Dave Meltzer stuff

[Grimmas]

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

 

 

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

 

Then maybe don't go on twitter, and just send correction notices to people writing the article with the mistake in it?

[Cornette's racket]

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

 

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

I'm not talking about the obituary he will write and I've no doubt that he will do a superb job on it and it will be a fitting tribute to a great man. My point is that correcting a number about how many times Bruno sold out MSG isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things is it ? Is that really relevant on the day the man dies ? I'd say no it isn't. It's not as if Bruno never sold MSG out, so why quibble over the number now of all days. That was the only point I was trying to make.

 

shodate grow up a bit. What does people having a go at Dave meltzer over the WMIII attendance number have to do with with Bruno sammartino ? Nothing that's what.

[El-P]

I'm not talking about the obituary he will write and I've no doubt that he will do a superb job on it and it will be a fitting tribute to a great man. My point is that correcting a number about how many times Bruno sold out MSG isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things is it ? Is that really relevant on the day the man dies ? I'd say no it isn't. It's not as if Bruno never sold MSG out, so why quibble over the number now of all days. That was the only point I was trying to make

 

I would agree it's not that big of a deal. But it really isn't that big of a deal to correct it either. So the Twitter Dweeb Society acting like Dave grossly disrespected Bruno is just ridiculous to me. This hive mentality is awful. Dave is certainly truly mourning Bruno a whole lot more than any of these people are.

[Childs]

 

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

 

 

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

 

Then maybe don't go on twitter, and just send correction notices to people writing the article with the mistake in it?

 

 

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

[shodate]

 

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

I'm not talking about the obituary he will write and I've no doubt that he will do a superb job on it and it will be a fitting tribute to a great man. My point is that correcting a number about how many times Bruno sold out MSG isn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things is it ? Is that really relevant on the day the man dies ? I'd say no it isn't. It's not as if Bruno never sold MSG out, so why quibble over the number now of all days. That was the only point I was trying to make.

 

shodate grow up a bit. What does people having a go at Dave meltzer over the WMIII attendance number have to do with with Bruno sammartino ? Nothing that's what.

 

it is the same idea Though people will attack dave over x or y numbers for the rest of the time

[El-P]

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

 

Sadly, yes.

[shodate]

 

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

 

Sadly, yes.

 

could not agree more here its so Pavlovian

[oldbirds]

When you get trapped in your own bubble, you lose some social awareness. It's not appropriate, and it doesn't fit the image of the man who hasn't done a negative criticism of anything related to New Japan for the last years.

[...TG]

Part of this is the nature of twitter, which is generally read from the newest to the oldest. If you log on around lunch, the first reaction from DM you'll see is the sellout tweet, not the RIP.

[Fando]

The MSG sellouts are guaranteed the number one accolade people are going to report, thinking it's somehow disrespectful to caution people that it's not accurate or verified like this is some dark shameful skeleton that should only be discussed after a mourning period is fucking bananas.

[Grimmas]

 

 

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

 

 

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

 

Then maybe don't go on twitter, and just send correction notices to people writing the article with the mistake in it?

 

 

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

 

Not one person who is writing these stories will read Dave's twitter. He has corrected nothing.

 

Also, it's just about timing. The amount of sell outs he did is irrelevant today, especially for stories on ESPN's website or whatever.

[Grimmas]

 

 

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

 

Sadly, yes.

 

could not agree more here its so Pavlovian

 

Do you actually understand Pavlov's dog study?

[NintendoLogic]

What a silly non-issue this is. It's amazing how many people have such a hate-boner for Dave that they bend over backwards to find things to be outraged by.

[Boss Rock]

 

 

 

 

 

Why isn't it the moment to bring it up? He paid tribute to Bruno. He will no doubt do so again in a long obituary. But he's a reporter, and this is a significant news story on his beat. He's not besmirching Bruno's legacy by pointing out a widespread factual error. He's doing his job.

 

For fuck's sake, people are so desperate to be outraged these days that they don't even think.

Why because Bruno just died today. That's why people don't like it. I saw that he paid tribute and that's the right thing to have done. A significant news story ? It's a fecking sell out number for msg from over forty years ago. I'm not desperate to be outraged but bringing it up today but now isn't the time or place.

 

 

Bruno's death is a significant news story. I know that when I'm writing an obituary for a prominent person, which I've done plenty of times, I work extra hard to get the facts right. An obituary is like the final word on someone's life. If anything, I'd argue it's more important to be careful with the details in that context. I know if I were writing Bruno's obituary, I would be happy that Dave, as an authority in the field, clarified this point.

