JobberJoe

And people with the "ohnoez he'll be another Umaga!" hysterics are hilarious. If Samoa Joe has a WWE career where he has a great gimmick totally protected better than everyone else's almost his entire run, has the chance to have some great matches, he main events some PPVs with John Cena and has a hand in one of the biggest buyrates in recorded history...he'll have done approximately a billion times better than anyone could reasonably expect of him.

This x1000.

Remember when everyone went "lol, so glad Joe didn't go to WWE and become a stupid fat savage with face paint on his face, lol."

Then remember when Penis-face Joe (he was the fat one with... face paint...) came about and started stabbing people?

Remember who, out of Umaga and Joe, was better?

I'll give you a clue - he's now in second place, by default.

Umaga also has one of the greatest crowd chants ever in the form of "Oo-Oo-Umaga!!"

Haha, something gay!!

:info7: Damn that handsome and wonderful JobberJoe!!

I'm that stupid jerk dsrchris - that's right, it's me.

I'm a jerk.

YAASSS!!

Yeah, was a part of one of Raven's many mini-factions along with... let's go for it, Sin?

Or Slasher?

Or Stabby?

I'm sure he followed Raven around though - and it was aboooooooout the time Raven made him over in RoH, so there ya' go.

I'm pretty sure at least.

You don't have to look at it in person every single day :(.

And hello there.

Do you take pleasure in killing all things that resemble fun?

You're weird.

He said what I said was correct so it was me.

HAHA!

The one you never suspected.

Alright then I'll put it another way. Imagine this is you talking.

 

JobberJoe: "Saz said, and I quote, "I am innocent". That means I am innocent".....

No.

JobberJoe: "Saz said, and I quote, "I am innocent" [in reference to himself. He did NOT say that JJ was innocent. He was indicating towards himself, as in Saz]. That means that Saz is claiming that HE is innocent. He makes no reference towards me - I'm simply stating that the sentence he said is indeed true. I don't even necessarily agree that Saz is innocent, I just have total faith that whatever Saz said was the truth. He said that he was innocent? Well that must be the case then."

Exactly. JobberJoe said that Saz was telling the truth. In other words, JobberJoe is innocent because Saz said "I am innocent". That means that JobberJoe was the one saying "I am innocent", because he said that Saz was telling the truth.

 

Which means that JobberJoe is innocent, and Saz is guilty.

 

Or something.....

No.

Saz says "I am innocent".

That means Saz is making a claim about himself - ie. that Saz is not the killer, that he himself did not commit the crime.

JJ (I? oh-ho-ho) then come along and say that the statement which Saz says is true. Therefore, Saz referring to himself (and not me) about not being the killer is the case.

He doesn't even look my way.

You read that all very, very strangely.

I'm furious that I messed up the Scooby Doo joke :( Thought it was really funny too.

EDIT: Somebody else explain why Shaolin is wrong please.

That's how I walk, I have a constant hard-on and hope to impale someone with it, like some sort of fleshy spear.

"Oh so that was you I saw walking down the street. Next time I'll say "Hi"."

:D :D :D :D :D :D

I can play this b*tch - and I'm not talkin' about the game... cause I'm pretty awful at Tetris...

Love that tune though.

Plus it would just give Tonga another excuse to bring up his massive d*ck.

It gets so tiresome :(.

I don't think you realise...

He's the best there is, the best there was and the best there ever will be.

THE BEST.

Sheamus and Finlay are from the same mould? Really?

Yeah - they're both Irish.

Look, it works for any nationality:

English: Barrett and Dynamite Kid.

Japanese: Liger and Misawa.

Mexico: Mysterio and... well, whatever... it'll be the same.

All the freakin' same.

A farmer has to transport a fox, a chicken and a sack of grain across a river. He can wade across but the river gets a little deep so it's only safe to carry one item at a time, but if he leaves the fox and chicken together the fox will kill the chicken, and if the chicken and the sack of grain are left together the goose will eat the grain. How does he get them all over?

:lol Where does the goose come from?

I really loved Othello, and in turn didn't really enjoy Twelfth Night all that much.

The Scottish Play is great as well - and that's basically my Shakespeare knowledge now.

In my world, I'm busy writing two essays: one discussing "human nature" in Ancient Chinese thought and the other talking about a liberal egalitarians response to individual responsibility.

It's a freakin' ball, let me tell you.

But it's not to a degree, because you're little after-school special answer has NO RELEVANCE to the argument we're having.

It's like you've just thrown it in there as a desperate attempt to stop all the fighting and make everybody think of you as some kind of sage who ended the Kinect War. But you didn't - you just sounded stupid.

Holy Diver!!

Fiona has a point to a degree, but considering we all having this debate on a wrestling forum her point is mute is it's already clear we are at best geeks

But... the thing is, she originally sounded like she was calling who anybody who played a game and enjoyed it a loser.

That's where your point would come in as a "well we're all geeks in our own special ways, aww happy ending."

BUT THEN the argument went further, to a point where she was actually discussing somebody who's day-to-day living is effected by the amount they play games - which most people would agree are losers, cause in THAT situation you can drop anything you want in there and if it's stopping you living a normal (OOH BUT WHAT'S NORMAL) day-to-day life then it's an issue.

Go on, let's drop a few things in there - games, alcohol, sex, drugs, OCD, depressions, the colour blue...

See, so at this point, where our argument has been taken to - your point has no relevance at all (although I'm sure we could happily argue that to some degree or another we're all 'soft-addicts' of something or another. But that sounds like a really stupid debate... sorta' like this one).

COME ON!

Speaking of having a grudge. This isn't the first time you've decided to pick one of my posts and have a go at me for something I've said. Most of the time I've kept my mouth shut, but forget it, not happening anymore. You've already told me that I can't have an opinion on wrestling, so I guess video games is being added to that list. Noted.

Specifically here though, he wasn't "having a go". You said something stupid and he called you on it.

People who get immersed in games aren't necessarily losers - as has been pointed out on a few occasions.

Even you then went on to admit that you just worded your point badly - that you meant people who spent far too long on games, to a point where they were sacrificing their normal day to day living.

Stop being so dramatic.

EDIT: On subject, I recently watched a bunch of the old TNA stuff when Kevin Nash was going round calling himself the inventor of the X Division. Some of those skits were great.

Hot damn yeah - when sh*t was "Backlund Approved", gimmick overhauls were going to every man and their dog, Nash had graphs for EVERYTHING and Sonjay Dutt was on steroids.

Great, great times!!

My main concern about them though are whether or not I'd enjoy it.....I mean, I hate reality shows in general.....

 

Do they actually have fights on each episode? Or only one at the end of the series?

Oh yeah - although I'm not an avid watcher there's at least a fight an episode (at least, every one I've seen).

Sometimes two depending on how far in you're going.

It's the kind of thing Shao, because you like MMA, you're willing to let slip some of things you'd normally really hate about reality television... if that makes sense...