Loss Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Oh God. That may have been a good message board post, but it's a pretty lousy article. If he's going to steal from me, I wish he at least had the decency to fix some of my bad grammar and expand on some of the shorthand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchistxx Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Hunter Golden is 'Towney 007' on message boards, and posts at DVDVR and various other places, so it's perfectly feasible that he ripped off this thread. When I was first online I used to frequent the Wrestleview boards a lot, he joined in 2003/2004 as a mark who knew next to nothing, got turned on to Ring of Honor a bit later and writing news for the site. I've never rated him as a writer or as a person. He has form for copying as well, all over Wrestleview forums archives you could find arguments he copied word for word about Puro/Indie wrestling, knowing he wouldn't be called out since the majority of the message board only watched WWE and didn't venture onto the really hardcore boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Towney007 is a mod at Wrestleview (has been for a few years) where I also used to post just as I was getting into Japanese wrestling. I stopped posting there after discovering this place, DVDVR, and WKO. Yeah, he constantly plagiarizes from DVDVR and Segunda Caida on the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death From Above Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Ha, that's the same guy that had his DVDVR account hacked not long ago by some spammer too. I think they shut down his account, or its possible he's just been quiet there lately and I haven't seen him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Schneider Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Towney007 is a mod at Wrestleview (has been for a few years) where I also used to post just as I was getting into Japanese wrestling. I stopped posting there after discovering this place, DVDVR, and WKO. Yeah, he constantly plagiarizes from DVDVR and Segunda Caida on the board. What has he plagiarized from Segunda Caida? I can't imagine anyone wanting to steal Eric rambling about APW or me making the same Teddy Atlas point in 25 different Fujiwara reviews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravJ1979 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 He also plagiarized S.L.L.'s post on storytelling over on DVDR. More Hunter Golden Plagarism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Just can't understand the pyschology of a guy like that. I mean plagerism is one thing, plagerising FORUM POSTS ABOUT WRESTLING. Dear God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Towney007 is a mod at Wrestleview (has been for a few years) where I also used to post just as I was getting into Japanese wrestling. I stopped posting there after discovering this place, DVDVR, and WKO. Yeah, he constantly plagiarizes from DVDVR and Segunda Caida on the board. What has he plagiarized from Segunda Caida? I can't imagine anyone wanting to steal Eric rambling about APW or me making the same Teddy Atlas point in 25 different Fujiwara reviews Around the time I saw Segunda Caida for the first time in 2008 I remember thinking the reviews from your MOTY lists were familiar. He had been using them for his nominations for MOTY threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 This pisses me off. As someone who's done some writing himself, I can't stand assholes who steal someone else's shit and have the BALLS to claim it as their own. What can we do to hurt this fucker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricR Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I will do my part by continuing to write horribly, to then make him look bad by extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I will do my part by continuing to write horribly, to then make him look bad by extension.I believe it's spelled "Princess Sugey", btw. At least, that's what I think she told me the one time we worked together, her English was almost as bad as my Spanish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 He also plagiarized S.L.L.'s post on storytelling over on DVDR. More Hunter Golden Plagarism. It's bad enough that the dude plagiarized me, but that was a pretty serious butchering of my original post. When you apply that kind of logic to wrestling - where fundamental storytelling is all they have - you're left with work so artless as to boggle the mind. And professional wrestling is a very, very, very low art to begin with. becomes.... If you apply those kinds of ideal to something that is rudimentary storytelling, which is all pro wrestling has, then you’re left with work that is completely lacking in artfulness altogether, and that’s not even scratching the surface of the fact that pro wrestling is an incredibly low form of art to begin with. Who reads my writing and says "this needs more words...his original point was too coherent"? Since the birth of humanity, the concept of "the hero" has been that of a person who works to help achieve the needs of society (and, ideally, themselves as well), and will do so even in the face of overwhelming odds, or if doing so requires a great sacrifice on their part. becomes.... Heroes, since the dawn of time, have always been the person working towards the greatest needs of society and for the social good. In ideal circumstances, it can even be themselves. They accomplish and meet these needs by accomplishing overwhelming odds or by making a great sacrifice. Ummm...no. One does not have to be working towards the greatest needs of society to be the hero of a story. It would be kinda limiting if only those working towards the "greatest" societal needs qualified, and the whole point of this is that the storytelling template we follow isn't limiting. It's further limiting when doing something to benefit oneself could only be heroic in "ideal" circumstances, though to be fair he does not actually define what qualifies as "ideal". But yeah, by this definition, does any character in wrestling history qualify as a hero? Epic plagiarism fail. There's nothing in there