Read on Twitter
Is it 'Accountability' or 'Cyber-Bullying'?
where's the line? how much information constitutes sufficient evidence to distinguish one over the other? when does 'justified' dunking go too far? is that even possible?
I'm having a hard time finding the line.
where's the line? how much information constitutes sufficient evidence to distinguish one over the other? when does 'justified' dunking go too far? is that even possible?
I'm having a hard time finding the line.
quick thoughts:
1. Stardom eng acct shouldnt of tweeted in that way, best to just ignore. the response only adds fuel to the fire, better off disabling comments and putting out blanket statement saying any such comments about any wrestlers will not be tolerated.
1. Stardom eng acct shouldnt of tweeted in that way, best to just ignore. the response only adds fuel to the fire, better off disabling comments and putting out blanket statement saying any such comments about any wrestlers will not be tolerated.
2. I don't like Bea, I do like Stardom - it does cause conflict in my fandom and its different for everyone.
It's okay to support the wrestlers you do like while not supporting the ones you don't like.
It's okay to give up a promotion because of a particular wrestler as well.
It's okay to support the wrestlers you do like while not supporting the ones you don't like.
It's okay to give up a promotion because of a particular wrestler as well.
3. Stardom is a bigger fish in the proverbial pond than compared to even last year - more eyes equals more responsibility - adapting to their audience matters.
Fans need to allow them time to change but not shy away from voicing their displeasure effectively.
Fans need to allow them time to change but not shy away from voicing their displeasure effectively.
4. "You shouldn't promote B*a because she's an alleged blackballer & r*pe apologist" is more impactful than "i hope {wrestler X} smashes her f*cking face in".
One leads to discourse, the other leads to perceived defensive posturing which then cycles to dunking and judgement.
One leads to discourse, the other leads to perceived defensive posturing which then cycles to dunking and judgement.
5. Piggybacking off this issue as a reason to voice other displeasures with a promotion feels super disingenuous as well.
"Because of 'X' you know that 'Y' is true about {promotion Z} as well" doesnt progress change or conversation. it waters down the original discussion point.
"Because of 'X' you know that 'Y' is true about {promotion Z} as well" doesnt progress change or conversation. it waters down the original discussion point.
6. Offer solutions instead of restating the problem.
Some of you hold great influence - #FireBea - may do more than "omg she's back on my TL, fuck her etc"
The idea is to get people to listen and engage in a way that invokes change and doesn't tear the community apart.
Some of you hold great influence - #FireBea - may do more than "omg she's back on my TL, fuck her etc"
The idea is to get people to listen and engage in a way that invokes change and doesn't tear the community apart.
This applies to any and all discussions not just Stardom specific ones. This is probably the wrong forum to do this i'm sure.
folks seem to be digging their heels in on both sides instead of coming together and thats a bummer because i like most of you.
&
,
.
folks seem to be digging their heels in on both sides instead of coming together and thats a bummer because i like most of you.
&,.
