On The Sofa (3)

[Anonymous @]

@shazzbot — I’m afraid it’ll have been and gone by then…. not sure that we’ll need an excuse to raise a glass or two at the pub anyways…. 😉

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

Well, my famed tact & diplomacy have made d123456 commit Hari-Kari.

I must say that this was certainly not my intent.

Next time when someone mentions me & my spoilers in the wrong place, I’ll try to sort it by personal messages.

I can’t believe that ‘little old me’ has caused these gems:

i can relate to @dcTennant when he said you are all very hostile to new people here

 

i will delete myself now , and go far away from this amazingly arogant ,rude and hostile forum.
I am sad you did not appriciate my brilliant theorys . as you dont have any good theorys going on here.
goodbye !!

I’m off to do my ‘Hostility Homework’.

[Anonymous @]

@wolfweed – you can’t seriously think you had anything to do with today’s troll.  Please.

It was at least his third incarnation and that whole business of ‘it was just one line in a million, guv’ showed that the ‘I’m a non-English speaking person trying my best’ persona was a fake.  He was a troublemaker from the get-go and although @craig tried his very best, over multiple incarnations, to sway him over from The Dark Side, that last juvenile outburst showed him up for what he really was.

I wish I could actually believe that last ‘goodbye !!!’ but I’m sure we’ll see him again here.   P.S.  I find it very funny when people who previously feigned spelling, grammar and vocabulary mistakes galore in their posts, suddenly in their ‘Goodbye Cruel World’ post discover perfect idiomatic English.  (And, get all ‘I was too brilliant for you’ in their GBCW post.  Priceless.)

P.S.:  Compare today’s GBCW post with the previous one.  His English tutoring must have gone into overtime.

i did not pay attention,but i see you all type the text in the same manner,as if you are all writers for the new york times,this is silly to me,but i respect the opinion of most of you.i am not use to type in a such.. for me to formal way.i am the computer caveman.and i am not emberessed to admit it.my apologies to mister fish i didn t know you all write the same way.i didn t mean to insult anbody.cheers from croatia

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

@Shazzbot – Thanks. I got the vibe that the misplaced post was a dig at me, but you’ve got to try to give people the benefit of the doubt.

the autor of this theory writes a doctor who pysho analysis , not providing any other extra interesting facts

Claiming to be foreign is a lot less low than feigning Mental Retardedness but we can probably expect that next.

It wasn’t all a complete waste of time though, as we were gifted with the wonderous ‘Shape Shiters’…

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

[Whisht @whisht]

@shazzbot – shh, next you’ll be saying that the website has no clothes…

🙂

actually, the whole online advertising model is (currently) based around the physical newspaper/ magazine/ billboard model.

Which itself is based on intuition – which is “if more people who we think could be our customers see it, then more of the people who may be our customers may buy it”.

Its a belief that kinda works but hardly efficiently, but no one ever got sacked for believing in what everyone else believed in. This particular belief has been going for a couple of hundred years, and it is at least proven that by not advertising, sales go down. However, where and when an advert is seen is the key to someone remembering, and the current approach is still locked in print media thinking. Its changing (though not as quickly as you’d imagine digital abilities to be) and Google is the benchmark at the moment (“we got what we think was their intent or mindset from the search query so show them ‘this’ and this is more relevant so charge the advertiser more).

However, I haven’t seen many stats for who actually clicks the advert and then actually buys. Its all based on hope.

I remember a few years ago an agency that distributed ads being surprised when their ‘number of clicks who viewed the ad website’ was challenged by my client as we had a way of (finally) accurately counting the actual number of “eyeballs” that they had. And yes, it was far fewer. Our client had been overpaying them for years. And it still goes on, as I’m not sure accurate counting is happening (though its not my particular area of expertise).

So yes, you’re right. But yes, the guardian get more money by provocative articles leading to clicks.

and it was such a shite article. I haven’t been bothered to write anything there though I’ve recommended anything that said “this is shit”.

perhaps I’m a good example as to why we shouldn’t have “likes” and “recommends” as its better to hear thoughts and voices than simply volume of agreement.

