The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: familyfeudfan on February 01, 2004, 03:23:01 PM
-
It's funny I didn't have GSN when it was in the "Dark period" But I got it 3 years ago and I find my self thinking that GSN was better in the dark period than it is know (2-1-03). When I first got GSN it was still showing password which is my favorite game show then after they stopped showing Password I enjoyed other Goodson game shows but, GSN just hasn't been the same since all of "Original" programming has come. When will it leave?
-
NEVER! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
-
What they should do is set up a GSN2 for all the GSN originals and Reality TV, and have GSN be nothing but classics. Maybe bring back some of the classics from days of yore. :)
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 02:08 PM\'] What they should do is set up a GSN2 for all the GSN originals and Reality TV, and have GSN be nothing but classics. Maybe bring back some of the classics from days of yore. :) [/quote]
Yes, but you know it isn't gonna happen, so why keep harping about it?
-
Did anyone at GSN officially declare that?
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 05:15 PM\'] Did anyone at GSN officially declare that? [/quote]
The day that Hollywood Connection was taken off did it for me. [ducking]
-
[quote name=\'familyfeudfan\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 03:23 PM\'] It's funny I didn't have GSN when it was in the "Dark period" But I got it 3 years ago and I find my self thinking that GSN was better in the dark period than it is know (2-1-03). [/quote]
When you say "know", I suspect that you're fishing for that word which is synonymous with "currently". That word is spelled "now".
Also, know (not to be confused with now) that 2-1-03 is a date one year in the past. Today is 2-1-04. It is the 32nd day of the year of our Lord 2004. It's high time you started knowing that. Or is it nowing that?
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 02:15 PM\'] Did anyone at GSN officially declare that? [/quote]
No, but at the same time nobody at GSN has officially declared that they've bought the rights to TPiR from CBS, effective Monday, and that they're installing Andrew Dice Clay as the new host, and yet I have a feeling I'm gonna see Barker on my Tivo tomorrow.
-
I first got GSN it was still showing password which is my favorite game show then after they stopped showing Password I enjoyed other Goodson game shows but, GSN just hasn't been the same since all of "Original" programming has come.
Sorry to point out the obvious, but GSN is showing Password right now. Okay, it's an ungodly hour. So get TiVo and enjoy.
-
It's funny I didn't have GSN when it was in the "Dark period" But I got it 3 years ago and I find my self thinking that GSN was better in the dark period than it is
I've said many times that I enjoyed what some people refer to as "The Dark Period". When you look back at GSN's history, it's the only time we've seen such shows as "Break the Bank", "Pass the Buck", "Go", "Hollywood Connection", "Parent Game", "$20,000 Pyramid", etc.
OK, maybe all of those shows aren't exactly earth-shattering, but it was nice to see them at least for a little while!
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 02:31 AM\'] [quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 02:15 PM\'] Did anyone at GSN officially declare that? [/quote]
No, but at the same time nobody at GSN has officially declared that they've bought the rights to TPiR from CBS, effective Monday, and that they're installing Andrew Dice Clay as the new host, and yet I have a feeling I'm gonna see Barker on my Tivo tomorrow. [/quote]
And yet, that would give "reach into my $100 pocket" a whole new meaning. :-D
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 11 2004, 08:40 PM\'] OK I'm officially dizzy and confused. [/quote]
Funny, that only happens to me when I see a one-line post and a five-line sig.
Seriously, guys, can we ease up on the short stories below the dotted line?
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 11 2004, 10:16 PM\'] Seriously, guys, can we ease up on the short stories below the dotted line? [/quote]
So you're saying I shouldn't take a fully scanned-and-OCRed copy of EOTVGS3 and use it as my sig?
(sigh) Back to the drawing board...
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 11 2004, 07:40 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 02:31 AM\'] No, but at the same time nobody at GSN has officially declared that they've bought the rights to TPiR from CBS, effective Monday, and that they're installing Andrew Dice Clay as the new host, and yet I have a feeling I'm gonna see Barker on my Tivo tomorrow. [/quote]
OK I'm officially dizzy and confused. [/quote]
Well, then I've got just the thing for you, don't I, Mike?
Mike: That's right Don! The new and improved sarcasm detector can be yours today for only $19.99! But if you call in the next 10 minutes, we'll include a free game show tape! Enjoy an unsold pilot called "Malcolm!" But that's only if you call in the next 10 minutes! Back to you, Don.
