Here's what I've got to remember: Any exposure to anyone throws my mind off-kilter. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but, c'mon, if I just avoid the news and avoid what most people say, and just read books or whatever, then I should get much smarter.
Here is a Fox News article titled, "Senior Teen Vogue staffer who supported Alexi McCammond’s ousting used ‘N-word’ in decade-old tweets." That seems like an odd thing to care about, regardless of what political clique you're part of.
There's some controversy on Reddit involving a trans woman and accusations of pedophilia. Could this be the future of every controversy ever?
I've got a bunch of tabs open and I want to close those tabs but in order to close those tabs I first have to document why certain things are stupid. Here is a Wreddit post from March 16th titled, "Why has Keith Lee disappeared from Raw?" Everyone is saying it's an injury. Which is to say, all the commenters are saying it's an injury. No news site has said it's an injury, but that's what all the commenters are saying. The top comment, by Dundore77, says "injury no real updates on what or when he'll be back." And the people below him are repeating the same thing. There is no indication whatsoever that Keith Lee has an injury. They did a half-hearted kayfabe explanation for why Keith Lee missed a recent pay-per-view, saying he was injured by Bobby Lashley during a post-match attack, but you could just watch TV and realize it wasn't an injury angle. If you watch WWE, it's a thing that happens from time to time. I think it happened during last year's WrestleMania where they had to take either Miz or Morrison or one of the Usos out of the tag team title match, and they said someone had been injured during a brawl even though if you watched TV you would see the guy who was supposedly injured didn't actually get beat up during the brawl. It's kind of the same situation with Keith Lee. There, now I can close that stupid fucking thread.
Here is a thread from /r/television titled "Streaming HBO Max will now count toward data limits for AT&T customers." One of the comments from dbadefense1990 said, "Obligatory fuck that smug-looking weasel Ajit Pai and the damage he’s done to the internet which will take decades to correct." It had 15 upvotes when I first opened the thread over a week ago, so maybe it's much higher now. Another commenter, MaxV331, replied: "AT&T not giving HBO preferential treatment is how it’d be with NN." I don't know what the fuck that means. NN is Net Neutrality, of course, but what I mean is that it sounds like MaxV331 is trying to correct dbadefense1990, but I have no way to make sense of it.
Here is a thread titled, "The Strange Saga of Lauren Boebert’s Pro Wrestler Paternity Case." It was removed and flaired as "Not closely related to wrestling." It's an in-depth article about Stan Lane. That is totally related to wrestling, but you can say it's not related to wrestling if you have a weird outlook on life and you believe any gossip or frank discussion should not be allowed. The problem isn't that it's unrelated to wrestling. The problem is that it involves a paternity dispute, and people just don't want to ever discuss that sort of thing; which is to say, the moderators of an internet forum don't want that discussion to take place, because they believe everything should be civil and non-controversial. And when you try to keep everything civil and non-controversial, you create an awful dystopia full of constant strife and stupidity. The article itself is from Mel Magazine (which just ceased publication earlier this afternoon), so it's not, like an unfounded message board rumor. It's a news article, so even if your mentality as a moderator is, 'Eh, we don't want people going on a message board and saying stuff,' this wouldn't apply here, because it's MelMagazine printing the article, and there's a byline on it; it's not Throwaway98138 making up or spreading a rumor.
Any time WWE makes a tweet about Jordan Devlin, people respond with a CrowdJustice link for a campaign: "Sexual and domestic abuse victim fighting civil litigation from abuser."
Here is a thread by mistershadow95 titled, "Why is everyone against bad bunny?" It's been removed by the moderators, but the text said: "The guy is literally the top artist right now, WWE has always brought celebrities for wrestlemania to make it more mainstream. Its a good business move and the guy gets to make his dreams come true. I swear all this hate its because hes latino." It's weird when people reply to that like the OP is making an astute observation. Like, there's no hate of Bad Bunny on the subreddit. If anyone does criticize Bad Bunny, they get blowback. And most of the commenters replying to the thread realize that, and one commenter noted how the OP seemed to be using a throwaway account (although I think alt account would be the better descriptor).
Here is a post-Raw thread on /r/Wreddit. The people in SCJerk link to /r/Wreddit rather than /r/SquaredCircle. You'll find this thing in post-show threads where people are complaining about what people in other threads said. One of the commenters wrote: "Lmao now the basement complaing Rhea doesn't deserve it." (Rhea Ripley had debuted on Raw this week and will face Asuka for the Raw Women's title.) Another person responed to that, saying: "REEE!! Rhea should be facing Charlotte for the RAW Women's Championship! Charlotte gets COVID and can't compete, changed to Asuka. REEE!! Why is Rhea getting the match?! She didn't earn it, despite me asking for it for about 6 months!!" And another commenter's reply was: "jesus they are beyond parody." That last line is the one that caught my attention. It's an internet discourse thing; you say so-and-so are beyond parody, but, like, you're not even quoting someone directly, and I don't even know how much backlash there was towards Rhea's appearance in the first place. But maybe you pick out a few negative comments and then say how so-and-so are beyond parody. It's something MeltzerSaidWhat does a lot with the F4W Board where he'll screencap a few commenters who have a based opinion about something and share that screencap with all his Twitter followers.
Here is a thread by EmbarrassedWhile8117 titled "The truth about Jon Moxley." The account has been suspended and the thread was removed. It was an obvious troll post. The OP commented at one point: "renee needs to get raped so moxley will become humbled. Hopefully she miscarries while it happens."
This site, PostBourgie.com, hasn't updated since 2016. But at least it's still online: