Now, don't be like that.
I don't think you were doing anything like trolling.
But, only because you asked, I think you tend to enter with thunderous judgements and strong statements in a tone that implies a strong response, especially when, as in the case of today's, there are some flaws in your argument.
But I am genuinely glad to see you back.
Trolling? To me, it's about participating in a discussion in bad faith; looking to play the discussion in some way rather than merely contribute to it. You weren't doing that, but sniping about "self-congratulating backslapping" isn't really helpful. You know it's more than that.
That all said, I'm a fan of vigorous argument, and I really enjoy the fact that I can argue tetchily with Craig or Gio or anyone else on one thread and be giving them a manly backrub on the next.
Ok. I make arguments for a living and I know ad hominem ones are fallacious by definition. Others do not.
I suppose your explanation gives a vague definition of trolling.
I'd like to think good faith (rather than bad faith) is merely about reasonable expectations.
I'm not sure you can reasonably expect people to argue without trying to "play" the argument to their advantage. Arguing is about winning.
I'm still interested in what Robyn has to say.
Most people don't watch TV like we do.
Agreed! Yes! I couldn't agree more!
I do the same. I grew up doing the same. My folks would snigger at boom shadows and the like.
HOWEVER, most people, I expect you to admit, do NOT do this.
Lots of people...think what they see on TV is real. Ask the people that work at television listing magazines.
I reckon that most people watch TV out of habit and that means without thinking. It's like smoking cigarettes.
I am off to pitch this show - it's going to be great! Just think about it.
Some quality trolling there Brickley, by the way, I take my hat off to you.
Sorry, a typo. Mea culpa.
Can I have a definition of trolling, please? Every time I come here with an interest in a debate I get accused of this because I don't take part in the overall self-congratulating backslapping that passes for debate in here.
Hence: freeview recorder. Miles of free content, view at leisure, ads over in a blinding 16x FF flash.
But: who's gonna pay for the content in the long run?
Don't you have to buy that Freeview thing though?
I didn't realise it was free content. Thanks.
Nope -- but Prime did shunt it off to a graveyard slot and stopped promoting it.
Interesting. I thought it was one of the best I've seen. Tells you something. Keep in mind that most people watch Police Ten Seven, Boarder Patrol, Sensing Horseshit and the like. Imagine your brain if you watched this shit?
I have never subscribed the 'crap theory' ie dismissing an entire medium because some of its content ain 't so good. Do we ever say, "some books are just a waste of paper so I never read" or " there is some horrible music around, so I never listen to anything??" So, why do some people apply this to television?
I don't find that convincing. Television's entire purpose is to argue that some soap/chewing gum/baldness therapy is better than some other one. It's purpose is to beam capitalist ideology into everyone's lounge - and no increasingly, everyone's bedrooms.
Imagine if Goebbels saw this? He'd have a boner for months.
Books do lots of things. Television doesn't. It asks nothing of you except that you not think.
The Wire was free to air here. As long as you could find it. We get a bunch of HBO stuff free to air here - The Sopranos, The Wire, Mad Men - so in those terms we're actually better off here than in the States.
Yes I know that. But didn't start its life as free to air.
DIdn't Mad Men get cancelled in NZ? I loved their needlessly anti-semitic adverts before the launch, though.
The Wire did show on free to air TV in New Zealand.
Wasn't it on at some bizarre time?
You seemed to be implying that robust social commentary had disappeared from television. I think it really hasn't.
I'm simply saying that TV has become incredibly shallow and boring. The same thing is happening with movies. People still go to really bad movies. Aren't they doing a remake of 'The A-Team'? I can't wait till my kids are watching remakes of remakes.
My main problem with TV is that when we have one it sets the after-work tempo of my life. It also forces me to watch soap commercials until I hit mute and walk away.
Doesn't anyone else in here feel as if they are being spoken to as if they are soft in the head whilst watching TV?
I'm guessing The Wire was past your bedtime?
I'd finished Season 5 by mid-last year.
I'm talking about free to air TV. Old time TV.
Comparing Diff'rent Strokes to The Wire is pretty pathetic.
I'm also interested in your thoughts about the future of television.
How about a conversation about whether, on the whole, television is a good thing or a bad thing?
I grew watching heaps of TV. My mum and dad both work in TV. I loved it.
But as I got older, TV got less and less good.
Just yesterday, somebody reminded me of an episode of Diff'rent Strokes in which the two black kids had trouble doing an aptitude test for a private school because the questions were biased toward upper-middle class white students.
Imagine seeeing that on TV today? I'd drop dead.
Which is why I haven't watched TV for three years.
My hand was forced: there was nothing to watch on TV 1-3 or Prime and I don't want to pay for Sky.
And frankly, I don't understand the rest.
I know more and more people that don't watch TV at all either.
TV was always junk food but it used to be good junk food.
Now it blows.
I can't believe dumping on The Aucklander got so few comments. That upstart community has had it coming for years. Good on ya, Russ.
Now, on to the Western Leader. Those fuckers got it coming. Still.
Don't even get me going on the Auckland City Harbour News. They're rotten to the core.
One of the more striking conclusions from the Auckland Uni School of Medicine survey on drug us is the major reason people give for stopping using cannabis: they didn't like it any more .
The majority of New Zealanders who use cannabis stop using it at some point -- I know some very keen smokers who stopped for the same or similar reasons to you.
That's interesting, thanks. Now I touch every couple of years just to remind myself of how little I really enjoy it.
The Dunedin and Christchurch longitudinal studies have shown reasonably convincingly that the long-term risks of cannabis are much higher in users under 18, and the earlier the first use the greater the risk.
the science says it's a very bad idea for you to have it at your age when your brain's still developing
I want to read more on this. See I always knew that when I was high I couldn't learn new things. I could laugh at George Carlin but I couldn't learn. I also always thought that I had a bad memory and was just bad at maths and science. Lateral or logical thinking wasn't my thing. I was more into literature, music, etc.
Except my job now requires lateral thinking and in the 7 or so years since I stopped smoking, I've started doing expert Sudoku puzzles, riddles, etc. Stuff that I never did before because I thought I was just bad at it.
I have wondered whether I have just learned how to do these things -- learning being something I wasn't very good at before because I was often high as a kite.
I've wondered whether my brain had repaired itself because it seemed really incongruous. An old friend saw me doing a jigsaw puzzle and thought I'd lost my mind.
Anyway, really interesting because I'd been thinking about this for a while.