Don: Thank you Mike!
Anyhow, thank you; Matt; for adressing this. 'Tis appreciated.
-
[quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 02:55 AM\'] ..Batteries Not Included... [/quote]
Don't you mean, "Sarcasm Detector not included"? I thought the company that made those things went bankrupt last fall because they invested their entire budget in ad time on Coupling.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 12:35 PM\'] [quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 02:55 AM\'] ..Batteries Not Included... [/quote]
Don't you mean, "Sarcasm Detector not included"? I thought the company that made those things went bankrupt last fall because they invested their entire budget in ad time on Coupling. [/quote]
You mean Mike K. and Chuck G. couldn't get ad time on GSN
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 07:11 PM\'] [quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 12:35 PM\'] [quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 02:55 AM\'] ..Batteries Not Included... [/quote]
Don't you mean, "Sarcasm Detector not included"? I thought the company that made those things went bankrupt last fall because they invested their entire budget in ad time on Coupling. [/quote]
You mean Mike K. and Chuck G. couldn't get ad time on GSN [/quote]
Well, there goes a good joke down the drain.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 11 2004, 10:16 PM\'] [quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 11 2004, 08:40 PM\'] OK I'm officially dizzy and confused. [/quote]
Funny, that only happens to me when I see a one-line post and a five-line sig.
Seriously, guys, can we ease up on the short stories below the dotted line? [/quote]
I thought my signature was good....... :( :(
I guess if someone else says something about it I'll either change it or just plain out erase it.
-
Oh, my signature is good. Nothing bad about it to me.
Anyway, Back on topic. I didn't get GSN until 2000. At the time I did get it, I liked watching the old TPIR shows with Johnny O. I liked them from the first time I saw them to the last time. In addition, I got to see 2 out of 3 versions of CS: Perry and Eubanks (Never saw Rafferty).
In addition, I saw HP and Blockbusters, and liked them, and even like Hollywood Showdown, and the Bergeron Squares. The $25K and $100K Pyramids brought me down Memory Lane, when I got to see those same episodes that I saw on USA, 10 years ago.
When TJW came in December, I started getting familiar with the Classic format (as I only knew the 90's format to start), and the same with TTD (ditto). Whenever I saw a Devil pop up in the bonus round, I was like "Well, they'd better win the next game, so that they can redeem themselves and win some prizes, because that's what they're guaranteed to leave with, if they bomb their next front game."
That was the ONLY Classic version I saw, the Joker's Jackpot years.
I also got familiar with Family Feud 1976, and saw how it really started. Pretty good.
So, in closing, I'll say this: The GSN we know may be gone forever, but it'll be forever etched in the hearts of me and all GSN fans nationwide and worldwide.
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 07:49 PM\'] I thought my signature was good....... :( :(
I guess if someone else says something about it I'll either change it or just plain out erase it. [/quote]
On most discussion groups, it's expected that (1) signatures are four lines or less, and (2) you don't make a habit of posting a signature that's longer than your message. It's just considered good form... and when you don't follow the first part, it's difficult to follow the second.
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 05:49 PM\'] I guess if someone else says something about it I'll either change it or just plain out erase it. [/quote]
Here's a hint: When Matt or Chris319 tell you to do something about your overly-long and utterly meaningless signature, don't wait around for a second opinion, 'cuz they're the ones in a position to do it FOR you. :)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 08:32 PM\'] Here's a hint: When Matt or Chris319 tell you to do something about your overly-long and utterly meaningless signature, don't wait around for a second opinion, 'cuz they're the ones in a position to do it FOR you. :) [/quote]
Oh! I didn't know he was a Moderator.
Ok, it's changed.
*sigh* I guess while I'm at it I might as well shorten my signature down at golden-road.net.
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 07:44 PM\'] *sigh* I guess while I'm at it I might as well shorten my signature down at golden-road.net. [/quote]
They would probably appreciate it. I know we do.
-
[quote name=\'nbuckler14\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 10:44 PM\'] Ok, it's changed.
*sigh* I guess while I'm at it I might as well shorten my signature down at golden-road.net. [/quote]
While power trips can be fun, of course, I didn't say anything about having to cut out everything except signing your name. Look around, get a general sense of what other people are doing. There's nothing wrong with a line or two. As others are telling you, it's when your signature is WAY longer than your message that it looks goofy.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 12 2004, 08:12 PM\'] So, in closing, I'll say this: The GSN we know may be gone forever, but it'll be forever etched in the hearts of me and all GSN fans nationwide and worldwide. [/quote]
The problem is; that it's not really gone. Primetime, and primetime only has changed. You'll still see Let's Make a Deal, Press Your Luck, among countless others.
