Raw rating lowest since July 2012

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by DAMN iNATOR Yeah, with all the posts you've made since your ill-fated return to the boards, you're in no position to call anyone else out as a "bottom feeder", dude.

Have I presented myself as an insider, or someone with inside info?

I like the product, which makes me a villain here in bizzaro world

[BigCrippyZ]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Have I presented myself as an insider, or someone with inside info?

No. That's not the point.

The point is anytime anyone with even a modicum of credibility comes out with info that may be potentially damaging to the company or your opinions, you claim the person has no credibility or are bottom feeders, etc.

You claim that because they aren't Vince or HHH or didn't get their info directly from Vince or HHH, these reporters or sources aren't credible. You do this despite the fact that you, 1. usually have no evidence that the reporter's sources were or weren't Vince or HHH, and 2. you don't know who their sources are.

No one's saying that guys like Meltzer are always right or that we take their reporting as 100% or gospel. In fairness though, I'd say Meltzer is probably the most credible and in a VERY small class of "legit" and credible pro wrestling reporters, in terms of length of reporting, accuracy over the years, etc.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem like the kind of client that would at trial, yell and argue over top of the expert witness testifying against you about their lack credibility or knowledge. All the while your lawyer keeps telling you to shut up and that he'll handle it.

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by BigCrippyZ No. That's not the point. The point is anytime anyone with even a modicum of credibility comes out with info that may be potentially damaging to the company or your opinions, you claim the person has no credibility or are bottom feeders, etc. You claim that because they aren't Vince or HHH or didn't get their info directly from Vince or HHH, these reporters or sources aren't credible. You do this despite the fact that you, 1. usually have no evidence that the reporter's sources were or weren't Vince or HHH, and 2. you don't know who their sources are. No one's saying that guys like Meltzer are always right or that we take their reporting as 100% or gospel. In fairness though, I'd say Meltzer is probably the most credible and in a VERY small class of "legit" and credible pro wrestling reporters, in terms of length of reporting, accuracy over the years, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem like the kind of client that would at trial, yell and argue over top of the expert witness testifying against you about their lack credibility or knowledge. All the while your lawyer keeps telling you to shut up and that he'll handle it.

I just dont accept info that is fifth hand, when the people who make the decisions could be reached out to, or at least have conducted interviews where they address a lot of the criticisms about the product. To me they are all the same. They write BS stories that they pass off as legit news. I have never said anything bad about him writing about the history of the business.

I'm actually really calm, and nothing like what you claim (I'm not sure who you feel is the "expert" in this scenario). If you read my posts, I rarely use foul language when addressing people. I enjoy reading other people's opinions, I just dont happen to agree that the product sucks right now. This whole thread is about ratings, and Ive just pointed out that TV is changing, and yes, RAW is down in ratings, but so are a lot of shows, most shows in fact. And at the end of the day, the show is still among the most watched things in its timeslot (usually top 2 or 3), and from an advertising perspective, things have never been better. Those things seem to get ignored by everyone who isnt me, because the people who are frequent posters on here, dont feel the product is catering to their whims. I look like the ugly girl at the dance because I'm the guy who actually enjoys what I'm watching.