 

Then maybe don't go on twitter, and just send correction notices to people writing the article with the mistake in it?

 

 

Why shouldn't he post factual (and in no way negative or critical) information on Twitter? Have we really become this infantilized? I don't even get where people are coming from with this.

 

Not one person who is writing these stories will read Dave's twitter. He has corrected nothing.

 

Also, it's just about timing. The amount of sell outs he did is irrelevant today, especially for stories on ESPN's website or whatever.

 

 

Sort of how I feel about it. I get WHY he tweeted it but coming from a guy not known for having tact on social media, it came off a bit callous. Not saying anyone should be outraged, but I get why some were a bit put off by it.

 

But at any rate, Bruno and Dave were friends and I'm sure his obituary will be great.

[Boss Rock]

I don't even think there was any "outrage". Just a "Wow, seriously?" kind of reaction.

[Grimmas]

You know what's fun?

 

People A: This was a little socially clueless, maybe shouldn't had said that.

 

People B: Isn't it amazing how people will get outraged about anything? I'm outraged.

 

People A: We are not outraged at all, it just came off wrong.

 

People B: People will get outraged over anything.

 

This happens all the time? It's like the people going on about snowflakes, who are the actually real snowflakes.

[Fando]

So irrelevant, no idea why he'd even bring it up. How callous.

 

The promotion now known as WWE said Sammartino sold out Madison Square Garden, known as the mecca of professional wrestling, 187 times over his career.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/ct-spt-bruno-sammartino-dies-wwe-wrestler-20180418-story.html

 

 

Especially popular in the Northeast, Sammartino wrestled for the first time at the “new” Madison Square Garden — the stadium currently standing above Penn Station — just eight days after it opened in 1968; he sold out the arena 187 times out of 211 appearances, according to the Post-Gazette.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/04/18/wrestler-bruno-sammartino-the-italian-superman-dies-at-82/?utm_term=.062924479f8a

 

"The Italian Superman" headlined more than 180 sold-out shows at Madison Square Garden, and he had memorable rivalries against the likes of Superstar Billy Graham, Killer Kowalski, Gorilla Monsoon and George "The Animal" Steele, among many others.

http://www.espn.com/wwe/story/_/id/23230798/wwe-hall-famer-bruno-sammartino-dies-age-82

 

As professional wrestling's biggest box office draw, Sammartino headlined over 180 shows at Madison Square Garden, the sport's mecca, before retiring from the ring in 1981

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/wwe-legend-bruno-sammartino-dead-82-article-1.3940985

[Eduardo]

Yeah, surprised at seeing people make ties to being 'anti-WWE' or 'pro-NJPW' or whatever, and about timing. Meltzer has fucked up plenty on Twitter but I don't understand how this is being viewed as bad Tweet. Totally agree with what Childs is saying.

 

Working in fields where I've helped local writers and editors cover musicians or labor organizers who have died, corrections and statements like these would never cause any stir.

[KawadaSmile]

I think it is possible to have the opinion that, while he was good friends with Bruno and probably will write a very good homage, that tweet had bad timing and certainly could have waited.

[Fando]

It say a lot that to wrestling fans that, "Although it has been reported everywhere, and Bruno was my friend, the stories of his 187 or 188 MSG sellouts represents yet another wrestling myth that is far from accurate" is the equivalent of calling Barbara Bush a war criminal or something.

[Grimmas]

It say a lot that to wrestling fans that, "Although it has been reported everywhere, and Bruno was my friend, the stories of his 187 or 188 MSG sellouts represents yet another wrestling myth that is far from accurate" is the equivalent of calling Barbara Bush a war criminal or something.

 

You know what's fun?

 

People A: This was a little socially clueless, maybe shouldn't had said that.

 

People B: Isn't it amazing how people will get outraged about anything? I'm outraged.

 

People A: We are not outraged at all, it just came off wrong.

 

People B: People will get outraged over anything.

[NintendoLogic]

Yeah, it's totally normal and appropriate to call someone a wanker when they commit a minor social faux pas and you're not the slightest bit outraged.

[Fando]

Grimmas, given your history in this thread I'm not even convinced you read his tweet.

[AstroBoy]

Seriously? If Dave tweeted out a correction saying that he actually headlined MORE shows that people typically think, would anybody have a problem with it? It's not hurtful to point out a commonly misunderstood fact and he wasn't being malicious about it in any way.

[El-P]

Being called "disgusting", "dick" etc… on Twitter is not exactly "That is a little socially clueless, maybe you should not have said that"… People are hateful for nothing.