-
The problem is; that it's not really gone. Primetime, and primetime only has changed. You'll still see Let's Make a Deal, Press Your Luck, among countless others.
I definitely agree with this. In fact, I think that many of these posts are again having that apocalyptic air that existed when the video game block came on.
Basically, you won't see me obsess over it until the game show part of GSN is gone for good. However, I can definitely agree with DSmith on this one. GSN is simply trying something new, and, if it doesn't work out, then they'll probably go back to traditional game show programming just like they did after their other experiments failed (NS and the video game block).
Moral of the story: No, GSN will never be the same 24-hour network of classic game shows it once was. But, yes, GSN will continue to show game shows during the day, and that's enough to make me happy. So, don't get the image of the Four Horsemen ready yet; there's still a long way to go!
Anthony
-
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Feb 13 2004, 09:52 AM\']
The problem is; that it's not really gone. Primetime, and primetime only has changed. You'll still see Let's Make a Deal, Press Your Luck, among countless others.
I definitely agree with this. In fact, I think that many of these posts are again having that apocalyptic air that existed when the video game block came on.
Basically, you won't see me obsess over it until the game show part of GSN is gone for good. However, I can definitely agree with DSmith on this one. GSN is simply trying something new, and, if it doesn't work out, then they'll probably go back to traditional game show programming just like they did after their other experiments failed (NS and the video game block).[/quote]
Don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but I still feel that if this revamp bombs, Sony will be pressing for something else--like that AXN all-action show channel they do overseas. No solid proof, just a hunch. And no Merv, I don't want to play it with X, Y or Z.
-
Don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but I still feel that if this revamp bombs, Sony will be pressing for something else--like that AXN all-action show channel they do overseas. No solid proof, just a hunch. And no Merv, I don't want to play it with X, Y or Z.
Yeah, but just how many of Sony's shows are leased out to other networks over here? Seems like they would make more money doing that than using it themselves...Plus they have to deal with Liberty. Liberty didn't buy into the network for action show reruns.
-
*Sigh*
You know Zach, if you want me to stay away, quit using my name on this board.
The next person to drag me into any discussion is getting whacked upside the head.
Please don't us my name Horan. I don't want to be linked with this place. There are so many morons on this board who can post at will because of uncaring moderators. And the allowence of old morons to return (See: Tammy Warner) really irks me.
Chuck
"Don't ask me, I just work here."
-
Chuck,
You need some *$&%ing Prozac. Seriously. Sometimes I wonder if you're not a carefully crafted alias by Harvey or Grant, by the way you manage to come on here and all you do is egg the moderators on. You've made all of three posts here, two flaming Matt Kaiser for asking for assistance with his TJW production and this one.
Zach did not disrespect you. He did not flame you. He simply continued a running joke. On the other hand, all you did in that post was flame. Flame flame flame flame big ol' fiery flames.
If there's any morons on this board, I'm probably replying to one of them right now. Matt, Chris, please ban this guy so we can get on with our normal conversation. This is the big boy sandbox, and Chuck just wet his Pull-Ups.
-
[quote name=\'Sport6449\' date=\'Feb 13 2004, 02:26 PM\'] I don't want to be linked with this place. [/quote]
I imagine that can be taken care of with little effort.
-
[quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Feb 13 2004, 04:42 PM\'] Chuck,
You need some *$&%ing Prozac. Seriously. Sometimes I wonder if you're not a carefully crafted alias by Harvey or Grant, by the way you manage to come on here and all you do is egg the moderators on. You've made all of three posts here, two flaming Matt Kaiser for asking for assistance with his TJW production and this one.
Zach did not disrespect you. He did not flame you. He simply continued a running joke. On the other hand, all you did in that post was flame. Flame flame flame flame big ol' fiery flames.
If there's any morons on this board, I'm probably replying to one of them right now. Matt, Chris, please ban this guy so we can get on with our normal conversation. This is the big boy sandbox, and Chuck just wet his Pull-Ups. [/quote]
I would not call Chuck G. a moron. No, he is not an alias of GB or HD. He and I have disagreed on some things for the last couple of years(as have Chris Lemon and I, Dave Z. and I, etc.). If CHuck chooses not to be in here, that is his choice. I won't mention Chuck G.'s name anymore if he doesn't want me to.
