Constantly claiming a wrestler sucks despite evidence of the contrary, and despite any advances in skills or character. For example, at least 90% of the forum was shitting on Morrison before and after he got fired. Possibly even 95%. Most were too timid to even post that he was good because you'd get blasted by 5 or 6 other posters.
Most of the forum never gave him any props at all. Now many people are on his nuts to come back because now that he's gone they realize how good he was. All because they're too narrow-minded to give anyone a chance since they go into it thinking they suck to begin with due to other IWC members.
This also works in reverse. I think if popular opinion is in one direction, a lot of posters on here are sheep and just follow along since they don't have the balls to come out and say otherwise.
Calling a wrestler the "best", or "best" at something. . .simply because he's their favorite. Do people really not understand the difference between calling someone the "best" and their "favorite" anymore?
Originally Posted by nevereveragainu
1)wrestling isn't for kids
It is actually, and it always has been outside of and for a few years after the attitude era. The target age group dropped over time, the further we got from the attitude era, the more it was becoming geared towards younger males (mostly young teens) until they finally just switched it to PG.