TV
YAWN
Whats your **** problem? This is an online forum to discuss television presentation. This might be interesting to some people, so instead of criticising them as if it is your own forum piss off somewhere else.
Hymagumba posted:
PMDAVIDWILLIAMS posted:
Just came across the fact that Jane Hill is confirmed as the second presenter of the One.
YAWN
Whats your **** problem? This is an online forum to discuss television presentation. This might be interesting to some people, so instead of criticising them as if it is your own forum piss off somewhere else.
BB
Amen to that.
There's obviously a demand - however questionable or disturbing - for the discussion of presenter rotas and scheduling. I think most would agree, however, that such matters are largely peripheral to the subject matter of the forum. No-one would argue that presenters are unimportant, but this obsessive cataloguing of every presenter or correspondent on the news is deeply tedious for those of us who are actually here to discuss the core subject matter of on-screen presentation.
I honestly can't understand why those members who find it genuinely interesting to discuss presenter rotas can't see fit to isolate their oh-so-thrilling banter to dedicated threads so that the rest of us who have absolutely no interest in these things can also enjoy the forum.
The BBC News, World and N24 threads have been mercilessly clogged with pages and pages of "X is presenting now" and "does anyone know when Y is presenting?" and "whatever happened to Z?", and believe it or not, there are many of us on here who find such discussions excruciatingly awful to have to wade through. What exactly is the problem in requesting that there be one thread type for discussion of the on-screen look of channels and programmes, and another for the discussion of rotas?
Why must the majority of us be bored to death when only a relatively small minority find such great delight in the discussion of presenter scheduling - and when there's such an easy solution to ensure everyone gets the most out of the forum in the form of having seperate threads for dedicated rota discussions?
Hymagumba posted:
The problem is television presentation consists of grapics, and the like.
Rotas of presenters are not interesting in any shape or form. It's tedious, turgid and clogging up this thread. If you want to talk about rotas, make another thread. Its not hard.
Rotas of presenters are not interesting in any shape or form. It's tedious, turgid and clogging up this thread. If you want to talk about rotas, make another thread. Its not hard.
Amen to that.
There's obviously a demand - however questionable or disturbing - for the discussion of presenter rotas and scheduling. I think most would agree, however, that such matters are largely peripheral to the subject matter of the forum. No-one would argue that presenters are unimportant, but this obsessive cataloguing of every presenter or correspondent on the news is deeply tedious for those of us who are actually here to discuss the core subject matter of on-screen presentation.
I honestly can't understand why those members who find it genuinely interesting to discuss presenter rotas can't see fit to isolate their oh-so-thrilling banter to dedicated threads so that the rest of us who have absolutely no interest in these things can also enjoy the forum.
The BBC News, World and N24 threads have been mercilessly clogged with pages and pages of "X is presenting now" and "does anyone know when Y is presenting?" and "whatever happened to Z?", and believe it or not, there are many of us on here who find such discussions excruciatingly awful to have to wade through. What exactly is the problem in requesting that there be one thread type for discussion of the on-screen look of channels and programmes, and another for the discussion of rotas?
Why must the majority of us be bored to death when only a relatively small minority find such great delight in the discussion of presenter scheduling - and when there's such an easy solution to ensure everyone gets the most out of the forum in the form of having seperate threads for dedicated rota discussions?
BC
bcdr
Hymagumba posted:
The problem is television presentation consists of grapics, and the like.
Surely the presenters are part of presentation!
LU
Surely the presenters are part of presentation!
that's what I thought. There are different veins of TV presentation and I for one feel my eyes glazing over when somebody - in minute detail - posts on the position of a spinning TOG or a 2 second graphical anomaly.
then again, detailed presenter rotas aren't thrilling reading either.
bcdr posted:
Hymagumba posted:
The problem is television presentation consists of grapics, and the like.
Surely the presenters are part of presentation!
that's what I thought. There are different veins of TV presentation and I for one feel my eyes glazing over when somebody - in minute detail - posts on the position of a spinning TOG or a 2 second graphical anomaly.
then again, detailed presenter rotas aren't thrilling reading either.
M
Surely the presenters are part of presentation!
that's what I thought. There are different veins of TV presentation and I for one feel my eyes glazing over when somebody - in minute detail - posts on the position of a spinning TOG or a 2 second graphical anomaly.
Although what you've specified is indeed boring, it's much closer to the actual intended subject matter of this forum as opposed to presenter rotas and the reason why Asa set up the forum in the first place. I think rather than set up a different topic for the logging of presenter appearances, discussion of this nature should be moved to a different forum altogether.
M@
Founding member
Luke posted:
bcdr posted:
Hymagumba posted:
The problem is television presentation consists of grapics, and the like.
Surely the presenters are part of presentation!
that's what I thought. There are different veins of TV presentation and I for one feel my eyes glazing over when somebody - in minute detail - posts on the position of a spinning TOG or a 2 second graphical anomaly.
Although what you've specified is indeed boring, it's much closer to the actual intended subject matter of this forum as opposed to presenter rotas and the reason why Asa set up the forum in the first place. I think rather than set up a different topic for the logging of presenter appearances, discussion of this nature should be moved to a different forum altogether.
BC
bcdr
[quote="Luke"] I for one feel my eyes glazing over when somebody - in minute detail - posts on the position of a spinning TOG or a 2 second graphical anomaly.
quote]
Spot on!
quote]
Spot on!
AN
That would be nice, but I can see a backlash from a certain few members (not naming any names, but most contributors to this thread seem obsessed).
Could we try the rota threads again? A lot of members (me included) don't actually read these threads anymore and tend to miss out on matters of which this forum was made for.
M@ posted:
...discussion of this nature should be moved to a different forum altogether.
That would be nice, but I can see a backlash from a certain few members (not naming any names, but most contributors to this thread seem obsessed).
Could we try the rota threads again? A lot of members (me included) don't actually read these threads anymore and tend to miss out on matters of which this forum was made for.
BC
bcdr
PMDAVIDWILLIAMS posted:
Just came across the fact that Jane Hill is confirmed as the second presenter of the One.
Kate Silverton today, with Ms Hill on the 11-2 slot on News24
NE
Are you sure? There's been no announcement from the BBC Press Office. It says so on Jane's Wikipedia page but I wouldn't class that as a reliable source.
PMDAVIDWILLIAMS posted:
Just came across the fact that Jane Hill is confirmed as the second presenter of the One.
Are you sure? There's been no announcement from the BBC Press Office. It says so on Jane's Wikipedia page but I wouldn't class that as a reliable source.