-
I don't need Prozac, I just need to quietly be left alone. I've moved on with my life. I found my peace and happiness and don't need to be dragged back into a mud puddle of garbage.
As to how I found my name being used, I know it wasn't asked but I'll answer anyway: I have a ton of friends who still lurk/occasionally post here. Good people who I've come to care about in the past three years. When my name pops up, ok maybe it only has once or twice, I'll hear about it.
Zach: Thank you for pointing out I'm not those two individuals, but I think any drooling moron could have figured it out. Once again, you commit nothing to the conversation.
The sarcasm detector is a joke Mike K. and I took to new heights. If you're gonna use it Zach, use it properly like Don did. Don't kill it. That's the one contribution I was a part of that I don't mind seeing continue.
Chris: I'm sorry to see any potential you have being wasted here on idiots. You're above this crap. But instead, I pity you for staying behind while some of us move on to better things.
Yes I've made three posts here and while my record at the old ATGS may not be the greatest, I contributed far more in reasonable discussion than half the people here.
If there is every something worth talking about here, I'll consider it. Otherwise: Get Bent.
Chuck
"Don't knock masturbation, it's sex with someone I love."---Woody Allen
-
don't need Prozac, I just need to quietly be left alone
If you didn't lose your temper over something as trivial as what Zach posted, you'd be left alone.
Chris: I'm sorry to see any potential you have being wasted here on idiots
You want idiots? Go the hell back to ATGS and leave us alone. What Chris does here is not your problem.
Or better yet, go post at the GSN boards. They'll love you over there.
I have a ton of friends who still lurk/occasionally post here. Good people who I've come to care about in the past three years
Other than your right hand? You've outdone yourself.
If there is every something worth talking about here, I'll consider it
(I assume that should say "ever," not "every.")
Hmmm...I've found plenty of worthwhile discussion here for a long time. Certainly better than hearing about Regis Philbin crapping his slacks at ATGS or the eternal warzone that is the GSN board.
Let me pose an open question to you, Chuck. Do you enjoy fighting with others? I'm getting the impression you'd rather have this board be ATGS where there's a moron a minute to flame.
Again, I beg of the intellegent men who run this board: shut this guy down. Please.
-
I didn't lose my temper. Your interpretation of things is sadly mistaken. You haven't seen me lose my temper in ages and I'm not about to give you the satisfaction.
Shut me down? There's a laundry list of people who should be gone before me. I'd list them all here but there is no time.
I don't need to argue with people to justify anything. I don't miss ATGS, but at least there when idiots were gone, they were gone. And if they came back, they were promptly run out again.
The morons who returned after the creation of this forum came back because they knew the moderators would protect their fragile egos. Tammy Warner left ATGS because she's a crybaby. She came back when she found out basically no one could slam Steve Beverly as hard as we wanted to anymore.
I left because I moved on with life. Better job, better pay, better life. I've never been happier.
I'd come back in earnest in a minute if I thought any contribution was worth anything. You lose IQ points posting to this board and will continue to do so until the moderators grow spinal columns.
People like you, whoserman and Tammy Warner are three reasons I have the sudden urge to watch and enjoy CS2K1. I gotta leave before I start having the urge to write a dream schedule.
Chuck
"On the Shermometer, this rates absolute zero."
-
I didn't lose my temper. Your interpretation of things is sadly mistaken. You haven't seen me lose my temper in ages and I'm not about to give you the satisfaction.
Fine. At least you stopped putting an expletive in every other word like you used to; I'll give you credit for that.
Shut me down? There's a laundry list of people who should be gone before me. I'd list them all here but there is no time.
Let's hear it; I have the time. I can probably give you a legit reason NOT to shut down almost every person you have on the "list."
I don't need to argue with people to justify anything. I don't miss ATGS, but at least there when idiots were gone, they were gone. And if they came back, they were promptly run out again.
....which is exactly the same as it is here. When idiots like that Dick Tater guy who trolled here a few months back get in, they're eliminated the same day.
The morons who returned after the creation of this forum came back because they knew the moderators would protect their fragile egos. Tammy Warner left ATGS because she's a crybaby. She came back when she found out basically no one could slam Steve Beverly as hard as we wanted to anymore.
I see an "s" on the end of the word "moron," thus implying there is more than one who this paragraph applies to. Yet I only see one example [and a very poor one at that] Maybe some people left ATGS but came back here because there would be no more trolls?
