View previous topic | View next topic

How come tonights episode is a repeat??

Page 6 of 9
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

NickFromFulham
871610.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:09 am Reply with quote

"Again, we're going to have to gingerly step around the issue of a hitherto unknown poster leaping to someone's defence."

I'm so glad I don't often join forums, the general panic and paranoia an unknown poster seems to spread among the regulars is very worrying. Who knows, maybe the previous poster will be accused of being me, or, I'll be accused of being a 'sockpuppet' again.

"If I am being disparaging, it is only to bring the whole thing back into context - I'm not sure that any uploader really deserves the deification that has been awarded - especially since he wasn't smart enough to realise that uploading an episode that was unbroadcast on the main terrestrial channels, and only put on iPlayer in error, would focus the attention of the legal teams."

Yeah my mistake, I uploaded the wrong episode and paid for it, the only thing I can do under the circumstances is just move on with the new channel. You're exaggerating, I don't receive 'deification' nor do I demand it.

"Indeed, the very fact NFF's account grew to (IIRC) more than 1,500 videos was because of the Beebs generally benign attitude to the practice. Try replicating the process with The Daily Show, or The Colbert Report, and see how long it takes for a big fat Cease And Desist notice to plop onto your doormat from Viacom."

Over 1500 videos, over 23 million views and 22000 plus subscribers I'll have you know, the fact you're aware of such details tends to suggest you were a visitor to my old channel (and probably the new one too).

Since I doubt you visited the old NFF and new NFFA channel merely to view my boring channel page I'm pretty sure you watched many of the videos I uploaded. Not that it stops you or certain fellow forumers feigning outrage and condemning me and other uploaders for it, the words 'two-faced' and 'sanctimonous' spring to mind...

"What he was doing and (whisper it) is doing again makes him a hobbyist, not a hero."

I fully agree, I'm no hero, and may I add that I don't make a single penny from this. Ah so you do visit and view my channel, I hope you enjoyed my recent uploads. By the way, see my previous statement re: sanctimonious.

"Incidentally, it's the word 'intend' that somewhat undermines the argument given above. What need would you have to follow through on that intention, whilst everything you want/need is available for nowt?"

Everything you want/need is available for nowt on websites and channels like mine, you admit to visiting them yourself, so what's your point exactly?

"If folks stateside really want to see the full shows on your networks, then probably the thing to do is to start lobbying other channels with deeper pockets (like, say, Comedy Central) to buy the shows and deal with the licencing."

And no doubt it will be as dynamic and successful as the petition for BBC America to broadcast QI in the States.

In short, if you or certain fellow forumers try to tell me or anyone else that you do not watch or have not watched QI or other BBC programmes online apart from iPlayer, you're liars.

Cheers

NFFA

(NOT a sockpuppet).

 
exnihilo
871612.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:17 am Reply with quote

I'll tell you exactly that. And I'm not a liar.

 
soup
871623.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:10 am Reply with quote

NickFromFulham wrote:


In short, if you or certain fellow forumers try to tell me or anyone else that you do not watch or have not watched QI or other BBC programmes online apart from iPlayer, you're liars..


No I'm not .
Cha togar m' fhearg gun džoladh you (stupid ignorant fuck that you are) probably know this as.
Nemo me impune lacessit

 
PDR
871628.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:20 am Reply with quote

Oh for gawd's sake, there's no dark conspiricy to keep the QI episodes off BBCA - simply a matter of legal rights. As has been explained, the show has to pay money for the images and videos it uses. The fees paid only cover use in the UK (and I assume a seperate fee for the DVD copies) and these are part of the production costs which are paid for from UK TV license-payer's money. To extend the rights to include the USA costs a LOT of money, and it's rather hard to justify spending UK license-payer's money to provide free shows to the USA.

If Americans want to see the shows they can petition their TV providers to stonk up the wonga - I doubt the owners of the image rights would be in the slightest bit reluctant to take their money. All that self-appointed vigillantees like yourself do is provide them with the exuse not to do it on the grounds that they won't shell out cash for something that their subscribers can get for free.

Prat! *

PDR

* This is a purely personal opinion and not a statement of fact. It is provided free of copyright should anyone wish to use it, but only in the UK. Anyone wishing you use itr beyond the UK should contact my business office to negotiate an appropriate license deal.

 
NickFromFulham
871633.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:34 am Reply with quote

Oh dear, are we resorting to insults already, touched a nerve did I?

Almost 6 years on the qi.com forum has made 'soup' a very cultured individual...

Anyway, as I posted earlier, you're liars.

