Petition

(26-08-2011 22:32 )eccles Wrote:  From 44 to 77 votes in a day and its made it to the first page for the Dept of Culture Media and Sport raising its visibility massively. Things are looking up. Thanks to Admin and Hexit.

I thought you might be interested in some stats from the mass mailing that was sent on HEX!T's request:

Total messages sent: 31,893
Unread after 14 days: 29,341 (92%)
PM read and deleted: 463 (1.45%)
PM read and retained: 2,089 (6.55%)

92% left their PM unread for two whole weeks!? That staggers me - especially when you consider you get a pop-up alerting you to it. Just out of curiosity you'd think most would read them.

cant say im that surprised... i have noticed over the months that the online average after midnight on her has fallen off quite a bit. the site has a small core membership of regulars, and the masses, they only visit on occasion.

Sorry to piss on the parade but this petition isn't going to get noticed, it currently sits on page 17 with a measily sum total of 186 signatures, sure more people have voted but it hasn't made a blind fuck bit of notice. I urge anybody who's reading this to get their finger out and show you give a shit. 186 is a fucking embarrasment, even the Raving Looney Party gained more support. If it was 186 thousand then we'd be talking about this. Show you give a fuck and vote. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/13222

True its a low number, and lower that had been hoped for, but its ahead of the petition to split Ofcom and give it more powers (181) and way ahead of the petition to increase the watershed to 10:30 (38 votes). While the numbers arent staggering, MPs, the Daily Mail and Ofcom cant claim unopposed support for tighter rules. That counts for something.

The nature of the voting mechanism doesnt help either.

Mucho thanks to Admin for the stats. This tells me that 92% of signed up members simply browse and either dont sign in or dont do anything advanced like reading PMs ever. 2,552 members have read it. 186 have signed the petition - thats nearly 10% and thats a pretty good response rate. Many marketing organisations would love that. Just a pity its 10% of 2,552, not 31,893.

Now if you dont mind, Sophia is in the bath wet and glistening.

eccles, if you haven't already done so you might want to contact Dave @ melonfarmers.co.uk with details of the petition. I think MF gets around 30,000 hits a day and, as it focuses on censorship issues, you might get a few more signatories...?

As Stan and I discovered last year, most of the visitors here are pretty casual and more interested in simply looking up their fave babe rather than getting 'politically active'.

Those stats above tend to suggest the vast majority of members either haven't bothered to visit in the last 2 weeks or else they're completely disinterested or, worse still, happy with the way things are. Of course another possibility is they're just kids who can't sign the petition...or adults that don't want the world to know they'd like some proper adult entertainment on TV.

So we now have a grande total of 194 votes, anybody who watched last nights debacle take note as the channels are getting more and more censored as last nights was as bad as anything I've seen in a long time, we had Lucy Summers on RLC, she didn't even get naked and that is a bad sign of what might just become the norm if nobody is bothered about the petition. Far too many fanboys easily pleased, in the Tonight I'm Loving Thread, I was tempted to say a good night's sleep because it was rotten, car crash tv at it's finest. If we don't gain more votes, it'll never get noticed and once every channel has become a croc of shit, they will slowly die off one by one, either it will be a case of licence revoked or finanially bankrupt. They can't win, follow the rules - go bust - don't follow the rules - licence revoked. In this current financial climate it is sucide by the channels just to sit idly back and accept this heavy handed kind of regulation by a non elected government qango. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/13222

Ultimately, the main problem you guys face is trying to convince people who are stuck-up to be more liberal-minded about adult entertainment. This is something people in the industry have struggled with for many years. It's a culture clash (a bit like those 4 Australians and the stuck-up pommy from that Monty Python sketch).

The kind of people working for OFCOM and the Government, at a high level, allow these channels reluctantly as it is. The industry, in general, is looked at negatively. It's not just about what these channels represent at face value - it's what they're linked to: porn, strip clubs, escorting/prostitution, etc. All things the stuck-up, stickybeaks believe are undesirable.

You always get the odd maverick working for the Government who might be supportive - but that usually means indirectly, not directly. In other words, you would need indirect mainstream support, from other areas and industries, against OFCOM.

If companies from several different industries - not in competition with each other - decided to challenge OFCOM for various reasons (not just adult entertainment), then there would be a much better chance of success.

(14-09-2011 19:27 )Winston Wolfe Wrote:  Ultimately, the main problem you guys face is trying to convince people who are stuck-up to be more liberal-minded about adult entertainment. This is something people in the industry have struggled with for many years. It's a culture clash (a bit like those 4 Australians and the stuck-up pommy from that Monty Python sketch).

The kind of people working for OFCOM and the Government, at a high level, allow these channels reluctantly as it is. The industry, in general, is looked at negatively. It's not just about what these channels represent at face value - it's what they're linked to: porn, strip clubs, escorting/prostitution, etc. All things the stuck-up, stickybeaks believe are undesirable.

You always get the odd maverick working for the Government who might be supportive - but that usually means indirectly, not directly. In other words, you would need indirect mainstream support, from other areas and industries, against OFCOM.

If companies from several different industries - not in competition with each other - decided to challenge OFCOM for various reasons (not just adult entertainment), then there would be a much better chance of success.

Hey that's not a bad idea at all, i like it, getting other companies, like a consortium to pull forces against Ofcom and collectively put pressure on them, mmmh it's a worth a shot.

Since when did being offended change to harm and offence, where's the harm in being offended, if you're offended then fuck you - be offended, at which point did this country turn into the PC looking after the easily offended. My opinion is offended never did anybody any harm, I'll tell you something when I witnessed 2 planes fly into the World Trade Centre Centre 10 years ago live on the telly, I wasn't so much offended, but more fucking shocked and what started off all of this, I'll tell you fucking religion, so if ofcom have got any reason to pick on programmes or channels that enter the grounds of harm, then look no further than your extremist religious ones as they do cause harm as witnessed live across the globe. R18 material on the other hand has never done anybody any harm. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/13222