You lose IQ points posting to this board and will continue to do so until the moderators grow spinal columns.
I've learned more fascinating game show information here than I could have anywhere else.
The moderators have spinal columns, but they're being generous with you. But I can almost guarantee you'll be out on the street after this flap.
People like you, whoserman and Tammy Warner are three reasons I have the sudden urge to watch and enjoy CS2K1.
People like you make me want to listen to an mp3 of "YOUUUU WINNNN" over and over.
Chuck, before you start calling people "idiots," keep this in mind: "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," and go buy some more Pull-Ups. Your mess is starting to stink.
-
Produce any evidence of your "appearence" on MG/HS hour yet?
Until you do, nothing you say holds any water with me.
Liar.
Chuck
-
Killfile, anyone?
-
And in addition to that, let me add the following, spoken through the words of Isaiah 5:20, and maybe this'll be a lesson to Chuck:
"WOE to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"
Maybe if Chuck thought about this quote before posting here, we wouldn't be fighting now, would we?
-
I don't need Prozac, I just need to quietly be left alone. I've moved on with my life. I found my peace and happiness and don't need to be dragged back into a mud puddle of garbage.
So you're here why?......
I left because I moved on with life. Better job, better pay, better life. I've never been happier.
Once again.....why?
People like you, whoserman and Tammy Warner are three reasons I have the sudden urge to watch and enjoy CS2K1. I gotta leave before I start having the urge to write a dream schedule.
You're doing the very same thing that you're accusing people of doing. You are a very sad, lonely and bitter man to come here and make everyone feel as bad as you do. If you hate it so much, then stay away. We were fine before you, we'll be fine after you.
-
My name came up.
If you are all smart, you won't mention me.
Remember that lesson. I stay away unless I'm invoked in conversation. In any way.
And I'm not saying anyone is evil, just stupid, so that bible verse/philosophical stuff means nothing to me.
No, I'm accusing a lot of you of being stupid. Hell most of you are stupid. You were on ATGS and you are now. You're just protected by moderators who won't do anything about it.
I'll take my shots as I see fit. The people I call out are dumb. See: Matt Kaiser. I still can't believe he freely wore that Match Game Addict pin around Cleveland. That's like walking around with a sandwich board saying "Please hit me, I'm a loser who works at a 7-11."
Chuck
-
If you are all smart, you won't mention me.
Chuck Gibson. :)
No, I'm accusing a lot of you of being stupid. Hell most of you are stupid. You were on ATGS and you are now. You're just protected by moderators who won't do anything about it.
That's the whole point of this board, to be a better alternative (and replacement) to ATGS. This forum is meant to be welcoming and open to all people (except trolls and troublemakers, of course)
I'll take my shots as I see fit. The people I call out are dumb.
Wow, just...wow.
Just remember this:
ALL MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN A CIVILIZED AND ADULT-LIKE FASHION IN THIS FORUM AND IN ALL DEALINGS WITH OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, BOTH PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY.
(from the Eligibility Requirements (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?act=boardrules\"))
Lock 'er up, Matt or Chris.
-
[quote name=\'Sport6449\' date=\'Feb 13 2004, 04:26 PM\'] There are so many morons on this board who can post at will because of uncaring moderators. And the allowence of old morons to return (See: Tammy Warner) really irks me.
[/quote]
Just because you got beef with someone doesn't mean you should come ever so often, bash someone, then leave. Why read the board in the first place?
Brandon Brooks
-
Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Remember that people still have issues with ZHIFOS and some members here. But I do agree with the master that such drama doesn't belong here.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 09:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Thank you, Chris.
-
I also agree with Chris and everyone else here.
I saw it coming, and I'm grateful it came this Valentine's Day.
If Chuck can't show his love for this board (and I knew he couldn't), and all he wants to do is show his love for treating us like ATGSers (I'm not one of them), he can go back over to ATGS, and show his love for the trolls.
And I would like to mention that this is a G-rated site/message board. I'm sure the Ex-ATGSers like Zach and newbies like me (although I've been here for almost 3 months) would love to keep it that way.
Other than that, that's all I have to say.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 12:52 PM\'] And I would like to mention that this is a G-rated site/message board. I'm sure the Ex-ATGSers like Zach and newbies like me (although I've been here for almost 3 months) would love to keep it that way. [/quote]
No, it isn't. I mean, if you're old enough to post, you're old enough to deal with potentially mature themes. PG-13 is more like it.