[Whisht @whisht]

blimey – that was longer than intended – apologies!!

[Anonymous @]

NEVER apologise for a detailed and cogent argument, @whisht. 😀

And not least because you confirmed my suspicions that ‘page-view based internet advertising budgets’ are a chimera which signifies the imminent downfall of human society in all its utter sh*teness. **

** oooh, perhaps you didn’t say that, and I extrapolated it.  Apologies myself.  🙂

[Whisht @whisht]

and also Shazzbot I know you know this already (damn, rereading and realising I hadn’t written properly and edits gone so I can’t edit original post).

Its more – you’re right, and yes, people are that lazy and dumb!

—EDIT —

ah – you replied already!

doh!

[IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan @pedant]

@whisht

(“we got what we think was their intent or mindset from the search query so show them ‘this’ and this is more relevant so charge the advertiser more).

I am constantly amazed at how poor Google, Facebook et are at identifying my preferences. The very best algorithm is totally shit. Yet they get very upset when you use plug ins to try to deal with the crap results.

Internet advertising is the biggest scam on the planet while also being the biggest nuisance to users.

[Craig @craig Emperor]

@wolfweed @Shazzbot

d12345 was, indeed, from Croatia (given his .hr email address), so I can forgive the bad spelling. But his spelling did appear to improve as he tried a bit harder and, as you say Shazzbot, I did try to give him every opportunity to actually join in.

What I find sadly amusing is that someone who initially came on here to try and annoy and offend people can actually be offended themselves so quickly, and by not very much. Imagine if we’d really tried to troll him!

It seems to be a bit of a pattern. People join to try and annoy us, or waste our time (“Please write a long reply in response to my stupid question about the Doctor that’s been asked many times before.”), or they’re just naturally annoying without any real intent. But if we annoy them a tiny bit they’re off. “I’m so offended I’m deleting myself… for the third time! And I hate you all!”

[Whisht @whisht]

@craig – yep, though having English as a second language doesn’t mean that its usual to write either aggressively or in single blocks of writing. (I can’t imagine my couple of friends from there doing that).

and being thin skinned when ‘giving out’ is a sign of a bully in whatever culture.

And don’t get me started on bullies.

y’know, I’m really sorry that by creating and keeping this community going, you have to deal with this shit.

Thank you

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

@craig – I could have probably handled it a bit better but I’m not on top form today & my immediate concern was to move the spoilers.

I know I took the p*ss with mocking  ‘Shape Shiters’ but I couldn’t resist, as that was an obvious typo – d123456 wrote the word shapeshifting with no problem.

I nearly started to retaliate when it became personal, but stopped myself. I suppose that’s a benefit of being an old fogey.

I had a little think and realised I should have mentioned to him that there was nothing to stop the same post appearing on the DOTD thread, sans Spoilers, but by that time Hari-Kari had occurred.

[Craig @craig Emperor]

@whisht Cheers, and no worries, I’ll get better at it. And if I don’t I’ll just give @phaseshift a shout. He’s well good at it!

@wolfweed Don’t worry about it at all. You did absolutely nothing wrong. I’m beginning to think being offended is a new form of trolling. “If I don’t get a reaction from my posts I’m going to pretend to be offended then delete myself, then watch as these nice people, y’know, those with a bit of a conscience, beat themselves up about it”.

It really does seem to be happening more and more.

[stevethewhistle @steve-thorp]

To All

Thanks, and keep up the good contributions.

I still remember (on another place) a certain Truculent Sheep (formerly known as Alexander) who, when he was criticised, tried to provoke contributors into making inappropriate comments to try and get them banned from the Guardian comments site.

Cheers

Steve

[PhaseShift @phaseshift Time Lord]

@craig – It’s a shame the Time Lord moniker for mods can’t be individual. I’d happily take up @scaryb‘s suggestion of “Special Weapons”. 😀

@wolfweed – No point in giving it a second thought, as they’re probably selecting the next moniker to sign in as. I always enjoy the “faux offence” ones, as they storm away like a petulant teenager. They complete my day and send to sleep with a smile on my face.

