Recommended Posts

Hello,

The fued between Shield and Wyatt fued I can see being extended until WM.

And I like that some members said "Batista signed a full tim contract. He isnt like The Rock". Well, look at him. He has yet to have a TV match. Great full time :rolleyes:

Hello,

 

BTW, thanks to the Bellas, did anyone notice that the Xbox One isnt being advertised as "supporting" the WWE Network? Only said Xbox 360, PS3, PS4, and Roku.

 

there are quite a few devices they didn't mention that will be supported at some point this year. Xbox One is barely in its infancy and doesn't have all that many apps right now. Apple TV and Chromecast devices were handed out at the Launch event back in January (src: https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/621597-the-big-wrestling-thread/?view=findpost&p=596211055)

 

I'm sure that WWE will be on the Xbox One by the time summer gets here. I can see it now, Michael Cole plugging the Xbox One app every few minutes "here's how to download the app, blah blah blah, change channel, blah blah"

Hello,

 

BTW, thanks to the Bellas, did anyone notice that the Xbox One isnt being advertised as "supporting" the WWE Network? Only said Xbox 360, PS3, PS4, and Roku.

 

It won't support XB1 at launch. It will have an app in the summer though.

I have no idea why there is a big delay.

It won't support XB1 at launch. It will have an app in the summer though.

I have no idea why there is a big delay.

Maybe it's the same reason why BBC iPlayer is still not out on Xbox One yet: Kinect.

No, its the same thing.

 

No, it's not the same thing.  WWE make very clear definitions about this, it's their HOF and realistically what they say goes.  Wrestlemania has always been about celebrity as well as wrestling, and the HOF recognises that.

 

Whether there is a physical building or not is moot.

No, it's not the same thing.  WWE make very clear definitions about this, it's their HOF and realistically what they say goes.  Wrestlemania has always been about celebrity as well as wrestling, and the HOF recognises that.

 

Whether there is a physical building or not is moot.

 

It really is. 

 

Can you go somewhere and see the segregation between different inductees? Can you walk into the celebrity wing? 

 

In fact, and this is proof, without shadow of a doubt, that they are the same:

 

http://www.wwe.com/superstars/halloffame

 

Is there any differentials between those that are celebrity inductees in that list? Hint: NO.

 

Some of the celebrity bios mention the 'celebrity wing', but most, like Bob Uecker and Donald Trump, do not. The 'career highlights' part at the top only lists the year they were inducted. Not 'celebrity inductee'. In fact, Drew Carey's bio is the ONLY one to mention a celebrity wing.

 

The entire thing is for the glorification of Vince McMahon's ego anyway, so it doesn't matter. But saying any wrestler (especially a multi-time champion like the Hardys) isn't deserving of being in when you consider the people that are is downright comical.

Is there any differentials between those that are celebrity inductees in that list? Hint: NO.

 

Some of the celebrity bios mention the 'celebrity wing'

 

You answered your own question.  Building or not, it's a metaphor anyway.  The hall is a metaphor, so is the wing.  Just because one list doesn't discriminate means nothing.

You answered your own question.  Building or not, it's a metaphor anyway.  The hall is a metaphor, so is the wing.  Just because one list doesn't discriminate means nothing.

 

Nice selective edit.

 

It isn't one list. It is THE OFFICIAL LIST. And only ONE PERSON on that OFFICIAL LIST mentions a celebrity wing.

 

Lets put it this way:

Assume you didn't know a 'celebrity wing' existed, and you looked up the Hall of Famers on WWE's site. Would you know, by looking at any other person except Drew Carey, that there was a celebrity wing and those people were supposed to be considered 'separate'? No, you would not. Therefore - there is no difference. 

So the official list mentions a celebrity wing...

 

Gotcha.

 

Suppose a great many things - hypothetical arguments are not for me.

 

WWE created their HOF.  WWE have numerous times mentioned people going into a celebrity wing.  Their HOF, their rules.  Therefore - there is a difference.  Don't like it?  Doesn't matter one ounce to what WWE say and do.

Drew Carey and Pete Rose are in the WWE HoF.

Putting the celebrity wing debate aside, these two inductions are among the reasons why I don't take the WWE Hall of Fame too seriously. Drew Carey made just one appearance in WWE, and Pete Rose is a convicted tax evader who also had a gambling problem which resulted in him being made permanently ineligible to go into the hall of fame of his own sport. And of course, there's also Mike Tyson: convicted rapist.

Putting the celebrity wing debate aside, these two inductions are among the reasons why I don't take the WWE Hall of Fame too seriously. Drew Carey made just one appearance in WWE, and Pete Rose is a convicted tax evader who also had a gambling problem which resulted in him being made permanently ineligible to go into the hall of fame of his own sport. And of course, there's also Mike Tyson: convicted rapist.

 

Carey made a couple of appearances, and Rose's gambling wasn't really why he is still banned. He is still banned (and not in the Baseball HoF) because of other reasons, mostly that people don't like him. 

 

Tyson, though, I agree 100%. 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!