(page 136) She did go to the those live shows to promote the show and she did present the "What is Sexy" list. So what's your point? I didn't even respond to your "predictions".I meant an argument we had earlier. I think it was the one where we talked about the LL Show. IMO she didn't present anything during the list special. She wasn't really hosting it. She was a pretty face used for promoting the event. Thanks for the lecture, but it didn't answer my question. I wasn't asking about hypothetical situations. I wanted you to tell me how is it possible that my precise words quoted just some posts earlier were negative and obvious at the same time. Did I write she will be just a tiny part of the show AND that she will probably be bad and that it will most likely end her career? No! That would have been pessimistic. What I wrote was realistic and it could only be seen as negative by people who expected to see something like an small Oscar ceremony with Adriana being in the center of attention and actually hosting the thing. The problem is that I figured out my positive comments would look pessimistic when surrounded by the hyper optimistic opinions usually posted here. Someone being realistic would look negative for people who normally only notice the bright side of things. That's why I try not to post comments at all. I only snap from time to time when I encounter too much naivety. Because I'm an old Adriana fan who still is curious to see what will happen to her. BZ is a great place to find news and you don't have to go through so many childish opinions like on e.g. AFL. Beside that I feel a sentiment for this place and it's old users I enjoyed reading long before I bothered to register. If I really enjoyed doing that wouldn't I come here more often? Wouldn't I go to a place like AFL where I could "attack" more people? Wouldn't I use every chance to write something negative and "feel smarter"? You just wrote yourself I don't bother to comment many things. Let's play this "psychology" game for a little longer. Tell me dr. Freud what would be you opinion about people who are able to convince themselves that clearly negative things about their idol actually are positive. E.g. the idol humiliates themselves during an interview, but those people don't see it like that at all. They make up a story e.g. that the idol was insulted by something the interviewer did, and thanks to that story they convince themselves their idol's behavior wasn't humiliating, but rational. They aren't able to notice their own delusion even when the idol actually does the precise same thing that was suppose to insult him/her during the interview. What would be your opinion about those people's mental state? Since we are already talking about why do people do certain things - why are you constantly attacking my posts? If I remember correctly we made an agreement that we will avoid each other. You were the one who broke it and you continue to do so. That she isn't spokesperson material and that VS knows it, that she doesn't know how to behave in front of a TV camera during interviews, that she had lost her chance to become really important for VS's marketing, that she is "slower" then most people, that the change in her look was sudden, etc. We argued about many little things and somehow I can't recall one you were right about. Reply if you want to. I will not.