And it was great to indulge in the “shape shiting” stuff – I almost went for a Tur(d)ner Prize gag.

[Anonymous @]

@steve-thorp — careful now. One of my last communications with dear old Truckles was him warning me that he was ‘keeping a close eye’ on this site in case we dissed him at any point….

[Anonymous @]

And just to add that I don’t think that @wolfweed did anything wrong. It’s rather a bizarre one this one. Just a simple piece of housekeeping, made with what I thought was exemplary politeness. I guess some of the comments about the the formatting of his posts was still rankling….

Also agree that faux-offence is getting more and more common. As most of you will know, it’s one of the things that really gets my goat at the moment too….

[stevethewhistle @steve-thorp]

@jimthefish

“Also agree that faux-offence is getting more and more common.”

Mary Whitehouse has a lot to answer for! 😉

 

[Anonymous @]

this is so amusing and funny , i just couldnt resist to post a reply

o @wolfweed and @shazzbot how you made me laugh hahaha

It was at least his third incarnation and that whole business of ‘it was just one line in a million, guv’ showed that the ‘I’m a non-English speaking person trying my best’ persona was a fake. He was a troublemaker from the get-go

Claiming to be foreign is a lot less low than feigning Mental Retardedness but we can probably expect that next.

I find it very funny when people who previously feigned spelling, grammar and vocabulary mistakes galore in their posts, suddenly in their ‘Goodbye Cruel World’ post discover perfect idiomatic English.

It wasn’t all a complete waste of time though, as we were gifted with the wonderous ‘Shape Shiters’…

P.S.: Compare today’s GBCW post with the previous one. His English tutoring must have gone into overtime.

hahahahahaha unbeliveble , just unbeliveble , and then the voice of reason comes in @craig @jimthefish

d12345 was, indeed, from Croatia (given his .hr email address), so I can forgive the bad spelling.

If I don’t get a reaction from my posts I’m going to pretend to be offended then delete myself,

Just a simple piece of housekeeping, made with what I thought was exemplary politeness. I guess some of the comments about the the formatting of his posts was still rankling….

It s a bizzare one this one

now these two guys have something in their heads , you others are way below my standard ,including @phaseshift @iamnotafish @steve ….. but @shazzbot is an apsolute winner of gold retarded medal .

See you in a few months , when other interesting episodes will come . i have decoded the 50th , i am the man . peace

ooo and that coment that i was a bully , hahahaha to good

[Anonymous @]

“You do have strange people at yo’ parties!”

I Gotta Be Me

[PhaseShift @phaseshift Time Lord]

Awww, Bless!

[Anonymous @]

There is a certain circumnambulatory cartilagenous creature who might really, really, like to be in the Groundlings’ seats right now.

Whoo-hooo @pedant … popcorn’s piping hot and seats are going for a song … 😆

[Craig @craig Emperor]

@jimthefish We get the seal of approval!

The rest of you… Well, Ming has his eye on you 😀

[IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan @pedant]

@craig – rather than a  nuclear delete button, who about changing it so stuff gets moved to a naughty step so we can all point and laugh?

@jimthefish Truculent sheep the arse-wipe obnoxious witless troll simpleton formerly known as Alexander? Why would any want to diss him?

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

I think all post #19960 needed was a ‘bwah ha haaa’ to make it perfect. It’s strangely appropriate that we’ve been watching Part 4 of Tomb of the Cybermen tonight.

So you are mad. Just wanted to check.

🙂

[Craig @craig Emperor]

@wolfweed See. No reason to beat yourself up. They hang around to witness the reaction.

@pedant For once we may be in agreement. Will see what I can do.

[Anonymous @]

@pedant — couldn’t have put it better myself….

