We Should Talk About The Title Scene

The problem with thinking of solutions 'off the top of my head' is that they don't take any long-term details into account, or have any real thought put behind them. They're band-aid solutions that won't actually fix anything and seem like they're just new rules for the sake of having new rules.

It doesn't help that pretty much all of us veterans are getting shut down by people going 'NO YOU'RE NOT LISTENING YOU'RE IN YOUR VETERANS CIRCLE AND NEED TO TALK TO US NEWBIES MORE'. People are acting like we don't know anything and never try to help out newer members at all and it's kind of bothering me, to be perfectly honest.

Alexandra wrote:The problem with thinking of solutions 'off the top of my head' is that they don't take any long-term details into account, or have any real thought put behind them. They're band-aid solutions that won't actually fix anything and seem like they're just new rules for the sake of having new rules.

Literally just agreed with you on that above.

Again, this got derailed. If this keeps going, it'll just turn into another "No, the other sides wrong" 'No, the OTHER sides wrong.' I can't speak for anyone else, but again, in my mind even one voting that they dislike the system is enough to bring about calm discussion.

Both sides have patronised one another. Not everyone on either side, but it's definitely happened. That is something to be addressed, not fixed right now.

Alexandra wrote:The problem with thinking of solutions 'off the top of my head' is that they don't take any long-term details into account, or have any real thought put behind them. They're band-aid solutions that won't actually fix anything and seem like they're just new rules for the sake of having new rules.

It doesn't help that pretty much all of us veterans are getting shut down by people going 'NO YOU'RE NOT LISTENING YOU'RE IN YOUR VETERANS CIRCLE AND NEED TO TALK TO US NEWBIES MORE'. People are acting like we don't know anything and never try to help out newer members at all and it's kind of bothering me, to be perfectly honest.

What your saying is not wrong but it was never winner3 intention or my own for this thread to go down that path. On either side of the current argument between newbies and veterans you got those who are polite and respond to pm and those that don't. From my own experience with you i don't think does attacks should apply to you or almost anyone who replied here on this thread who has bin a champion at a time.

Now for other stuff i notice plenty of female characters do both tension and friction so maybe a title that could be defended on both brands could be a nice idea even if it sounds complicated. I think that the time for blaming others in this thread should be over and we should come up with solutions or suggestions on how to improve certain problems which have come up in this discussion.

anime_hentaifighter wrote: Now for other stuff i notice plenty of female characters do both tension and friction so maybe a title that could be defended on both brands could be a nice idea even if it sounds complicated.

I'm a fan of this idea.

anime_hentaifighter wrote:Now for other stuff i notice plenty of female characters do both tension and friction so maybe a title that could be defended on both brands could be a nice idea even if it sounds complicated.

I agree, it is a great idea!

Vcom7418 wrote:

anime_hentaifighter wrote:Now for other stuff i notice plenty of female characters do both tension and friction so maybe a title that could be defended on both brands could be a nice idea even if it sounds complicated.

I agree, it is a great idea!

LARIATO wrote:I'm a fan of this idea.

Well it was just one idea I had but like I mentioned earlier this would be a difficult championship to keep track of. I think the best time for these inter brand matches for the belt should be at the four PPV's we got. In the time between the PPV's I think the belt should stay with one brand to make it easier to keep an track on this belt.

But that would maybe involve a chance in the PPV system as I think at this time their's only two PPV that happen on the site but I could be wrong here.

Alexandra wrote:

scorn53 wrote:Just wanna say, absolute bogus. Not the part about you guys not working for it, but implying this thread is a 'give me a title' thread.

*shrug* That might not be the intention, but that's how it's coming off.

If you want to believe that is the impression being given, that's your prerogative. Your agenda. Literally no one in this thread has or is demanding a title.

I think you're coming across as every bit as arrogant and condescending as you feel some of us are, if not more. Racker and various others have brought up very valid points. But rather than discuss them and everyone else's in a constructive manner, I feel like you've decided to take them as personal attacks on yourself and other/previous title holders. No one is here to attack anyone's worthiness of a title.

Making more belts doesn't automatically save any division in pro wrestling, but neither does doing nothing. Having no rules at all has never been conducive to any type of productivity anywhere in life. Defending the concept of freeform/no rules for the sake of it being freeform/no rules helps no one. Multiple people feel like some belts are restricted to a small circle of members that flat out ignore the possibility of allowing those outside their circle to contend for it. A minimum requirement  for belt eligibility (age of account, number of matches on the character) has made enough sense that there are more people here arguing for it than against it. I think you're the only one that's explicitly argued against this concept as a whole, actually. 

The fact that there are many people that take issue with the way things work is proof enough that it isn't working for everyone and could be better. If you don't want to put effort into trying to make it better, that's fine. Just say that. But don't act like there are no issues at all. And don't act like anyone is out here to undercut the credibility of others.

*Pokes head in and looks around*

"........Damn!"

*Makes a Farooq exit*

I agree with Alex in that I feel these rules really wont do anything for the site good or bad, since at the end of the day I still feel the core problem is the lack of communication which has been addressed. If someone pm's someone and gets ignored, no new rule is going to make that person suddenly answer the next pm you send them nor will it make them reach out to new people if they have nothing going on they will just go to one of their friends they know they can get an entertaining match or storyline out of. Unless said rule limits them to doing just that or restricting who they can choose which I feel would hurt the rp (Not saying anyone's seriously suggested that but that's the only thing that would actually cause a change and not for the better)

That being said just because we acknowledge communication is the issue doesn't fix anything yet, I don't really feel that many of these ignored pm's are intentional slights (some maybe cant speak for all of them) But I was talking with one of the people here on the issue (Wont say his name) and he mentioned people who I'm pretty certain wouldn't have just ignored him and likely had it fall through the cracks between rl and who knows what. This can also be an issue because now someone thinks there being ignored when the guy might not have realized they were being contacted and maybe they don't send another pm for fear of coming off rude or annoying or something (understandable) and that can suck but there really isn't a way t fix that that's been proposed here or otherwise, its just something we need to be more aware of.

HighFly wrote:*Pokes head in and looks around*

"........Damn!"

Me everytime I try to sum up and end this thread in a way everyone looks equal.