Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:02:37 +0100, "Zimmy" wrote:


"Agamemnon" wrote in message
t.uk...
Who was the MORON at the BBC who decided to schedule the Grand Prix
practice session on BBC1 instead of Merlin and now it's overrunning into
Strictly Come Dancing by 15 minutes

You'd rather watch ballroom dancing than motor racing? Is this you 'coming
out'? :-)

Z


I thnk he wanted to watch Merlin. He was pointing out that a lot of
others wanted the dancing.

So he wanted to watch the magic boy that lives with an older man; ok then
;-)



I was well p.... off as I'd missed the end of Life when it was first
shown (I think it ran late) and I wanted to record teh repeat and the
last ep of Ghandi.
Considering the Beeb have been pushing Life for weeks it smacks of
incompetence.

I have to say that even as an F1 fan I was surprised about that too.
I also missed most of the qualifying anyway as I tried to start an 'instant
recording' on my TVonics PVR but it still thought Life was on and even
though it said it was recording and the file appeared, it refused to let me
play it back for some reason. First time it has ever done anything weird.

Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:02:37 +0100, "Zimmy" wrote:


"Agamemnon" wrote in message
t.uk...
Who was the MORON at the BBC who decided to schedule the Grand Prix
practice session on BBC1 instead of Merlin and now it's overrunning into
Strictly Come Dancing by 15 minutes

You'd rather watch ballroom dancing than motor racing? Is this you 'coming
out'? :-)

:-)

Competitive ballroom dancing is a test of physical skill as well as
artistry. Try to ignore the ******ing sequins.

At least in dancing the competitors are visible.

They most certainly are!

Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Phil ] said:

Yellow wrote:
Java Jive ] said:
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:55:45 +0100, Yellow
wrote:
Assuming that the BBC sent the start signal, why would PVRs in general
not pick up the correct start of Gandhi? It was due to start at 8:30pm
and the F1 finished, give or take a few minutes in either direction, at
8:30pm.
Because many of them, including the two that I own, and another I have
passed on, simply do not have that functionality.

You have a PVR that does not look at broadcaster starts and stops? That
function was available on VCRs!

It's only
comparatively recent boxes

Sweeping aside that you state elsewhere that 10 years ago is "relatively
recent", my 3 year old, now obsolete, Humax does so it sounds like it
might be time to consider an upgrade.

My 8 month old Humax either misses the start of programmes or continues
recording after the end, at least an hour, until I turn it off at the
mains. So I set it so it starts 5 minutes early and finishes 5 minutes
late. This only fails when there is sport before the wanted programme.
It has the latest software and it is a known problem with "accurate
recording" setting.

Phil

I am sorry to hear that I have the previous model and it works just fine
and dandy 99% of the time.

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Java Jive ] said:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:03:06 +0100, Yellow
wrote:


You're obviously part of the modern generation

I am middle aged so you are a mile off there, like you are with pretty
well every thing else you post.

that is used to
upgrading everything for no real reason other than it's a couple of
years old. My PVRs work pretty well in other respects, I don't have
much money, so I'm not going to replace them until they fail.

My Humax has the feature in question and is a 1st generation PVR.
Perhaps the actual problem is that you do not understand how to operate
your equipment?


It's more than three of four, there is a whole history going way back
of posts complaining about PVRs missing the beginnings or ends of
recordings because the broadcasters won't stick to their advertised
schedules.

If you have the feature enabled, PVRs follow the start and stop
instructions transmitted by broadcasters so the published schedule, and
changes to it, is neither here nor there.



No, I said I *rarely* miss the start or end of a programme. And if it is
that important to you for a given programme, there are ways and means
(alternatively know as making an effort), to ensure that you catch the
whole show.

So, like I said, it doesn't work very well!

Excuse me? How do you get that from what I wrote? LOL!

For what seems like the 100th time, my PVR work very well indeed using
the series-link feature and auto starts and stops. In the small number
of cases where it does fail - C5 and too many recordings and missing the
end credits of This Week, if it is *that* important then you can just
set the recording manually instead of using the auto features.

I use my PVR well and more-or-less record everything single programme I
watch so that I can schedule my own viewing, advert free - so that must
be 50 programmes a week? No way could I do that if it failed to work
properly.


My comment was with respect to your assertion that a few posts here
prove all PVRs fail to make proper recordings and my comment stands.

Apparently not

Says you? Someone who doesn't seem to know his arse from his elbow. :-)

Anyway, I do not think either of us has anything new to say and
repeating stuff over and over is pointless, so I am done now. :-)

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:13:45 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

avoid aggravating the majority of viewers to cater for a minority?

Hmmm..isn't that why the BBC is a publicly funded, Public Service
Broadcaster and not a private commercial one?

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

"Java Jive" wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:10:53 +0100, "Brian Lawrence"
wrote:

"Java Jive" wrote in message

I queried the reason for the graph starting in 1992 - that was the
year that qualifying was changed to a single hour on Saturday, thus
making it more appealing to tv companies. The BBC chose not to show
it at that time.

