Originally Posted by SinJackal
It isn't a straw man argument. I bolded what you just claimed I straw man argued, yet you just said the exact same thing I said that you're calling a straw man argument.
So thanks for clearing that up for yourself rather than deny it. But no thanks for lying about what I said being a straw man since it's what you believed anyway. I'm guessing you just wanted to use that term since I used it against you last week properly. I don't use logical fallacies or try to pass off my opinion like it means more than facts, unlike you. If I say something that seems to reply to something that isn't in the post I'm replying to, it's because I'm using something you said elsewhere to support an argument.
Onto the rest of that paragraph, none of it was a point, all you did was tell me your opinion, which tbh, doesn't mean much. You've already established that you don't like Ryback or what he brings, so you aren't telling us anything we don't already know about you. I'm not going to debate your opinion because you can't prove someone's opinion wrong, it's just what they think. You can think what you want.
What I will do though, is point out that you're a huge Punk mark. You've been posting your dislike of Ryback very vehemently after he was put up against Punk. It's fairly obvious where your disdain for Ryback comes from. Pretty relevant fact when put up next to your opinions. Maybe you should preface your posts with "I'm a Punk mark", so people know the main reason why you don't like Ryback.
I felt that it must be a straw man argument since otherwise your comment was completely nonsensical. If I say that I dislike squash matches it's completely illogical to say "you complain now when he squashes jobbers but you'd also complain if he squashes big stars". Of course, because it's the same thing (squash matches). You say that I complain that he's being pushed too hard when he squashes jobbers, which is completely wrong. I never said that makes him pushed too strongly, I said that it makes for boring matches.
And regardless if you made a straw man argument or a nonsensical point there you went on to use a straw man when it came to mic work. I said that he hadn't done any and you say it's overrated because he doesn't need to talk for 15 minutes. Just because I wanted to see mic work doesn't mean that I want everyone to talk in 15 minute segments. That's the definition of a straw man argument.
You go on by trying to project opinions onto me when you claim that I dislike Ryback because he's put up against Punk (and yes, I'm definitely a Punk mark, which I've said many times). That is again not true. I said that I found Ryback boring way before that, but seeing how I take responsibility for my own entertainment I often skipped past his segments when I saw that it would be the same old thing, which means I didn't feel much need to talk about him. When he's thrust into segments that I do watch he appears on the radar again and it makes me more inclined to voice my opinion about it. So I don't write bad stuff about him just because he happens to go against CM Punk. If I did, why wouldn't I always write bad things about Cena? He's the real protagonist that goes against Punk. I can certainly say that I'm no Cena fan (which goes many years back) but I do credit him for having chemistry with Punk and they've put on good matches and other kinds of segments. I didn't have bad things to say about Punk opponents when he was against Bryan or Jericho either, and so on.
The above isn't a straw man argument but instead the logical fallacy named Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Meaning that you see something that's happened after an event and therefor conclude that the event must have been the reason that this "something" happened.
Originally Posted by SinJackal
Is that supposed to be a joke? Or are you just feigning extreme ignorance to nitpick something else about him? He obviously does it to get the crowd excited. Many other wrestlers do the same thing. CM Punk yells "nap time" and puts his hands to his cheek, Cena does the "You can't see me" thing, etc. This shit isn't new. . .at all. Even 20 years ago wrestlers were doing it.
The mic work thing, you brought up a terrible example. Cesaro barely says anything on the mic, and in fact literally repeats himself 5 times in every promo. But hey, he gets you interested in what's to come next. . .even though you just said it requires one to do more than repeat the same thing over and over, and that's the main thing Cesaro does.
You also can't legitimately bitch about him being put against a heel to get a push, since not only does damn near everyone get their big start that way, but your hero Punk got his super stardom by being put up against a much bigger guy at the time in John Cena. It's funny how you complain about things, yet are totally okay with it if someone you like does it.
You're a hypocrite dude. All 3 of your points go against the guys you actually like. Yet it only matters when someone you don't like falls into that category.
Of course I'm not asking why he says it in terms of reaction. I'm asking because it makes no grammatical sense. "Finish it" means that you're telling someone else to finish something. In the context he uses it he appears to talk to himself, seeing how he does finish his opponent himself. It would have made more sense if he said "I'm finishing it" or any variant thereof. I brought it up because you brought his other phrases into the discussion.
Cesaro doesn't just repeat himself five times in all promos anymore, which is why he's become more interesting. Last Raw he started devaluing Americans and their eating habits, something that continued on the post show thing on the web. Before I saw things like that I've only commented on his promos by saying that the gimmick is dumb, and that Swiss is not a language. It does work when he's just randomly talking in other languages now and then though.
I don't know what you're trying to say with the next paragraph. Possibly something related to what I already refuted above, that I dislike Ryback for being put against Punk.
It would be fun to see you explain how my points go against the guys I like. First I said that I dislike squash matches, and I've explained that I started to like Cesaro's style when he got more time in a match. I've said that I want to see mic work (or promo work in general) and again I've only commended Cesaro after he got to do a proper promo (and I've criticized his "one word, five languages" short promo). Both points are extremely far away from what Punk does, who doesn't even do squash matches when he fights Lawler and Vince.
As a final not I can again point out that I've said that several things lacking with Ryback is due to him not having gotten the chance to show something.