View previous topic | View next topic

Reply to comments in "20 songs" thread

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

GuyBarry
1312121.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:37 am Reply with quote

Quote:
It's typical that over the years this thread has been entertaining us, it's only GuyBarry who has any problems with it.


I have no problems with it whatsoever. You seem to be getting rather excited about it though.

Quote:
Nobody says that a topic SHOULD have 20 entries; that's only the maximum.


I can honestly say that, in all the years I've taken part in the thread, I did not know that this was one of the rules. The thread is entitled "20 songs featuring...", and that's how everyone else has interpreted it while I've been taking part. I don't recall any category that didn't get up to 20.

Perhaps you could rename it "Up to 20 songs featuring..." ?

Quote:
If it stalls, by all means post another of your gems. Don't sit n the sideline fuming and getting frustrated. Lunacy.


That is precisely what I did, 'yorz. Spike's thread stalled at number 9 on December 16th, after two of my contributions. I didn't want to post a third in succession, but eventually decided to post number 10 on Christmas Day. It then stalled for a further three weeks until duglasbell revived it on January 18th. It got to number 16 and then stalled again, so I revived it again on the 24th and again on the 26th before Spike wrapped it up. I think I did more to keep that category alive than anyone else, thank you very much.

Quote:
I know you don't like the word, but anal is the only appropriate word to describe this mindset.


I can think of a few choice words to describe you, but that doesn't mean I feel impelled to post them to the forum.

[Edited to correct error in dates]


Last edited by GuyBarry on Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:20 pm; edited 1 time in total

 
'yorz
1312122.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:39 am Reply with quote

Stop drinking and take your medication.

 
GuyBarry
1312123.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:41 am Reply with quote

I am completely sober, and I am not on any medication.

 
'yorz
1312124.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:45 am Reply with quote

Coulda fooled me.

Anyhoo - enough of this silly nonsense.

 
GuyBarry
1312130.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:05 pm Reply with quote

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
Yet here we are, days later, in a whole new thread, arguing about how that game should be run.


No we're not. I'm quite happy with the way it's run.

Quote:
Without your need to confine and define and control everything so that it fits into little boxes, none of this would exist.


I'm really fascinated about this strange impression you've got of me. "Control everything so that it fits into little boxes"? I live in one of the most untidy flats you're likely to come across. I can barely keep the washing-up under control.

I think it's very foolish to try to do this sort of "pop-psychology" stuff on the basis of an internet forum. You don't know what I'm like in real life, so why paint me as some sort of control freak? I think I'm a pretty easy-going person, actually.

Quote:
If you removed every post you had made in the thread, no one would be arguing for a change in the way things are done.


No one is arguing for a change in the way things are done. The game works fine.

Quote:
You cannot cope with the slightest hint of anarchy or chaos


Hey mate, I'm the one who's living through Brexit! :-)

Of course I can cope with anarchy and chaos. I wouldn't be taking part in this thoroughly anarchic, chaotic thread otherwise...

Quote:
Yet no one else is bothered by a thread that stops for a few weeks or months.


Nor am I.

Quote:
No one else feels obliged to add an extra rule just in case the thread languishes once more.


Nor do I. Honestly, it was just intended as a helpful suggestion, and I think you took it in the wrong spirit. It was ultimately up to Stefan to decide.

Quote:
Itís a light hearted thread in a forum that prides itself on its ability to go totally off topic


Indeed it is, and it should be kept that way.

Quote:
and as such it really doesnít need the level of anxiety that youíre bringing to it.


I'm not remotely anxious! I don't know what gives you that impression. I'm actually feeling quite laid-back at the moment.

This is yet another storm in a teacup. They break out on this forum from time to time. I've learned to live with them and so should you.

 
GuyBarry
1312167.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:58 pm Reply with quote

Just one further comment.

After I finished off Stefan's category, I thought very hard about what I should do next. I've had a number of rather fiendish ones in my mind for a long time and I was sorely tempted to post one of them.

But I didn't. I thought "the thread has suffered for long enough, let's do something simple and get other people involved again". And it worked. Indeed, if Stefan hadn't made his rather belated statement in post 1312052, none of this would have blown up.

So I'm not taking any lectures from anyone here about what I should and shouldn't post to the thread. I enjoy that thread hugely and I've done my best to make it as enjoyable as I possibly can for everyone else.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1312172.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:53 pm Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
I enjoy that thread hugely and I've done my best to make it as enjoyable as I possibly can for everyone else.

Youíve failed.

 
'yorz
1312177.  Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:45 pm Reply with quote

*snort*

 
GuyBarry
1312194.  Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:36 am Reply with quote

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
GuyBarry wrote:
I enjoy that thread hugely and I've done my best to make it as enjoyable as I possibly can for everyone else.