about having to follow the rules and laws laid down by their government. becomes.... One doesn’t have to obey the ’rules’or laws laid down by their fake governments. One also doesn't have to obey the rules and laws of their real government to be a hero in fiction, either. I wrote that line specifically in response to someone who, when I challenged them to name a great fictional hero who wasn't really heroic, had the balls to name Robin Hood. Yeah, robbed from the corrupt rich, gave to the oppressed poor. What an asshole. Thing is, standing up to King John's corruption wasn't really heroic because John was usurping the throne from Richard, it was heroic because he was fighting for those in need, even though the guy he had to fight against was the goddamn King of England. Not only is he adding more words to my writing, the words he's adding are muddying the point. All they have to do help achieve the needs of humanity, and to put this concern ahead of all other things. becomes.... All they have to do is put the needs of the rest of humanity before their own. NO! They have to put the needs of all of humanity - a group that includes the hero themselves - before other concerns, like personal wants. Yes, sometimes the hero can't save everyone. Sometimes he has to make tough choices about which sections of humanity are going to have their needs met, and which aren't. But the structure isn't about "sometimes". It's about "every time". He's placing further limitations on a structure who's whole point was to be as limitless as possible before a story could no longer function. Want a really, really powerful hero? That's OK, too. Just so long as his opposition is more powerful than him, or more resourceful, intelligent, connected, or otherwise has some kind of advantage that will make sure that there's some doubt as to whether or not the hero will pull it out this time. And when I say "doubt", I mean it in a strictly dramatic sense. Story-wise, is there reason to doubt the hero will triumph? You, the viewer, do not necessarily have to be in doubt about the story's outcome. becomes.... You can even have a super strong, intelligent, un-human hero, just so long as the evil opposition is just a LITTLE bit more powerful than he is. Anything that would establish doubt as to whether the hero could pull through ’this time’. And no, you as the reader do NOT have to be in doubt as to the outcome of the story. 1. No, the opposition doesn't have to be "a LITTLE bit more powerful" than the hero, not that he can't be. What he has to be is "more powerful than him, or more resourceful, intelligent, connected, or otherwise has some kind of advantage" over the hero. That's why I wrote that. Lex Luthor is not "a little bit more powerful" than Superman. He's actually a lot less powerful. He's still an effective villain because he's found other ways of getting the upper hand on Supes. Bobby Heenan was a lot less powerful than Hulk Hogan. He was still an effective heel because he had a seemingly endless supply of hired goons who could do what he couldn't on his own. Relevant to this thread, Ric Flair was a lot less powerful than many of his opponents. He was still an effective heel because he was craftier and more devious than most of them. 2. This is one of the few places where he actually removes lines completely from my original piece, and maybe it's just me, I do think it benefited from the little extra bit of clarification I gave when talking about what I meant by "doubt". Might just be me, though. Then there were the people suggesting there was something wrong with the story itself, that the framework that has worked for everything from The Epic of Gilgamesh to 24, just kind of stopped working in the last few years - coincidentally, just in time for John Cena's rise to prominence. becomes.... Then there were folks who declared that there was something wrong with the story, itself, that the framework that has been used in every major play in human history from the Epic of Gilgamesh to NCIS, is now somehow faulty. And wouldn’t ya know; just in time for John Cena to rise to the top! The Epic of Gilgamesh wasn't a play, jackass. I don't know why he went with "every major play" as a replacement for "everything". I guess it just goes to show why he needs to steal other people's material. But at least you could claim that NCIS (and why was that the automatic replacement for 24?) is a teleplay. The Epic of Gilgamesh was a written work. "Bix, the people who have gotten on here to say that Cena is basically playing the same babyface character as the last 5,203 (I believe that was the number) are right." becomes.... “Hunter, the people who have gotten on here to say that Cena is basically playing the same babyface character as the last 5,203 (I believe that was the number) are right.” APOLOGIZE TO BIX! But what if you totally broke the structure and refused to repair it? What if Superman was a greedy jerk, but was still treated as the hero of the story? Not even in a satirical way. Playing it for laughs would place it outside the realm of dramatic conflict. What if they portrayed greedy jerk Superman as a hero, with no more heroic opposition, and played it all totally straight? It wouldn't make sense. It wouldn't look right. It wouldn't fit. It wouldn't work. That's what happens when you try to break the structure. becomes.... Now conversely, imagine what would happen if that didn’t happen and they just played it out. Jerk-face Superman is the hero and there’s no opposition. If they played it for laughs, it wouldn’t fall within the structure. It wouldn’t make sense, it wouldn’t work… if you break up a structure, that’s what happens. Again, he tries to streamline my point, and this time, I'm pretty confident that my version reads better. Even if I didn't need to fully clarify that I wasn't talking about a satirical portrayal of Superman as a jerk, at least my full clarification reads better than him awkwardly alluding to it in passing. The word "structure" suggests restriction, formulaic, assembly line thinking, and shopworn clichés. Even if the structure in question is as minimalist and open as this one, many "intelligent" and "creative" people will oppose