But if you examine the graph above concerning the races, it also
starts in 1992, so I think it's determined by how far back the site's
data goes - your point seems like coincidence to me.

You referred to it as a 'site' before, but it's a forum hosted by the
autosport website. The data is being provided by an (unknown) individual
who states that he has found the data from many sources, he mentions
BARB & DigitalSpy. He's not working for or getting his data from
autosport, although they may have the data in their archives.

Of 819 F1 events 329 (40%) have been won by the driver who started from
pole position.

Yes, I am aware of how important it is to the race, but by your own
figures, the majority of races have not been won by the driver on pole
position, and its importance doesn't make it any less dull to watch.

Well, over 2 million people don't find it dull it seems. I expect many
of them would find many others programs dull too.

While more races have been won by drivers who didn't start from pole
position, that is looking at 60 seasons of racing. It is well known
that in modern F1 overtaking is very difficult. During the 'naughties
88 races have been won from pole out of 171 (51%). Adding 2nd place
to pole the numbers are 123 from 171 (72%); including 3rd it increases
to 82%. It's part of a 3-day event, which fans pay to attend at the
tracks and like to watch on TV.

Incidentally, I read a bit on the BBC website which stated that the
qualifying would be on BBC2 not BBC 1, so they seem to have had a plan
to switch it which was later changed.

--

Brian

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Kay Robinson ] said:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:25:06 +0100, Yellow
sharpened a new quill and scratched:

So a 15 minute delay on one show and a few days delay on another. A pity
for those who sat down to view, but hardly life changing stuff.

So are we to assume that if they hadn't changed the schedule and not
bothered to show this qualifying round you'd shrug it off as 'hardly
life changing stuff.' ?

Yes, cherry picking a comment in from the middle of a long drawn out
discussion can be fun, can't it. Obviously it was not made in isolation
so you will need to read back to find out who thinks what and why they
think it. If you are that interested of course.

I hope you will forgive that I have snipped the rest as I have no desire
to do this entire dance again with another person who wants to start
right back at the beginning of the discussion, all over again, not least
because me and the person I was replying to have decided to agreed to
disagree.

This boat has sailed. :-)

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:01:12 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

And, as such, it was already showing F1Q on interactive. Further, as
I have already suggested, instead of disrupting the schedules for 105
minutes to show just 25 minutes of something of secondary importance

That's part and parcel of being a PSB. Suppose I were to value F1Q
more than the other Saturday programmes - I pay my license fee. Why
shouldn't SCD have been shoved out the way and BBC2 disrupted for my
pleasure? Please understand, the BBC is *not* there just to appease
majority desires - that's the role of the private sector due to the
nature of advertising revenue.

actually happening, they could have edited it into a 30 minutes
highlights programme to replace some of "Pages from Ceefax",
disruption to which noone would have complained about.

I would have.

That way, both parties would have been treated reasonably.

Not in my opinion (which carries just as much weight as yours).

Those who wanted to watch and record the scheduled programmes would
have been able to do so without disruption.

Since when did the BBC guarantee its schedules would be accurate?
What's the problem with *you* using iPlayer to catch up rather than
me?

Those who wanted to know the results of F1Q could have looked it up on
either the BBC or the F1 website in the first instance, and those who
particularly wanted to watch it could have done so via the interactive
channel on which it was apparently already being shown, or via the
iPlayer, or, failing both of those, via the late night recorded
highlights programme which they could have watched when they came in
from clubbing, or by setting a recording to watch in morning.

Indeed, but I wanted to watch it live and on a mainstream channel
while having my tea. And why should *I* be denied just because you
don't like what I like? It simply isn't possible to please everyone
all of the time - as proved by this thread.

Frankly, taking into consideration that TX is largely done by an
separate private company (Red Bee), TX playout control is largely
automated and there are regional scheduling issues before you even get
to editorial decisions, that the changes all went as smoothly as they
did is quite an achievement for "morons". On the editorial side, it
didn't take a genius to spot the difficulties there, given that even
the F1 commentators were asking over the air what was going on with
the F1 scheduling side.

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:25:49 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

The point I made about the BBC not being solely in existence to pamper
to the majority appears to have been missed. I'm not going to reply to
all your points individually suffice to say that I disagree with them
all.

snip

Except for..

Before bus services were nationalised,

...which is an outstanding contribution! LOL.

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:32:19 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:03:55 +0100, Zathras
wrote:

The point I made about the BBC not being solely in existence to pamper
to the majority appears to have been missed.

It was answered, but you snipped it.

No you didn't..you don't know what the BBC is, you just bleated on as
if it was some kind of failed democracy and made a hilarious
comparison to deregulated buses!! I simply stated a fact that you
appear unable to accept.

I'm not going to reply to
all your points individually suffice to say that I disagree with them
all.

Your choice, but you lose the argument thereby.

LOL - how so?. What happened over the weekend was exactly as I would
have wanted and expected and I argued that it was the correct way for
the BBC to deal with the situation it found itself in. If there are
losers here, strangely, I don't feel like one..

