We Should Talk About The Title Scene

Completely agreed for 24/7 title. For Entropy, isn't the No 1 contender anyone who champion names? It kinda works, it's just chosen by champion rather than a GM or Owner or board of executives, etc.

Friction hardcore title is being defended also, so thats only 2 belts without a current thing.


So far, all ive seen in this thread is people complaining about not getting a belt, and demanding the system be changed to suit them somehow, despite admitting to not putting effort into getting something for themselves because they are shy.

Thing is, you cant force someone to give you a belt. You cant say, "well ive been here two years, wheres my belt?" Its already been pointed out that a lot of said people dont bother trying to communicate that they want a title shot in the first place, as many people here have already stated.

So what change or regulation do you, Winner, think is best? Cause ive yet to see any real ideas, or at least any good ones, be presented.

Old_Man_Tai wrote:Friction hardcore title is being defended also, so thats only 2 belts without a current thing.

Verdict was refering to the scrolling thing that has all the champions and No 1 contenders. Ace is clearly still No 1 (meme intended) contender for the title. The status of what's going to happen to Friction World, Tension Hentai and 24/7 is currently unknown.

Well this sure got huge in a hurry, I'd have replied to this earlier. But work and time zones got in the way, anyway I'm just gonna say a couple of things.

Way back when I had the Tension tag titles I wanted to help make tag teaming a relevant thing over in Tension, looking back I feel like I helped achieve it given the influx of it since then.

Plus I got a chance to do a good back and forth with Maxy. Going with what Winner3 said on the first page with it's not what you know but who you know I think I was a bit liable to that, given that story had been the main thing with the belts. Though I do feel that I still managed to help complete the aforementioned goal, after all hindsight's 20-20.

Edit: I didn't really think of any rules with regards to the belts, I pretty much winged it. I guess some form of rules would be nice for the sake of holders that are too inactive but think the holders are doing a fair enough job so far.

As pointed out. Two of those belts inly just changed hands.

Should title holders just make all tgeir plans in the open? Should they not be allowed to make plans for stories they want, and be forced to work with certain people because they want to be catered too?

The current system isnt perfect, but many people feel it works, and forcing them to be unhappy to make yourself happy isnt the right way to go.

The best way to get a shot is still to put whatever shyness or fear of rejection bullshit you havebon the backburner, accept you might not get what you want, and ask for something. Communicate. No, its not a written rule, but its so damn simple.

One person took me up on my offer last night and pmed me. Im working out ideas with him right now.

Communication is still the best method. Trying to change the system to force someone to work with you is nothing but a quick way to get resented.

No winters I think your points were made clear but you can't expect the title holders to lose their freedom to pick and choose because if accessibility is the problem we could just go with a raffle or bracket system though those come with their own inherit flaws.

Old_Man_Tai wrote:Should title holders just make all tgeir plans in the open? Should they not be allowed to make plans for stories they want, and be forced to work with certain people because they want to be catered too?

Dude, are you serious right now? Have you READ my post? Have you read Verdict's post for that matter? They were confused over the No 1 contenders for the title, and I just explained what was happening with the belts. That's EXACTLY what I said, that people who hold titles with no clear contenders at the moment are working stuff out. And, I apologize if you weren't implying this, but nowhere did I say that should be the case.

Old_Man_Tai wrote:So far, all ive seen in this thread is people complaining about not getting a belt, and demanding the system be changed to suit them somehow, despite admitting to not putting effort into getting something for themselves because they are shy.

ZERO people in this thread have complained about not getting a belt. ZERO people have DEMANDED change.

The entire point of this thread right up until your page long tirade last night was just to discuss and get a consensus on what people thought about the titles; If they disliked it, what they would change. Honestly, is there any wonder only one has replied with your apparent vendetta against anyone simply suggesting change.


As the majority were saying right up until I left this last night, all that really needs to change is communication.

BOTH title holders and people seeking a belt need to come to one another.

And going through individual titles right now and saying "No, it's good, look at it, your wrong altogether" isn't helping anyone involved. Enough people obviously feel strongly enough to vote that they dislike the system. General efforts should be made to show that it either isn't broken, or that somethings could be changed.

Old_Man_Tai wrote:The current system isnt perfect, but many people feel it works, and forcing them to be unhappy to make yourself happy isnt the right way to go.

According to the results of the poll, more people actually dislike the current system than are in favor. Things are nearly split with the "I don't care" option. But I could also easily refute this point by using your same logic and saying many people feel it doesn't work, and forcing them to be unhappy to make yourself happy isn't the right way to go.

Honesly Tai, you've done a great job derailing this topic from from what Winner Kees trying to talk about. I'm not surprised, you did the same thing to me when I brought up a similar but not fully related concern in a thread a couple months back.

Winner is looking for COMPROMISE. Some sort of modification to the system, not wholesale revolution. There's always room for improvement, and all winner wants to discuss (and was discussing for a bit there in the beginning) were possible solutions.

TripleHelix wrote:

Old_Man_Tai wrote:The current system isnt perfect, but many people feel it works, and forcing them to be unhappy to make yourself happy isnt the right way to go.

That's literally the whole point of this thread. If change IS to be had, it's done in a way where both parties are happy.