No one believes for a moment that people such as yourselves who are such ardent fans of QI that you go to the effort of registering and joining an online forum dedicated to the programme do NOT watch favourite episodes or QI moments online when they are so freely available for viewing.

In 6 six you've never watched QI online because of some moral objection over copyright? Instead you happily wait for repeats in random order on the Beeb or Dave, yes? That's your story?

Sure it is...

The only 'stupid ignorant fuck' is the one who believes you.

Cheers.

 
NickFromFulham
871636.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:44 am Reply with quote

@PDR

Gosh you people love to label, 'sockpuppet' 'robin hood' and now 'self-appointed vigilante', I'm amazed I have time to do anything.

*Checks previous post* Nope, sorry, I made no mention of dark conspiracies...

As with Mr. or Mrs/Miss/Ms. 'soup' if you can't post without resorting to ridiculous online insults then maybe it's best not to bother.

Cheers.

 
PDR
871640.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:48 am Reply with quote

I've watched QI on-line - on iPlayer. I don't watch BBC programmes (or any broadcast programmes, come to that) on youtube because the picture and sound quality is abysmal.

I watch some QI repeats on Dave specificly because they are (pseudo) randomly shown, and I would never seek out and watch a specific episode. The reason is that I can actually *remember* my "favourite" episodes, and there's not much enjoyment in seeing them when I can remember the outcomes. I get much more from watching a randomly-selected repeat of a non-favourite episode, because I'm less likely to remember what happened.

I have never viewed anything from your channel, but as a license payer I do take exception to your theft of the material I paid for. You are also quite free with your accusations, and live in a world where whatever you imagine must be true. You are entitled to live in your own world if you wish, but please don't confuse it with the real one. Most specifically please don't make the mistake of believing that "facts" in your imaginary world remain true in the real one. "Wars have started that way, Mr Ambassidor".

PDR

 
Neotenic
871641.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:51 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm so glad I don't often join forums, the general panic and paranoia an unknown poster seems to spread among the regulars is very worrying. Who knows, maybe the previous poster will be accused of being me, or, I'll be accused of being a 'sockpuppet' again


It's only in light of previous experience that I mention such things.

Sadly, the posts made by the Dr Who puppet have been purged during general forum maintenance, but the Eddie Izzard ones are still here - have a look and see.

Incidentally, I don't think you're in any position to be disparaging about forums in seemingly every post you make, seeing as you keep coming back.

As I say, I was posting in response to the reaction to the original NFF account being closed, and the effusive praise and language used therein - 'hero' is a word used on these very forums. That is what I was reacting to in particular. That you have taken it personally does rather suggest the plaudits have gone to your head.

I've never suggested that I haven't viewed videos via your account, incidentally - nor that it shouldn't exist. My only point is that here, a site managed by the IP owners, may not be the best place to talk about it.

Indeed, that the NFFA account hasn't already been closed down speaks again to the Beeb's general attitude towards the practice. Just don't take the piss, and it'll probably be fine. Probably.

Now, I would suggest that if you are going to keep popping back, it may be best to leave the word 'sanctomonius' at home, seeing as it does seem to serve as an accurate description for your postings, too. There's a good chap.

 
soup
871642.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:56 am Reply with quote

NickFromFulham wrote:
Oh dear, are we resorting to insults already, touched a nerve did I?

Yep; I do not like being called a liar.
NickFromFulham wrote:
Anyway, as I posted earlier, you're liars.

Some undoubtedly are, I am not.
NickFromFulham wrote:
No one believes for a moment that people such as yourselves who are such ardent fans of QI that you go to the effort of registering and joining an online forum dedicated to the programme do NOT watch favourite episodes or QI moments online when they are so freely available for viewing.

That's their problem.
NickFromFulham wrote:
In 6 six you've never watched QI online because of some moral objection over copyright?

Nope; I haven't watched it online as I do not wish to. I do not have any great moral objections to you or anyone else breaching copyright.
NickFromFulham wrote:
Instead you happily wait for repeats in random order on the Beeb or Dave, yes?

Dave seems to have almost constant repeats of QI, so pretty much only minimal waiting involved.
NickFromFulham wrote:
The only 'stupid ignorant fuck'

Is someone who calls people, without knowing them/their circumstances, liars.

Anyway people like you annoy me so I will not "converse" with you anymore . You may now have the last word.

 
NickFromFulham
871649.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:28 am Reply with quote

@ PDR

Ah yes, remembering, I remember a lot of things too, losing my virginity for instance, the last blowjob I got &c.

Does that mean I'll happily refuse another because of fond memories of the previous one? Err, no. No doubt neither will you when given the choice.