Youíve failed.


Well I'm sorry if you feel that way. I'm still enjoying it, the other participants still appear to be enjoying it, and the only people grumbling are you and 'yorz - the Stadtler and Waldorf of the QI forums.

I suppose I simply have to accept that there are a couple of you here who will always grumble about anything given the opportunity, and learn to live with it.

Enough from me, I think.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1312199.  Fri Feb 01, 2019 5:07 am Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
I'm really fascinated about this strange impression you've got of me. "Control everything so that it fits into little boxes"? I live in one of the most untidy flats you're likely to come across. I can barely keep the washing-up under control.

I think it's very foolish to try to do this sort of "pop-psychology" stuff on the basis of an internet forum. You don't know what I'm like in real life, so why paint me as some sort of control freak? I think I'm a pretty easy-going person, actually.


I think I need to respond to this. The strange impression Iíve got of you is the persona that you present to me. Itís not something I invented, itís the manner in which you behave in the tiny part of the world where we interact, tinted by whatever colour spectacles I happen to be wearing at the time I read it.

Iím not doing any pop-psychology. Iím responding to your comments and actions. Your style of posting often takes on a dictatorial slant which pisses me off. Often I just ignore it - youíre just being you after all. Some days I comment on it - me being me. You donít like being called controlling, and I donít like it when people donít agree with my erudite and well phrased criticism, so it usually goes a few rounds before we back off.

Years ago when I did a leadership course at work, we were told that perception is reality, in the sense that our subordinates perception of us and our management style is their reality. Whatever we believe our style and personality to be, we are judged on those around usí perceptions, not our own opinion. As much as I didnít like the idea, I am forced to accept its validity.

My perception of who you are is based on what I know and see of you. Iíll never see your kitchen and itís mess, and youíll never see mine in itís pristine state (which is created by the lady who cleans it for me and lasts for about five minutes after I get home). I judge you by what you type here, and how you react to certain events. You judge me likewise. Neither of us actually knows the other very well at all. I know that I donít say far more than I do say on here. Many times itís just too much schlep to spend the time phrasing what I want to communicate in a way that I am happy with and I just donít bother. If it bugs me enough, Iíll make the effort. If itís something personal that I decide to respond to, Iíll often do it privately.

What you are objecting to is criticism of you, when actually itís merely criticism of your behaviour. Not matter how I may cloak it, I canít actually criticise you, because I donít know you. All I can do is comment on our interaction in this artificial space.

 
GuyBarry
1312222.  Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:33 am Reply with quote

Replied by PM.

 
GuyBarry
1312383.  Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:09 pm Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:

The limit is 20 songs.


Except when it isn't. (*snigger*)

 
PDR
1312409.  Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:13 am Reply with quote

OK, I've been puzzling over this to the point where I just have to ask. Why is it that my "S for Sugar" (which is a genuine UK-RAF variation on the NATO phonetic alphabet) gets a grudging:

GuyBarry wrote:
OK - you can have that one for "S" unless someone else comes up with an entry for "Sierra", in which case it gets knocked off the list.


But the subsequent "S for Sarah" (which is not used by anyone anywhere as a phonetic and is this completely out of scope) gets:

GuyBarry wrote:
If there were points in this game you'd get an extra one for making me laugh!


I wouldn't care much, but you've been throwing your weight around over how people deviating from the "rules" upsets you, and I'm constantly tiptoeing on eggshells* trying to make sure I don't slip back into offensive ways, so things like this just makes it all the more difficult to judge.

The only conclusion I've been able to come to is that you resent my re-admittance - is that what it is?

PDR

* A mixed metaphor that's self contradictory, now I think about it

 
GuyBarry
1312420.  Sun Feb 03, 2019 6:04 am Reply with quote

First of all, it's only a game, and I really wouldn't get too worried about it. However, since you ask:

PDR wrote:
OK, I've been puzzling over this to the point where I just have to ask. Why is it that my "S for Sugar" (which is a genuine UK-RAF variation on the NATO phonetic alphabet) gets a grudging:

GuyBarry wrote:
OK - you can have that one for "S" unless someone else comes up with an entry for "Sierra", in which case it gets knocked off the list.


It was a compromise. I could have been strict and said "no, that's not in the rules as laid down in the original post" (which specified "Sierra"), or I could have said "hey, I don't care, that's near enough, anything goes". I thought the best approach was to say "that's good enough for now, but if someone comes up with a legitimate entry for 'Sierra' then it takes precedence".

In actual fact AFB did come up with an entry for "Sierra" in post 1312368, and I didn't knock yours off the list after all. So be glad that you got a reprieve!

