That makes sense PBS/NPR are not exactly govt-owned, because they're amazingly awesome resources despite the depredations of the last years.
I knew they got federal funding, though, thus the confusion. But I think an actual (small) public broadcaster mandated to create NZ content would not be a bad thing. Maori TV is filling that niche in a lot odd ways, though
And to be really cynical, how many govts around the world don't control a broadcaster - propaganda has to come from somewhere.
not that I think NZ really aspires to Soviet-era levels of propaganda, but it's still handy to own a broadcaster that's a "trusted news source".
Back to my original point, is there any govt that anyone can think of that doesn't control a TV network and/or a radio network? Even the US has the PBS. In fact, NZ seems unusual in having a state-owned broadcaster that isn't a "public" broadcaster (not-for-profit, serving various communities).
I know just the venue. Dark, fairly loud music, a pretty stern audience ... and gags are available.
But I do agree with the suggestion that the lifetime awards be made first. Splendid plan.
Also, yes, where are the women in this category?
You're using iTunes? no suggestions there. But if you have a Windows machine, and your music is sitting in properly labelled files in a non-itunes directory structure, it would be easy enough to download Media Monkey or Foobar to retag your music. MM is particularly powerful.
If it is in itunes, it might even be worth extracting the problem music out of it, deleting the entries from iTunes, using another product to retag, and then reingesting it into itunes. I did this for a friend a wee while back - it didn't actually end up being too much of a faff, and worth it for hundreds of oddly-tagged tracks.
Not to mention the fact that the legal remedy for "intractable" disputes in a marriage - which, these days, does not contractually require it be "consummated" - is simply to get a divorce.
Enjoying together - yes, that's exactly what sex should be about. :-)
everyone I've met has "reasons" that are acceptable and ones that are not
Er, I don't know if I'm missing your point, but we're talking about consenting to sex rather than breaking some random contract. It doesn't matter what reason someone has for not consenting. "I don't want to" is sufficient.
I suppose the potential danger is that some moron might think that the app somehow creates a legally enforceable contract. Whereas, as far as I know, making contracts for sexual acts is specifically prohibited.
The thing about the good2go app is that it seems to negate the concept that consent can be withdrawn at any time. And, as you say, what you're consenting to is not specified.
I'm not legalistic in my approach to kink - those multipage agreements as what is on or off the menu make me roll my eyes, internally. But if you're not proceeding with the knowledge that "please don't do that" will be instantly heeded, then it's better to have that kind of thing than nothing at all. (Also, I get it that some people like the "security" of a spelled-out agreement, or get off on the formality.)
But I don't get what's so hard about the concept of "stop now", which I have seen much whining about in various forums. I'm sorry, a sexual disappointment doesn't trumpet harming someone, emotionally or otherwise.
Part of my kink is stretching someone'a boundaries. But that MUST be done in the context of mutual trust and negotiation. If you don't have absolute assurance it's there, then don't do it. Stick to the simple clear agreements and active ongoing consent, verbal or otherwise.
I think that according to the rules of heraldry and flag design, that connotation is precisely why no (?) nation has a substantially-black flag. It's a big no-no traditionally.
Heh, I would have been going AAAAAAAA!! too at that chorus, if I was in that crowd.
And agreed with Bart, great progress in the stagecraft.
No! And thanks for the link!