my YouTube follows when I purged pro wres from my social media. Thanks, Dave. Sorry I have to drop your channel. This incident feels like a shoot that will be turned into a work when all is said and done. It’ll be interesting to see if Roman feels like getting involved to throw Naomi a lifeline. Sasha could be out of luck, but Sasha went from being a main-eventer to being half of a “creative has nothing for you” tag team with Naomi. It feels like she was on her way out anyway. Kinda agree with the people speculating the “didn’t want to work with someone” thing is a cover story. Contract issues seem plausible. Meltzer speculated (?) Naomi and Sasha didn’t think Nikki and Doughdrop should be in the match and lobbied for them to be replaced. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarrie Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Technico Support said: Oh man, don't teach me that. I've been hung up on "less" vs "fewer" for the longest time already. https://tenor.com/view/yoda-you-must-unlearn-what-you-have-learned-star-wars-empire-strikes-back-jedi-gif-11538657 Seriously though. I think my usage dictionary is at the office, so I can't check, but I'm pretty sure the idea that "less" and "fewer" are mutually exclusive is one of those pseudorules that somebody randomly pulled out of their ass at one point and convinced some other people to go along with. "Less" is the opposite of "more"; like "more", it can be used with both mass nouns and count nouns. "Fewer", of course, can only be used with count nouns. Somewhere along the line somebody thought it would be nice if their usage was symmetrical. And yeah, I can sort of see that it would be nice - but it's not so. Oh well. Edited May 17, 2022 by tbarrie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwoy2j Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 5 hours ago, tbarrie said: Fun fact: "moot" means, or at least originally meant, "debatable" or "up for debate", not "beside the point" or "irrelevant". The misuse has become common enough that it probably needs to be considered the standard definition now, but you do run the risk of annoying pedants if you use it in the sense used in that skit. Just wait until "mute point" becomes the standard definition. I've seen it used so much over the past 10-15 years that I wouldn't be surprised to see that being the accepted usage soon. Another thing that I've seen is people saying something like, "I may be bias" instead of "biased". That bugs the hell out of me but it's commonly accepted nowadays. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwoy2j Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 7 minutes ago, tbarrie said: https://tenor.com/view/yoda-you-must-unlearn-what-you-have-learned-star-wars-empire-strikes-back-jedi-gif-11538657 Seriously though. I think my usage dictionary is at the office, so I can't check, but I'm pretty sure the idea that "less" and "fewer" are mutually exclusive is one of those pseudorules that somebody randomly pulled out of their ass at one point and convinced some other people to go along with. "Less" is the opposite of "more"; like "more", it can be used with both mass nouns and count nouns. "Fewer", of course, can only be used with count nouns. Somewhere along the line somebody thought it would be nice if their usage was symmetrical. And yeah, I can sort of see that it would be nice - but it's not so. Oh well. You'd never catch anyone confusing "less" with "fewer" if this guy had won The Battle of Blackwater Bay 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 WWE always has a cover story to pin the blame on the wrestlers. Much like the leaked shit that Keith Lee was difficult to work with, or, well, the same goes for a bunch of released wrestlers. They're always telling Satin or someone not Meltzer that such and such was difficult to work with and it was basically all the wrestler's fault. This press release is the same bullshit. Sorry, but WWE's track record, Vince, Bruce, and Laurinitis in particular, is fucking garbage when it comes to anything they say that is negative about a wrestler. This is the same company that put out a documentary tearing down the Ultimate Warrior only for some years later to bend over kiss his ass and name an award after that piece of shit. It's always the wrestler's fault until they come crawling back. 13 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirSmUgly Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 Weird Al has us pedants covered! I'm reading so much out there about the Sasha/Naomi thing, and while none of it is verified yet, the stuff I'm reading has me ready to hate on Bruce Prichard. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts