...and welcome to all who seek refuge in the prospect of civilty and sanity on this new site. Bon Voyage, Alan! :D
Printable View
...and welcome to all who seek refuge in the prospect of civilty and sanity on this new site. Bon Voyage, Alan! :D
Yes. Let's keep it civil. I've had enough of TVSPY and the class of clowns that overran that place.
Welcome aboard col_square, hopefully many more will soon lose their inhibitions/trepedation and sign on as well. But, then again, I suspect that many actually enjoy viewing and/or paticipating in the venom and venting on TVSPEW, far TOO much to ever let go. Some people just like throwing matches at gas pumps and rubbernecking at car wrecks...hmmm, sounds like the target audience for much of what we broadcast. I'm in the nearly 30 years in the NYC market and looking forward to leaving it ALL behind...
Glad to see an alternative to the toilet bowl that has become TV Spy. Don Fitzpatrick has gotta be doing somersaults over what happening there. That site used to be good for career advice and what's going on at certain stations across the country, the latter especially helpful when job hunting. Are people going to ask stupid questions sometimes? Sure they are, but they don't have to be put down for it or are afraid to contribute over fear that they will be cussed out. Hopefully this site proves that you can have good discussion and debate without personal insults and the potty mouth mentality. As a 25-year veteran of the TV biz, I'm more than glad to leave the children behind and go where the adults play!
my first post was "zapped."
(deletes site bookmark)
I'm sorry, but you violated our rule about naming individuals in a critical manner. Whether a person is deserving of the criticism or not, I am not going to let this forum degenerate as the "other one" did and that is why your comment was removed. Your membership remains, and the moderators and I welcome your future posts. But this site is not going to be ruined as the other site was.
We all know about how the other site was destroyed and who helped to contribute to its ruin. Let's take a higher road here. I know you have a lot to contribute and I hope you will share your knowledge and insights here.
Thanks, Alan
i'm wondering where you want to take the inevitable political commentary that's going to be submitted as the november elections draw nigh..
do you plan to keep it to the way the media covers the campaigns?..personally, i trhink that's the best way to go..it's what the watercoooler board was supposed to be about before it got hijacked..
just curious..
I think that commenting on political news coverage is a valid topic and a valid issue. Let's keep the conversation civil and let's be respectful of others' opinions. Thanks, Orthicon. Best, Alan
Hey all...
There are no issues with freedom of speach here. We just do not want to see threats towards named individuals or wishing people dead etc...
Welcome everyone and we look forward to this being a resourceful and respectful corner of the internet.
Users of this forum are welcome to send private messages to each other, give respect ratings, and report posts that are viewed as disrespectful to the moderators.
If a private message is received and you feel it is spam or inappropriate, please report it.
Cheers
Like other forums I've been on, all should be allowed EXCEPT for personal attacks on other members. This one rule pretty much weeds out the riff-raff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by col_square
Agreed. Just don't say such and such should die etc and there should be no issues.
maybe i am too old-school for today's media..after 42 years, maybe it HAS all escaped me..
but i was bothered no small amount by the basically slanted tenor of the beck coverage..
i hold no brief for beck at all.. but it did seem to me the rabid concern over how man people did or did not attend that rally completely overshadowed, if not eliminated, any serious questions about what the meaning of it all was.. what did beck accopmplish?..if anything..what was it all about?
have we in this business i used to love become so snarky that we can't any longer ask the legitimate questions that should have been asked?..that should still be asked?
or do the viewers really no longer care about context and meaning?
Hey, Doug... We oughta start another thread on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by orthicon
It does seem to me that a lot of people ARE focused on the numbers reporting. And I have not seen an official count. I do know the crowd seemed smaller than I was expecting to see, but my view was through the two live cameras CNN Newsource was providing, and that's a limited outlook.
NPR's Robert Siegel did a good interview with Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention yesterday. Dr. Land said it was all about returning to God, and not about politics. Here's the site for the transcript: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=129535008
Hmm. I wonder. Attendees were told not to bring political signs. I wonder if the focus on religion made attendance smaller? Because even 200-300,000 is a lot smaller a crowd than I would expect Beck to generate for an event like this.
Back on topic, it's amazing the mindless banter going on in that kiddie sandbox. It's almost become a game of who can be the most foul mouthed and who can bark the loudest. Glad we have some moderation on that here--just wish we had a few more posters.
Thanks for your post. I broke my silence on that "other" board to respond to some personal attacks. I felt I had to, but I am sorry I did. I also had to post about the loss of Edwin Newman. In fact, we have several hundred regular viewers of the forum and this Media Talk thread has had more than 500 visits. But we do have few actual posters. I too hope they will break their silence and join.
Someone with brains and initiative actually got the phone number for that other website company and posted it on their forum -- the one that the rest of us know has gone down the tubes. I called and made contact with one of their top executives, so thank you for posting it.
I made it clear to that executive that I tried, as many of you have tried, to send reports about abusive posts on that forum and that there was no response or that their mail/contact system was not operating. The executive sounded surprised.
I was able to show that executive some of the posts with the most flagrant violations including the posts filled with libel-- and you know which ones I am talking about. And they were promptly removed. There was no need to explain the problem, this executive immediate recognized the problem. However, that particular poster was not banned (as of my writing this) and it didn't take long for him to start another thread filled with his libelous fantasy.
I urge all of you to call the number that has been posted on that site. I think, at this time, it would be inappropriate for me to post that phone number here.
I also pointed out how I was libeled and warned this executive that he is now aware of the problem. He encouraged me to call back to flag other posts that violate their policies. His number is saved on my cell phone directory.
This is a start. I urge you all to participate and to call them. I also said it was a shame how that forum went downhill since the passing of Don and since Tom left as its administrator.
Best, Alan
It is interesting that the only thread I have ever seen removed on the other site was one pleading for a moderators help. I truly wonder if V..... cares.
If they did, they would fix their website so that if you wanted to report a concern it would go through instead of getting a server error. I too have had libelous posts made about me. I am to the point where if I have to take legal action of some sort to eradicate their problems I will.
This morning I had another phone conversation with the executive of that "other site" and asked why they could not block the offensive posts of the few who continue to violate the rules of that other site, including the foul language, libel and personal attacks.
The response of the executive was "we're doing the best we can."
So I asked, why not simply revoke the membership of the posters or block them from posting? His response was "I don't know that we can do that." So, I simply explained to him how these "message boards" operate -- with sign-ins and memberships and how you cannot post without a membership. Blocking a poster, or revoking a membership is simple. I don't know of a message forum that can't remove posts or block certain people from posting. His only response was that they are looking into it.
A few minutes later I discovered that instead of removing just the offensive posts, that the entire discussion threads were deleted, including the posts that complimented the management for taking some action. For example, some posts that could be considered both libelous and pornographic were removed.
I'm not going to tell those guys how to run their business, but I hate to see the baby thrown out with the bath water.
To all of the good people who make a positive contribution to that site -- keep up the good work.
In the meantime, I hope that other site figures out how they can ban particular posts and if necessary particular members who continue to violate the rules of their board.
And in the thread that was removed this morning, again there was a personal attack aimed at me with a very offensive term used. A term I will not repeat here. But that personal attack again claimed that we will -- on our forum -- remove posts with views that we do not agree with. This is not true. We welcome all opinions, but we will not tolerate libel, personal attacks, and foul language. Please, if you have a differing opinion please post it.
Thanks, Alan