Quote:
Originally Posted by Anybody Thrilla
You weren't even really disagreeing with my opinion, though. You were disagreeing with a sentiment that was put forward by no one but yourself (comparing Cody to Austin and The Rock) and your basis for that was purely a word I used. Having a different opinion is fine, but arguing for the sake of it is lame. It also appears to be what you do in pretty much every thread you post in.
|
Actually, to some extent I was disagreeing with you, b/c you claimed Cody was "amazing" and I don't think he's earned it yet. And apparently no one got my meaning by using the Austin/Rock analogy. My point there was Cody hasn't reached their level on the mic, and until he does the word "amazing" doesn't apply here. Most ppl here thought I meant he had to be the next Austin or Rock, Clearly every wrestler, superstar, or whatever name you wanna use has a different style. So, I never claimed Cody had to be the next Austin or Rock, but he does have to be more comfortable on the mic and be able to adapt and develop more as a character.
I never argue for the sake of arguing, but if I disagree with something, I will add my thoughts on it. And for the most part, I explain why I agree or disagree with any thread's content. How is that lame? Ppl on wrestling forums too often flame someone that doesn't go along with popular opinion. Just b/c I have my own original thoughts or ideas doesn't mean I wanna argue. It means I wanna discuss the issue and explain my POV and even learn from other opinions or ideas. Unfortunately, as demonstrated here, ppl would rather flame than discuss something. Easy to be dismissive and sarcastic to avoid discussion if you simply don't feel the need to explain your position on a topic.