This also applies to favourite films, books, TV programmes.

I'm glad that simply *remembering* is enough to sate you but for us mere mortals we feel the urge to re-watch favoured TV programme episodes and films and we even go so far as re-read favourite books. Shocking I know!

It's human nature whatever world you live in.


@ Neotenic

For 'Sanctimonious' read defensive, I haven't exactly been given the warmest of welcomes here. I don't like forum threads descending into ridiculous arguments, labelling and insults, however that seems to be the way it's going. I simply didn't want to stoop to the levels of some posters.

Not that it stopped me joining this forum because I imagined qi.com talk would be a step above the usual 'n00b', 'pwned' bullshit you see in other forums. Apart from acceptable grammar and the use of sentences it's pretty much the same mentality as the 'pwned' forums. So it seems I was wrong again.

My apologies if I pointed out the hypocrisy and the blatant transparency of the feigned outrage that copyright seems to bring out of forum members like Mr/Ms. 'soup' - it must be quite jarring for her/him.

But I simply hate lies.

Lastly, pointing out my being 'sanctimonious' then ending your post with 'There's a good chap' kinda cancels out your argument don't you think?


Cheers.

NFFA

(Still not a sockpuppet).

 
Neotenic
871652.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:37 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I simply didn't want to stoop to the levels of some posters.


Calling us all a bunch of liars didn't really help that cause, did it?

In case it has escaped your attention, you and I are broadly in agreement. So there's no need to be that defensive/combative.

FWIW, these boards are generally a friendly place - but we don't take particularly kindly to people arriving and stomping around in big boots, and calling established posters names. The same thing would happen if you walked into a pub and started taking the piss out of one of the regulars.

If you want to carry on posting as 'one of us', rather than as 'NFF from on high, with his army of worldwide acolytes', then I'm sure you'll be more than welcome.

Quote:
Lastly, pointing out my being 'sanctimonious' then ending your post with 'There's a good chap' kinda cancels out your argument don't you think?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

 
Willie
871655.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:57 am Reply with quote

NickFromFulham wrote:
But I simply hate lies.


I simply hate theft.

 
NickFromFulham
871656.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:13 am Reply with quote

I got static from some posters way before I started calling them liars.

I'm very glad you brought up the 'pub regular' motif. It's something I've noticed in previous forums over the years. And a big part of the reason I stopped joining them.

Many times I've witnessed the scenario of the old forumer who has been on the board for years and as such feels he or she somehow has the right to talk shit to anyone who just joined.

Just like the regulars at most locals around in the UK.

Again with the labels damnit, 'NFF from on high, with his army of worldwide acolytes'.

You're projecting, you're making me out to be something I'm most certainly not, I don't have an army of followers, neophytes, acolytes, worshippers or sex slaves and I am in no way responsible for the way they view me or the praise (and insults) I receive from them.

Again you're projecting, I don't stomp around in big boots, however I DID predict the kind of reaction I would get upon joining and sadly I was right.

I'm going to stop posting for a while after this, read the general reactions and take it from there.

I'll see if this forum lark is worth persuing.

 
Willie
871657.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:26 am Reply with quote

NickFromFulham wrote:
You're projecting, you're making me out to be something I'm most certainly not, I don't have an army of followers, neophytes, acolytes, worshippers or sex slaves and I am in no way responsible for the way they view me or the praise (and insults) I receive from them.


You are responsible for stealing others intellectual property and showing it without permission.

 
Neotenic
871661.  Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:45 am Reply with quote

Quote:
Again you're projecting, I don't stomp around in big boots, however I DID predict the kind of reaction I would get upon joining and sadly I was right.



In the way you phrased such misgivings, it did rather turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, didn't it?

I mean, your first response to me directly was vey much along the lines of 'Hey, I bring joy to hundreds of thousands of people, which is waaay better than your pathetic forum posting habit.'

Ain't none of us saints, and nobody but a saint would react to that particularly kindly.

You aren't the first person to take up the self-appointed mantle of Prime QI Youtube Uploader, and I suspect you won't be the last.

Anyway, my over-riding point is, and always was, that you aren't a hero. Your over-riding point is that you aren't a hero. That looks an awful lot to me like common ground.

Of course, with any forum there will be a certain amount of hyperbole for comic effect, and yes, there will be people who are actually (to use a favourite phrase of mine) thundering cockmonkeys. But the human-to-cockmonkey ratio hereabouts is certainly better than pretty much any forum I've ever frequented, which is why I stick around.

 

Page 6 of 9
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group