it, simply because it's a structure, and structures are universally bad. becomes.... The whole concept of the word ’structure’ instantly suggested that this was all assembly line thinking, and led to nothing in their minds, that was anything more than suggesting ’restriction’. Despite the fact that this structure, which is completely minimalist and as open-ended as this one would be (its almost hard to call it a structure), so-called ‘intelligent’ and ’creative’ people oppose it because its a structure, and structure is considered to be universally bad, especially amongst many, many artists. Well, at least now we see why he stripped down some of my earlier clarifying points. It was so he could add clarifying points of his own. And by that, I mean he pumped these lines full of random words until they were barely recognizable as sentences. It's riddled with logical flaws, not the least of which is the mental hoop-jumping required to complain about predictability, clichés, and unoriginality by spouting off a predictable, clichéd, and unoriginal line of thought such as this. becomes.... Its rife with logical flaws, mental hoop-jumping and all sorts of unnecessary non-intellectual mental gymnastics it takes to complain about predictability, cliches and lack or originality. I like how he managed to keep all the bells and whistles of that sentence intact while removing the actual point. It has no reason to be in his article at all in this form, but he left it's dried-out husk impaled on a stake, possibly with the words "Shylock Go Home" written on it in case I ever came across it. And even then, there will probably be exceptions that you make, either ignoring the hypocrisy or explaining it away with some flimsy excuse. becomes.... But even at that, there’s exceptions that will be made, such as ignoring the hypocrisy or explaining it away with some stupid excuse. "Either" does not mean "such as". If I didn't have my original post to compare this to, I wouldn't know what he was trying to say. First of all, I believe in Ecclesiastes 1:9 - "What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun". becomes.... I’m not much of a church go-er, but I know my bible!Ecclesiastes 1:9 says “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun”. Oh, and there's another thing that I didn't clarify in my original post that he fixed for me. Apparently, dropping a biblical verse without explaining how you came to know said biblical verse leaves too many unanswered questions. Idiot that I am, I figured I could quote scripture and leave it at that, as further details about my religious affiliations and beliefs weren't relevant to the post. And why the exclamation point at the end of that sentence? Why is he so damn happy that he knows his Bible? If you paid $8 for a movie ticket, sat down in the theater, only to have a large hatch in the ceiling open up and dump halibut onto you, and than be charged another $8 by a man dressed as a cactus wearing a funny hat and sent on your way without ever actually getting to see the movie, well, that would certainly be creative and different (and unpredictable, for that matter). becomes.... If you paid $8 for a movie ticket, sat down in the theater only to have the ceiling open up and drop a piano on you, you would be charged another $8 by some guy dressed as a cactus wearing a silly hat and send you along on your way without you getting to see the movie, sure, that’d be creative and different. If they dropped a piano on you, you'd probably die. On top of that, they'd be dropping an object that you commonly think of when you think about objects getting dropped on other people for comedic purposes...which is stupid, because the whole point of that analogy was to illustrate the perils of being creative/different/unpredictable for the sake of being creative/different/unpredictable. Replacing the halibut with the vastly more predictable payload of a piano defeats the purpose. Even if the cactus guy's hat was really, really funny? becomes.... Even if Cactus guy’s hate was lol~? LOLspeak? Really? Goddammit, this guy sucks. My hate is not lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 That was awesome. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricR Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 OK wow, that is insane. I don't think I've ever seen something so insanely plagiarized. My 9th grade Astronomy paper on Black Holes was not plagiarized this badly. I love how he felt the need to change 24 to NCIS, but keep Epic of Gilgamesh. I just picture him looking at it and thinking "Well obviously everybody would expect a reference to Gilgamesh in this John Cena op-ed piece...but this 24 reference is just a bit too on-the-nose." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 That was awesome. John It's even better if you read SLL's bits in Frasier Crane's flustered voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 A dude once uploaded my Lex Luger music vidya as his own, only changing the music. I was pretty flattered honestly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted March 23, 2012 Report Share Posted March 23, 2012 It's the internet so I don't expect proper atttribution for anything and take stealing for granted. The most I can hope for is that if someone steals from me, they at least understand my point. still... If you paid $8 for a movie ticket, sat down in the theater, only to have a large hatch in the ceiling open up and dump halibut onto you, and than be charged another $8 by a man dressed as a cactus wearing a funny hat and sent on your way without ever actually getting to see the movie, well, that would certainly be creative and different (and unpredictable, for that matter). becomes.... If you paid $8 for a movie ticket, sat down in the theater only to have the ceiling open up and drop a piano on you, you would be charged another $8 by some guy dressed as a cactus wearing a silly hat and send you along on your way without you getting to see the movie, sure, that’d be creative and different. Halibut, piano...both of you missed the true absurdist humor of salad in balloons. http://youtu.be/dyVA1SJPDl4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.