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

[Anonymous @]

From the Radio Times:

Doctor Who should be used to teach Religious Studies in schools says University lecturer

Over the show’s long history on television – and in various spin-off TV shows, audio adventures, novels and comic books – religion and religious themes have consistently been a subject of interest.

The show has attracted everything from Church of England conferences dedicated to its use in preaching, to guest appearances by [high-profile atheist] Richard Dawkins.

[PhaseShift @phaseshift Time Lord]

@shazzbot

Religion on a Sunday?!? Can’t we keep it special? 😉

No – I am actually interested in what he intends to focus on in the book he’s written (although not that interested that I’d shell out £15 for it), and how he builds the argument. I thought this discussion by Splendid Chaps that was recorded earlier this year was interesting. It featured Reverend Doctor Avril Hannah-Jones who did the Church of the later day Geek stuff in Australia, using Star Wars, Star Trek, Buffy and Doctor Who as religious texts. She actually had her eyes opened a bit by some of the choices that were made, and ended up with a pretty negative view of how religion had been portrayed.

I was quite surprised by this in the article:

while Gridlock, an episode show later that year, was viewed by others as a Christian allegory, and nominated for an Evangelical award in the US.

OK – it’s been a while since I watched Gridlock but doesn’t that episode involve the people with a shared belief and singing “Abide with me” basically stuck in a rut, going round in circles and lacking the motivation to question and do anything about their situation? That require a couple of outsiders and a self-sacrifice to sort them out? I’m amazed that’s the kind of Allegory any Christian would want to celebrate!

I’m so interested in this, I actually think it could form the basis of a retrospective in itself, because some of the episodes I’d highlight cover the history of the show, and include some that have also been mentioned in passing (I think it was @bluesqueakpip who asked for Curse of Peladon for Three, Kinda has been mentioned a lot for Five, And Curse of Fenric for Seven). It might make for an interesting diversion at some point in the future.

[Anonymous @]

Hmm, Who has never really shied clear of religion but aside from a couple of dalliances with Buddhism, I’d say that it’s been more critical of it more than anything else. Evil things lurking in churches — The Daemon and the Malus. Dodgy-dealing priests — The Curse of Peladon, the Masque of Mandragora, God-heads who turn out to be not so great — the End of Time, The Face of Evil (which apparently had the original title The Day God Went Mad).

Would it be too uncharitable for me to suggest that this seems to be a prime example of what R. Dawkins described as religion acting as a mind virus? I.e. latching onto a set of memes that are currently gaining more cultural traction than they are as a means of ‘free’ propagation?

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@jimthefish – don’t mention Dawkins. 🙂 I’m not qualified to judge his ability as a biologist, but I do have an MA in Religious Studies. He could definitely do with, shall we say, a little more research before he writes his books. 😈

Modern Religious Education in schools isn’t really about teaching kids to believe in the Christian faith (except for Roman Catholic schools); it’s more about introducing them to the various major faiths, and then to the ethical problems they’re likely to meet as adults. Bearing in mind that most people, faced with an ethical problem, will default to the ethics of some branch of Christianity or one of the other major faiths. So you’d typically go through stuff like ‘war’, ‘the problem of natural and human evil’, that sort of thing. Then you’d look at the various religious/ethical viewpoints. I think you could easily use Who – but you’d quite likely be using it as a discussion starter or as an example of the secular viewpoint.

On the whole I’d say that Gridlock would be a bloody awful Christian allegory. I seem to remember RTD finding it odd that David Tennant didn’t like the ‘sit on your backside and pray’ approach. 🙂

That said, some atheist allegories adapt very well as Christian allegories. Terry Pratchett was quite shocked when his Small Gods was very well received. 😀

[ScaryB @scaryb]

Greetings! Dammit – I seem to have missed all the fun. Again 😉 But it looks like mega-thanks due to @wolfweed, @Shazzbot, @craig for being vigilant in keeping the main threads clear of spoilers.  We spoilerphobes really appreciate it. (drinks of whatever’s your poison await you in the Rose & Crown)

Loved @craig‘s comment –

What I find sadly amusing is that someone who initially came on here to try and annoy and offend people can actually be offended themselves so quickly, and by not very much. Imagine if we’d really tried to troll him!