Brandon Brooks
-
As someone who spent almost NO time on ATGS, I have not Clue One what any of you people are talking about on this thread. And I can't be alone.
But I will say that I thought these boards were going to be admin'd in such a way as to keep out all the gremlins, trolls and etc. that ruined ATGS. Now I'm not sure any more. It always frosts my a$$ when someone claims that they don't read a message board "but have friends looking out for them". That's always been proven to be grade-A crap.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 12:52 PM\'] If Chuck can't show his love for this board (and I knew he couldn't), and all he wants to do is show his love for treating us like ATGSers (I'm not one of them), he can go back over to ATGS, and show his love for the trolls.
And I would like to mention that this is a G-rated site/message board. I'm sure the Ex-ATGSers like Zach and newbies like me (although I've been here for almost 3 months) would love to keep it that way. [/quote]
I'm going to support Chuck. Chuck doesn't have to "show his love for this board". If someone uses Chuck's name in a way he doesn't take too kindly, I believe he has a right to object. I wasn't too cool with Zach using my name as well, especially since <Don Smith>the flight to Clueville</DS> left without another passenger for the umpteenth time. Y'know Zach, you don't have to reply to every damn message just so you can fulfill your own self-indulgence.
Trust me, Chuck doesn't like the trolls. It's partially their fault that Chuck responds the way he has to certain posts, like those contained within this thread. Yes, Chuck sometimes goes overboard on what he says or does but that's the way he reacts to certain situations.
And despite what you may think, this board is hardly G-rated. When Chris and Matt start serving cookies and fruit punch, and there's a mandatory nap time every weekday afternoon, then it'll be more like the kindergarten you want.
If supporting Chuck makes me an idiot or an ass, let me be treated like Chuck and ban me. I don't agree 100% with what Chuck did but I'd rather the place have a little more intelligence and even some debate like this thread than be a sterile place where the clueless and immature can spew off about total idiocy and get away with it scott-free.
-
[quote name=\'hmtriplecrown\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 02:17 PM\'] I'm going to support Chuck. Chuck doesn't have to "show his love for this board". If someone uses Chuck's name in a way he doesn't take too kindly, I believe he has a right to object. I wasn't too cool with Zach using my name as well, especially since <Don Smith>the flight to Clueville</DS> left without another passenger for the umpteenth time. Y'know Zach, you don't have to reply to every damn message just so you can fulfill your own self-indulgence.
Trust me, Chuck doesn't like the trolls. It's partially their fault that Chuck responds the way he has to certain posts, like those contained within this thread. Yes, Chuck sometimes goes overboard on what he says or does but that's the way he reacts to certain situations.
And despite what you may think, this board is hardly G-rated. When Chris and Matt start serving cookies and fruit punch, and there's a mandatory nap time every weekday afternoon, then it'll be more like the kindergarten you want.
If supporting Chuck makes me an idiot or an ass, let me be treated like Chuck and ban me. I don't agree 100% with what Chuck did but I'd rather the place have a little more intelligence and even some debate like this thread than be a sterile place where the clueless and immature can spew off about total idiocy and get away with it scott-free. [/quote]
Let me be the second to support Chuck -- in fact, I concur with everything Mike said. Save for the "flight to Clueville" line... I think it was Chris Lemon and not Don Smith who first used it in ATGS, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that point. :-)
I would rather have a thousand Chuck Gibsons than one gameshowguy2000, one whoserman, or one Thad Dixon.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 12:52 PM\'] And I would like to mention that this is a G-rated site/message board. I'm sure the Ex-ATGSers like Zach and newbies like me (although I've been here for almost 3 months) would love to keep it that way.
[/quote]
I'd like to throw my voice in to support Chuck too. Back in the ATGS days, we didn't see eye-to-eye; mainly cause I watched NASCAR. Since then, we've chatted on MSN regularly, and gotten to know each other pretty well.
If some of you took one nanosecond to think before you posted, this kind of crap wouldn't be happen. But when you post something that makes you look like an idiot; expected to be treated like one.
As for gameshowguy 2000, I wasn't aware of the "G" rating. I suppose you take your girlfriend [if you have one] to see the afternoon matinee of "Bambi" too--and after that, hit the sack because it's your 7:00 bedtime.