Quote:
But the subsequent "S for Sarah" (which is not used by anyone anywhere as a phonetic and is this completely out of scope) gets:

GuyBarry wrote:
If there were points in this game you'd get an extra one for making me laugh!


Well, tetsabb did make me laugh. It's like when Nicholas Parsons gives bonus points in Just A Minute for illegitimate challenges because the audience enjoys them. It wasn't intended as a serious submission by tetsabb.

Quote:
I wouldn't care much, but you've been throwing your weight around over how people deviating from the "rules" upsets you


No I haven't. Where do you get this rubbish from?

Alf says I'm obsessed with rules. 'yorz says I'm obsessed with rules. You say I'm obsessed with rules. Yet we've just seen a category where I tore up the rulebook and allowed 24 posts because it was more fun getting the list complete than sticking to the rigid 20-post limit.

I have no idea where this stupid idea came from that I'm obsessed with rules. One of the games that I'm proudest of on this forum is "Reverse Quiz". I invented the game. There are very few rules at all. There's no set format for the answers or the questions. People can suggest whatever questions they like, as often as they like. The questionmaster can drop any hints he or she feels like. Games stop and start whenever people feel like it. Sometimes you get breaks of several months in the middle of a game. It's about as close to "anarchy and chaos" in a game as you're likely to find, and yet I get these ludicrous comments from Alf saying "you cannot cope with the slightest hint of anarchy or chaos".

What planet is he on? Has he actually been reading the thread? He must have been, because he's taken part in the game. Is there the slightest evidence in that thread that I'm a stickler for enforcing the rules? I enjoy the game because it's unpredictable. I wish there were more games like that.

I'm quite happy to accept criticism from people, but when they criticize me for something that's blatantly so far from reality that it's thoroughly laughable, I don't know how to react. Show me the evidence that I'm obsessed with enforcing rules, please. I don't think there is any. It just seems to be this weird idea that a couple of people have got hold of, and I can't disabuse them of the notion.

So please take it from me - I liked your "Sugar Sugar" submission. I thought it was very inventive. I wasn't, in all honesty, expecting that we were going to end up with all 26 official NATO keywords, so I didn't much care whether it was right at the time. Once it looked as though we were going to get the whole list, though, it would have been odd if we'd had the official NATO keyword for the other 25 and not for "S".

Quote:
and I'm constantly tiptoeing on eggshells* trying to make sure I don't slip back into offensive ways, so things like this just makes it all the more difficult to judge.


You're doing just fine. I've very much enjoyed your contributions since you've returned and hope they continue in this spirit.

Quote:
The only conclusion I've been able to come to is that you resent my re-admittance - is that what it is?


I never wanted you banned in the first place, as you know. Why would I resent your re-admittance?

In post 1310063, I wrote: "Can I say how very pleased I am to see PDR's return as a member of this forum. Whatever differences we may have had, he is certainly one of the most eloquent and knowledgeable voices here". I've had no reason to change my opinions since then.

 
GuyBarry
1319371.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:22 am Reply with quote

Just for reference, a list of the most recent categories in the "20 songs" thread.

Celebaelin (Mar 3) - Bread and bread products
Jenny (Mar 4) - Spring
suze (Mar 6) - Scents/smells/whiffs/pongs [proposed by 'yorz]
Celebaelin (Mar 8) - Angel(s)
Efros (Mar 8) - Devil
GuyBarry (Mar 9) - Lyrics that sound a lot less impressive when you take them literally
Celebaelin (Mar 20) - Aliens [finished by duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk]
Celebaelin (Mar 22) - Sauces
duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk (Mar 24) - Australasia
Celebaelin (Mar 27) - Scott Walker [proposed by 'yorz; finished by GuyBarry but opened to floor]
Efros (Mar 28) - Cold
Celebaelin (Mar 30) - Running
Celebaelin (Mar 31) - Change [finished by Stefan Linnemann]
Celebaelin (Apr 1) - Rooms of a house
Jenny (Apr 1) - Less than desirable people
GuyBarry (Apr 2) - Not to be confused with...
Stefan Linnemann (Apr 4) - Success after the band
Celebaelin (Apr 4) - Unctuous; slimy; oily; greasy; offensively suave and smug
AlmondFacialBar (Apr 6) - Songs that make you happy
Jenny (Apr 6) - Songs you always find yourself singing along to
Celebaelin (Apr 7) - Geometric shapes
Olinguito (Apr 7) - Tales [proposed for the previous category]
suze (Apr 9) - Heads
Celebaelin (Apr 10) - Communication
Celebaelin (Apr 12) - Shouting

 

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group