In any case, assuming you're correct and I've lost the argument, how
should I proceed at such terrible news? Slit my wrists, stay in a
darkened room for a year, enter a Monastery? On second thoughts, I
might just pour a drink and watch my recording of Question Time from
last night because the BBC have, outrageously, given some minority
party a platform. If the recording failed, there's always Top Gear on
Dave for entertainment..

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Java Jive ] said:

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:09:20 +0100, Zathras
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:32:19 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

No you didn't..you don't know what the BBC is, you just bleated on as
if it was some kind of failed democracy and made a hilarious
comparison to deregulated buses!! I simply stated a fact that you
appear unable to accept.

"""
But further on you talk about your opinion being worth as much as
mine, which by logical extension must mean that the opinion of the
majority who wanted to watch the scheduled broadcasts should weigh
more than the minority who wanted to watch F1Q, THE MAJORITY OF WHOM
ALREADY HAD ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF WATCHING IT ANYWAY!
"""

Your choice, but you lose the argument thereby.

LOL - how so?.

Because you haven't come up with a successful argument.

In any case, assuming you're correct and I've lost the argument, how
should I proceed at such terrible news? Slit my wrists, stay in a
darkened room for a year, enter a Monastery? On second thoughts, I
might just pour a drink and watch my recording of Question Time from
last night because the BBC have, outrageously, given some minority
party a platform. If the recording failed, there's always Top Gear on
Dave for entertainment..

I'm not interested, that's entirely up to you.

Nah, you just want the last word. :-)

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Java Jive wrote:
I don't seem to be any different from you in that respect ...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:13:58 +0100, Yellow
wrote:

Nah, you just want the last word. :-)

But where's the last word when you top-post?

André Coutanche

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

Java Jive ] said:

I don't seem to be any different from you in that respect ...

Not really as I shut up about 20 posts back when it became clear that
never of us was going to be persuaded by each other's arguments,
choosing not even to reply your final insult. You, by contrast, still
seem determined to have the final word on the topic regardless of what
anyone else has to say.

But don't let me stop you - it's amusing - and I really really won't be
posting to the thread again, I just couldn't help myself just now. Put
it down to depressing lack of self control. :-)


On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:13:58 +0100, Yellow
wrote:

Nah, you just want the last word. :-)

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

André Coutanche ] said:

Java Jive wrote:
I don't seem to be any different from you in that respect ...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:13:58 +0100, Yellow
wrote:

Nah, you just want the last word. :-)

But where's the last word when you top-post?

André Coutanche

At the top?

:-D

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:01:21 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:09:20 +0100, Zathras
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:32:19 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

No you didn't..you don't know what the BBC is, you just bleated on as
if it was some kind of failed democracy and made a hilarious
comparison to deregulated buses!! I simply stated a fact that you
appear unable to accept.

"""
But further on you talk about your opinion being worth as much as
mine, which by logical extension must mean that the opinion of the
majority who wanted to watch the scheduled broadcasts should weigh
more than the minority who wanted to watch F1Q, THE MAJORITY OF WHOM
ALREADY HAD ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF WATCHING IT ANYWAY!
"""

I disagree. Are you aware of the difference between opinions and
facts?

Your choice, but you lose the argument thereby.

LOL - how so?.

Because you haven't come up with a successful argument.

Read the BBC Charter. The answer you seek is there.

In any case, assuming you're correct and I've lost the argument, how
should I proceed at such terrible news? Slit my wrists, stay in a
darkened room for a year, enter a Monastery? On second thoughts, I
might just pour a drink and watch my recording of Question Time from
last night because the BBC have, outrageously, given some minority
party a platform. If the recording failed, there's always Top Gear on
Dave for entertainment..

I'm not interested, that's entirely up to you.

Whoosh (again). I mean, good grief..you cannot even spot when I'm
saying that to you. Was my sarcasm that subtle???!

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:20:50 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:40:10 +0100, Zathras
wrote:

I disagree. Are you aware of the difference between opinions and
facts?

You don't seem to realise that your arguments contradict each other.

Maybe because I'm not 'interpreting' them as you are?

If I accept as a fact, as you claimed, that your opinion is worth the
same as mine, or indeed presumably anyone else's, then the rest
follows logically.

...*your* logic..

The difference between opinions and facts isn't
relevant.

In my opinion, your opinion and mine are merely equal opinions, of
perhaps little or even no value. Facts altered by opinion are called
fiction. This matters as my initial contribution to this thread was a
simple fact that my subsequent opinion hasn't changed.

I doubt the BBC Charter says anything about your particular inability
to come up with a self-consistent set of arguments.

If that's news to you, I must have made a serious mistake in thinking
you were well informed. Can I suggest that the Charter might shed some
light on the role of a PSB? It might help clear up where you're
getting confused. On second thoughts, you might not understand it..

My first contribution to this thread was fact..and it still is,
regardless of your feeble attempts to steer the debate elsewhere.

Whoosh (again). I mean, good grief..you cannot even spot when I'm
saying that to you. Was my sarcasm that subtle???!

Ditto!

LOL..next..

--
Z

Total Moronic BBC Scheduling
 

snip even more waffle

Feel free to scientifically and logically analyse my use of the word
'yawn'..

--
Z