(27-11-2012 15:26 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Another thing you need to remember is that what the majority of today's generation of viewers are getting, is all they know. Never mind the so-called 'golden age' of 2010, what about the near-hardcore stuff we used to get 2005 - 2008 ?

There's an old adage that's very apt here; What you've never had you never miss.

(27-11-2012 20:01 )schmoo Wrote:  I don’t really want to get into an argument with others over this, and i won’t. But people are posting their thoughts (as they have every right to do), but other peoples’ posts/replies are of not of the same mindset, they’re of the “i’m right and you’re wrong” attitude and this is causing a lot of the unrest/upset on this forum, specifically, in respect of this subject.

Many posters on here have a distinct lack of reason, rationale, thought and impartiality. Yet an abundance of bias and self-serving.

However, i’m posting my thoughts on both sides of this “argument”.

The channels are available on our TV screens for our entertainment, whether this be visual, aural or both is ultimately to be our decision. Whatever it be, the channels are there to be watched first of all, with the enticement for the watchers to then call. This is the process of marketing.

Viewers therefore have every right to comment in the same manner a caller does – it’s these viewers that the channels were/are primarily targeting in the hope they will become/remain callers etc.

The visual aspect of channels is lacking (maybe not for newer viewers, but certainly for older ones), there is absolutely no doubt about this and many peoples’ beef about “poorer” shows is therefore a legitimate one.

One of these legitimate reasons is that the watcher cannot view a girl on the screen in the same manner he is speaking with her – that’s what a lot of people want. It’s what i want, albeit not to the “hard(er)core” degrees that others want, but the principle is the same nonetheless.

Ardent non callers (StanThe Man for example (sorry Stan!)) has often said he has every right to comment on the channels’ output, and i agree with him. One day, he may see something on these channels that will just be exactly what does it for him and he’ll so want to speak to whomever on the channel about it (i doubt it, but never say never!)

Scottishbloke for example, for all his long winded moans about the poor state of these channels, is actually correct and has every right to say so. If you don’t like his posts, don’t read them and/or just ignore him and don’t reply (it’s the self-serving i referred to above when you reply moaning about his posts, but just fuel his fire about it).

And before you all jump on me and say Ofcom this, Ofcom that, don’t watch etc and all that crap... the Ofcom retort only goes so far (see one of my previous posts in this thread) and as for stop watching... why should i/we? The channels are still airing and whilst they do, i will watch in the hope of seeing something i like one day/night and also in the hope that things improve.

Just remember... it’s the same channels (bar a few changes here and there) that still want your business (at the same expensive rate(s)) and will gladly take it, when they clearly don’t care a jot that the “product” they’re “delivering” is seriously diminishing month by month.

The viewers/callers were there in droves for the channels during the good times, but will they be when the bad times, that will inevitably come, arrive? A certain phrase now comes to mind...

Ultimately, this is why i say they will only have themselves to blame if/when things go tits up for them.

Quote:"Scottishbloke for example, for all his long winded moans about the poor state of these channels, is actually correct and has every right to say so. If you don’t like his posts, don’t read them and/or just ignore him and don’t reply (it’s the self-serving i referred to above when you reply moaning about his posts, but just fuel his fire about it)."

Quote:Just remember... it’s the same channels (bar a few changes here and there) that still want your business (at the same expensive rate(s)) and will gladly take it, when they clearly don’t care a jot that the “product” they’re “delivering” is seriously diminishing month by month.

(27-11-2012 21:17 )Gaz "AV1" Aston Wrote:  ~~~
However, in the same way that Scottishbloke is entitled to his often long winded rants about the state of the channels (in his opinion) why is someone like Rammy (As annoying as he can often be) not entitled to say that he is happy with the shows given the restrictions that currently plague the channels?

(27-11-2012 21:17 )Gaz "AV1" Aston Wrote:  You say

(27-11-2012 20:01 )schmoo Wrote:  "Scottishbloke for example, for all his long winded moans about the poor state of these channels, is actually correct and has every right to say so. If you don’t like his posts, don’t read them and/or just ignore him and don’t reply (it’s the self-serving i referred to above when you reply moaning about his posts, but just fuel his fire about it)."

Now maybe it wasn't your intention, but arent you just saying that because you agree with ScottishBlokes posts about the state of the channels that no-one should bother replying/putting their opinion across as it might add fuel to the fire??

Its a viewpoint that many a so called "fanboy" has held that "if you don't like the channels don't watch them..." and often been shouted down by the more critical posters for having that viewpoint... So why should the more critical posters on the board be allowed to use the same philosophy when it applies to their posts? ..."If you dont like my posts, dont read them..." I'm sorry it can't work that way!

As i said you may not have meant it that way but that certainly how i'm reading it!

(27-11-2012 21:17 )Gaz "AV1" Aston Wrote:  

(27-11-2012 20:01 )schmoo Wrote:  Just remember... it’s the same channels (bar a few changes here and there) that still want your business (at the same expensive rate(s)) and will gladly take it, when they clearly don’t care a jot that the “product” they’re “delivering” is seriously diminishing month by month.

You also need to remember that there are still plenty of people out there more than happy with the current output and whilst the channels will "Gladly take" the punters money at "Expensive rates" there are plenty of punters (myself included given the right girl) who are more than willing to pay it and are generally happy at the end of that call!

(27-11-2012 21:17 )Gaz "AV1" Aston Wrote:  In regards to the visual aspect of the channels "Lacking" ...Well yes, maybe they are in mine and your eyes and i'm sure many others but this isn't 2005 anymore, times have changed, unfortunately due to lots of reasons (not least the threat of Ofcom fines- im sorry but it is THE main reason the channels are the way they are) the channels are a lot tamer...Whether you think a certain girl or channel has had a good night or a bad night you should be free to express it on here but dont bitch and whine (This isnt aimed at you or your post schmoo) when someone happens to disagree with you one way or the other...Someone has already used the term but "Double Standards" seems to be rather Apt in a number of posts on this thread of late!