But, with just 20 days (Yay! for the countdown clock) to go till all (most? well some!) of our bonkers theories get knocked out the part (no doubt to be replaced by a whole new set) – there are more important things to do.

(@Phaseshift You’d fit the role of special weapons mod superbly. Glad you liked it)

[PhaseShift @phaseshift Time Lord]

@jimthefish @bluesqueakpip

On the whole, I’d say the anniversary year has been seized on by many, ahem, well timed (or opportunistic) viewpoints by various interested “stakeholders”. One thinks of the Doctor Who and Race book earlier this year.

I think I can agree you could use it as a start-off for discussion, as I suppose you could use many things, but I have to agree with @jimthefish you’d probably conclude that, on the whole, it’s a negative view. I wouldn’t think this is particularly troublesome for anyone. Religion is often presented as a conservative force for the status quo which rejects progress, while Science has often been portrayed as practiced by a stream of madmen with no thought of consequence or morality. That’s drama.

I’ve read stuff in the past that has tried to misrepresent Curse of Fenric as suggesting that strong belief is inherently a good thing (it rejects vampires!) and that the loss of faith by the Priest (who can’t reject vampires) is an endorsement of religion. I’ve never seen a problem with presenting faith as a force, someone’s faith and beliefs can shape history and events after all, but the Doctors faith is in his companions and the Soviet Commanders is with the Communist revolution, so probably not that much an endorsement of religion.

Terry Pratchett was quite shocked when his Small Gods was very well received.

Heh. I can remember hearing that, of the mail he received, those who mentioned religion in any context were split 50:50 between believers and non-believers. All of whom thanked him for supporting their opinion. Truly, Terry heard “the sound of many voices”.

[ScaryB @scaryb]

Re religion in DW – there was a very pointed comment by the Doctor in Rings of Akhaten when Clara asked if it really was a god to the effect (sorry, not got the exact wording) that it was what the poeple chose to believe and it kept them happy.  Mostly gods (and devils) are portrayed as being that way because we don’t have the full information about their origins. Everything is ultimately fallible and mortal.

Without researching in detail, I reckon the show has tackled the major themes of most religions/belief systems over the years. Even the Time Lords themselves, while arguably having god-like powers, are shown not to be the oldest (or most powerful) species eg Fenric, the Shakri

I agree with @bluesqueakpip that it could be interesting to use DW as a jumping off point for discussion but the article above looks like more click-bait to me. Expect much more over the next few weeks.

[Anonymous @]

Blimey, that Radio Times link has certainly sparked an interesting discussion on religion!  (Sorry @phaseshift for plopping it in on a Sunday … must’ve been the village church bells that added a certain atmosphere to my searching for DW news this morning.  🙂 )

I think it would make a very interesting blog, to discuss overt or otherwise religious symbolism and tropes to be found in DW.  But it’s such an enormous topic – would it be better to break it down into parts by Doctor?  Various producers’ / script editors’ / showrunners’ eras?

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

I think it would make a very interesting blog

@Shazzbot – ‘interesting’ in the Chinese sense? 😀

[PhaseShift @phaseshift Time Lord]

@shazzbot (@Craig) @all

While it may make an interesting blog, I had more of an interest in potentially opening it up a bit with an eye to the future. I’m sure we’ll be busy towards the end of November, and upto Christmas. After that we’ll probably have a loooooonggg wait.

I’ve enjoyed both the SM and BG retrospectives, but I’m keenly aware they’ve had limited participation. We finished Tomb yesterday, and shortly we’ve got a BBC showing of Unearthly Child, and I’m wondering if we should just call that our Hartnell review? I think one thread covering all the episodes, as we’ve done with Web of Fear and Enemy of the World. So my question was more to gauge the interest of further retrospectives in the future, maybe featuring stories we haven’t covered with a loose theme like “Religion” or “Time” (I think @bluesqueakpip was also interested in Day of the Daleks, and that may be worth revisiting in a Time retrospective).

