Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane Knight
(Post 2131481)
They're not doing it all throughout DX's bit, which is what you said. You can change the argument to "They're changing CM Punk's name louder than anything else," but it doesn't change the fact that what you previously said was, well...Wrong.
|
I didn't say "all throughout" DX's bit. I said "throughout" DX's bit. Which they did. DX had come out to a great entrance pop, and then they instigated the pointing at the crowds, and getting each section to cheer (DX were leading this, so this is still their shtick featuring Matt Hardy, Jeff Hardy and CM Punk). Then Triple H got everyone to cheer at once, and he held the mic and the fans chanted for CM Punk. I still don't know what you're trying to argue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane Knight
(Post 2131481)
Now, you can say they chanted Punk's name, but of course, that was after DX got practically every body on their feet and cheering simply by pointing. DX had the crowd in the palm of their hands, and that was incredibly epic. Now, I've already explained this to you, so you have no reason to continue making the claim to the contrary, beyond the need to lie.
|
Whoa! You mean KK has spoken?!?!
1) I don't usually read your explanations, so please don't act like you've been talking to me directly. You haven't been.
2) That is exactly my fucking point! DX were doing their face shtick (which I never said bombed), and the fans still chose to chant "CM Punk" over "DX," "Triple H" or "HBK." DX instigated it (it was "their" thing, but Matt, Jeff and Punk were also getting the exact same reaction from the fans), and then the fans chose to chant for Punk over them. You can argue that DX got the bigger entrance pop (which they did), but after everything built, the fans seemed more interested in CM Punk.
The chant is there and audible. Because you choose not to count it does not make me a liar. Sorry I am not going to bow to the world according to fat shit.
At the time, I found it mildly humourous that the new guy from ECW was getting his name chanted louder than anyone else's in the match. Now I just find it fucking annoying that dickheads like you can't drop it. And yes, it is your side that won't drop it. No one comes up with a post in every Punk thread saying "PUNK OUT-POPPED DX" in legitimate support of him. We have all accepted that it did happen, and that it was one night only in a town that was familiar with Punk. Now shut the fuck up and stop twisting things to fit your scenario. "THEY WERE PIPED IN!!!!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane Knight
(Post 2131481)
Which is not what you said, so now you're changing the story again. I'm loooooving your honesty here, Noid. :y:
|
"So everything in comedy needs to be completely new?"
This was a question. You could have taken it literally, or you could look at the subtext. Your point was that Santino's comedy is old. My question was asking whether it needed to be new.
"There is no room in comedy for simple good timing? There is no room in comedy for something so terrible being done so well? There is no room in comedy for natural talent being showcased as natural talent?"
I asked if timing can make a bad joke good. It can. I asked if there is such a thing as natural comedic talent. There is. I asked if it is occasionally appropriate to exploit this talent in a way that doesn't necessarily go through the most original of filters, so the cream can rise to the top. It sometimes is. The part about showcasing talent is reintroduced as part of my second post.
"Admit that Santino is not your cup of tea if you don't get him. That is fine. Stop trying to censor a genre that is much more flexible, larger and total than you are giving it credit for, though."
That completes what I reiterated in my second post. You don't get Santino. You think he is meant to be funny because he mispronounces words, and that is your uneducated matter to deal with. I don't give a shit enough about you to teach you. Santino's act has not been "done to death," however. Nothing in this world can be exploited to the point where it is no longer funny. Not when it's delivered and presented with proper comedic skill. That is what Santino Marella is doing with his foreign goof character.
OK, you didn't say "completely" new. Literally, I went to an extreme that you didn't. Now you know what it's like to be on the end of most of your arguments. As I said, though, you're the one who chose to take it in the most linear fashion. You could have replied with "completely new is not an extreme I was referring to," and then explained that you just feel it should be new. Then I would still argue the same points to you.
What you are doing now, is what is referred to as a "straw-man" (this may or may not be the same "Strawman" you refer to). Something aimed by you at someone's argument which attempts to attack a single area of entire argument, blow it up to irrelevant proportions, and deflect it, making it appear like you've won said argument, when you have really just been evading the point.
Get out of the bundles and start firing something other than blanks. In case you are unable to understand metaphors, that means actually stay on topic, don't accuse me of something I did not do because you've got no meat on your argument (that means nothing substantial), and if you realise you have nothing (I'm sure you're honestly stupid enough to believe that you always have something, even when you only have a clogged artery), don't make up something.