And PeterMarshallFan--Your comments were only bait to Chuck. IMO, you should be in the isolation booth or something for your "Pull-Ups" crap; but once again, that's not for me to decide.
Oh and Mike--it was indeed Chris Lemon, not myself who came up with the "flight to Clueville" line.
-
[quote name=\'melman1\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 11:28 AM\'] It always frosts my a$$ when someone claims that they don't read a message board "but have friends looking out for them". That's always been proven to be grade-A crap. [/quote]
Much of Gibson's utterances over the years were essentially nothing but Grade-A crap, so we've pretty much come to expect it.
I checked back once, at the old ATGS, and I remember finding a string of three months where he posted almost daily, and NOT ONE POST was topical, they were all "STFU" or "go away"-type flames.
Say what you will about how I posted back then (hell, say what you will about how I do it here :)), but at least I keep it germane to the subject matter most of the time.
Over Chuck's last couple of appearances here, I'm heartened to see everyone rise up, especially those who had to tolerate his act at ATGS, and tell him in no uncertain terms that his schtick is not welcome here. Standing up to the neighborhood bully is never easy, and I'm proud of all of you.
-
Here's a clue for everyone:
Some members make occasional, well-thought-out contributions and that's all. Some make a lot of on-topic contributions but ruffle feathers in the process. Some don't contribute very much to the arena of game show discussion yet when they open their mouths all that comes out is off-topic invective and "defending-my-honor" posts. The first two we can deal with; the third makes it very hard for us to justify keeping that member around.
Chuck has posted a grand total of seven messages. How many of those posts have been on-topic? Zero. How many of those posts insulted others on the board? All of them. If all he's going to do is antagonize other members without contributing anything to the discussion, we might as well be back at ATGS. Matt and I don't want to spend a whole lot of time refereeing these incidents. If Chuck brought anything worthwhile to the party we might be inclined to keep him around and tell him to cool it with the ad-hominems, but such is not the case.
-
Now what, a petition to reinstate Chuck? This gets more and more bizarre by the moment.
I still fail to see what Zach did wrong. He might have said something stupid, but he didn't inslut Chuck or Mike. IMO, it was some kind of grudge or something he has for Zach that made Chuck come on here last night, otherwise I'm stumped.
And PeterMarshallFan--Your comments were only bait to Chuck. IMO, you should be in the isolation booth or something for your "Pull-Ups" crap; but once again, that's not for me to decide.
Chuck needed to get back what he deals out. His "waaah, someone said my name" act was juvenile, hence the Pull Ups comment.
No, Chuck didn't have to "show his love for the board." But coming up once in a while to toss a few flames, then going back into remission makes him just slightly above a troll in my book. If he actually contributed something to this board, I would have less of a problem with him. But he didn't, unless saying "ZHIFOS" and flaming everyone who questions him makes him "intelligent," in which case I'm glad to be ignorant. I digress to Chris L. and Chris C.
Now we're starting to sound like the GSN board. Do we really want to end up like that?
-
As somebody who had to deal with a lot of Gibson's antagonistic remarks at ATGS, I for one am glad to see that many are opposed to his trash talk here and, especially, kudos to Chris and Matt for taking care of it in a hurry.
His recent posts here made Chris Lemon's look like olive branches! But, seriously, for those in support of his actions, I will admit, nobody is perfect. Perhaps many of you were angry at those Gibson was flaming. But, there is never an excuse for showing up specifically to flame other people and offer absolutely nothing constructive. Chris L., I have to side with you: you may get out of hand on occasion, but at least you stick with the topic at hand: game shows.
Basically, here's my short little rant: People may not be perfect, but it still gives nobody the right to simply show up and slam those who aren't. That's for ATGS, the place we all left for that exact reason! For those of you who like Gibson and his antagonistic ranting, then may I suggest going back to ATGS and, while you're there, say hi to Harvey and Grant for me! :)
Otherwise, let's keep the posts on-topic (as I didn't do here!).
ObGameShows: Super Millionaire is New! New! New! (he he; just had to get it out of my system!)
Anthony
-
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 04:28 PM\'] As somebody who had to deal with a lot of Gibson's antagonistic remarks at ATGS... [/quote]
Okay, this is getting old. Could we move on?
Brandon Brooks
-
This thread probably should be named "Remembering the old ATGS" for the direction it's taken. I might as well weigh in also.