I’m sure people will say “Ah…we’ll consider that later”, but I think it’s worth asking the question “are more retrospectives are a good idea for the future, or shall we look for another avenues to entertain ourselves?”

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@phaseshift and @craig – One thing I noticed with the Retrospectives was that participation dropped noticeably when we took the individual episodes off the front page and made them ‘portmanteau’ items.

I don’t know if that was coincidence, but I wonder if we should try putting the current week’s episode on the front page in future. Move them into the relevant folder when they’re no longer ‘this week’s episode’.

We did originally plan to leave things fairly clear for November/December. There’s something happening around then – can anyone remember what? 🙂

Anyway, the BG retrospective is, I think, finishing this week and the Moffat retrospective finishes next Saturday with The Name of The Doctor. If anyone would like to comment further on The Bells of St John, it’s here.

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

[Anonymous @]

@bluesqueakpip – that’s a good observation about participation levels in the SM / BG episode threads, pre- and post-Home Page changes.  And I think you have a very good idea about keeping the ‘current featured’ episode more highly noticeable on the front page, before moving it to its own page later.

With respect to SM – I wonder if it might be pertinent that we’re getting into episodes that people have watched fairly recently?  And therefore might feel they’ve already said what they have to say about that episode?

With respect to BG – well, I’ve watched all the Cybermen episodes but didn’t find I had anything constructive to contribute to the debate.  There are so many more erudite posts to read, and additional snippets to watch, which enhanced my post-viewing pleasure – but which didn’t make me think my ‘ooh, I’m really starting to love Patrick Troughton’s take on the Doctor!’ stylee thoughts would advance the debate.

That last point goes back to something I think @whisht said, regarding polls … why don’t people contribute more?  I’d be willing to bet that a large majority would tick the ‘Everyone else covered everything so well, and I couldn’t think of anything to add’ option.

[Anonymous @]

@wolfweed – that ‘Cassandra Lasagna’ should DEFINITELY go into @phaseshift‘s 50th blog!  It’s the most marvellous accompaniment to any of the Doctor-themed cocktails which have been proposed.

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@Shazzbot – I think with the Moffat retrospective, part of it has been that we talked the most recent episodes over quite exhaustively. And we’ve probably all watched them three or four times. That said, I am looking forward to re-watching The Name of The Doctor.

Despite my essay length rewatch comments, I’m afraid my attitude to Bells of St John, good as it is, was ‘oh gawd, do I have to watch it again?’ Rather like @phaseshift and The Eleventh Hour. 😉

But I finally found @wolfweed‘s screeching tires! 😀

[Anonymous @]

@bluesqueakpip – I think they were also @whisht‘s screeching tyres!  🙂

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

@bluesqueakpip & @Shazzbot – They were never my screeching tyres!

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@shazzbot – funny, I thought that as soon as the edit button had vanished… sorry, @whisht. 🙁

[wolfweed @wolfweed]

@bluesqueakpip – I do squeal a lot, though……

[Whisht @whisht]

he he – yes, I’ll admit it, I was obsessed about those tyres!

They just must be important!

Though having said that, I was also sure that Clara Oswin Oswald was an anagram…. (I’ll never see those hours again…)

[Whisht @whisht]

yep @Shazzbot – I actually think that’s why most people don’t contribute or drop away for periods.
They probably just think they don’t have anything interesting to add and are happy just to read along. which is fair enough.

That was where my silly ‘lurkers outside the pub’ image came from. I’ll admit when I was writing it I thought that most people have something interesting to say about something, so I had to come up with a bonkers theory for one of them on the spot. Kinda felt like those cartoon characters who run off a cliff and continue running in mid air.

Luckily Leela saved me!

Mind you, I’m glad I didn’t write it a day later or I’d have had to add a spot of violence as a group of armed vigilantes suddenly erupt from the bar and tear a dull, loudmouth prat apart.

[Author]

Posts