Chuck and I have had many respectful, civil correspondences in the past. Until very recently, I thought we saw eye-to-eye on a lot of this internet stuff. Many of us remember and respect his anti-troll crusades on Usenet. From all indications, he seems like he'd be an interesting guy to hang out with.
Still, the decision to ban him was easy. Painful, but easy. As Chris said, he was 0-for-7 on posts. He clearly had nothing to say to this group except to insult the intelligence of everybody here, and of some members he personally doesn't like in particular. No, of course Chuck didn't have to "show his love for this board". He was welcome to post his thoughts about game shows, and if an insult landed here or there within such a message, he wouldn't be the only one to have ever done that. But if his only reason for having an account is to slam fellow members, that's something we just don't need.
And what made him go so ballistic? Because Zach Horan mentioned his name in one of his posts? And not even a negative mention at that. I'm sorry, but for someone who's specifically claimed that he's found peace and happiness, that's a whole bunch of unfocussed hostility that we just don't need focussed here.
Finally, many of you have made it clear -- ABUNDANTLY clear -- that there are members here that you don't particularly care for. I can sympathize; there are a number of members here that *I* don't particularly care for. But that doesn't make them "trolls". One reason this place succeeds is because of the number of members we have. We know not every post is going to be a gem, and we know that not everybody is going to find our inclusionary system to be their cup of tea. But we still think we've got a pretty good thing going. If you like it, that's great. If you merely tolerate it to find the gems, that's good too. If you don't like it, all I can say is that there are plenty of alternatives.
-
[quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 04:19 PM\'] I still fail to see what Zach did wrong. He might have said something stupid, but he didn't inslut Chuck or Mike. [/quote]
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS!
Just kidding. I'm not normally one to comment on spelling, but this was too good to resist. :-D
-
3 words: Let's Move On!
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 07:13 PM\'] [quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 04:19 PM\'] I still fail to see what Zach did wrong. He might have said something stupid, but he didn't inslut Chuck or Mike. [/quote]
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS! [/quote]
It was one time and I only did it since I had to purchase textbooks and pay off my tuition!
Sorta ObGS: It does bring a new meaning to WinTuition...
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:13 PM\'] [quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 04:19 PM\'] I still fail to see what Zach did wrong. He might have said something stupid, but he didn't inslut Chuck or Mike. [/quote]
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS!
[/quote]
Wow, that was embarrasing... :-D
-
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS!
It was one time and I only did it since I had to purchase textbooks and pay off my tuition!
That would make you a whore. If you were a slut I'd know about it by now.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:43 PM\']
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS!
It was one time and I only did it since I had to purchase textbooks and pay off my tuition!
That would make you a whore. If you were a slut I'd know about it by now. [/quote]
I'm putting that as my signature. That is classic.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 07:43 PM\']
BAN PETERMARSHALLFAN! HE CALLED CHUCK AND MIKE SLUTS!
It was one time and I only did it since I had to purchase textbooks and pay off my tuition!
That would make you a whore. If you were a slut I'd know about it by now. [/quote]
TMI! Forget TV-G; I think we're well into TV-14 territory now.
-
I'm sorry that Chuck G. got banned(though it wasn't my decision), and that people who didn't want their name brought up were brought up by me, even if it wasn't meant to offend anyone. Chuck G. was a part of this community, even if he didn't post until these past couple of times. This kinds of reminds me of that "mystery poster" we dealt with on Usenet in 2000 and 2001 that came there to talk about a time the person met me in 1999 in a chat room and supposedly in person, and this "mystery poster" person NEVER posted anything else other than bashing myself and a few others. That having been said, it is nice not to see all the bashing that was done to people on Usenet who often didn't deserve it(of which I and some others here were guilty)
-
My thoughts on the Gibson matter:
I found ATGS via Google in August of 2002. One of the primary reasons I never posted there was Chuck Gibson and his constant, pointless bashing of other posters, not to mention the general blood-on-the-floor atmosphere that was ATGS at that time.
I, for one, am glad that his act was silenced here. Kudos to the mods for having the courage to tell the bully to take his flamethrower and go home. Hats off to ya! :-)
As for GSN, I hardly watch the channel anymore. And I can't say that I miss it.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 01:50 PM\'] I checked back once, at the old ATGS, and I remember finding a string of three months where he posted almost daily, and NOT ONE POST was topical, they were all "STFU" or "go away"-type flames.
[/quote]
Not that it really matters, but how much of that was really him? There's enough bogus addresses flying around Usenet (not to mention how easy it is to imitate the tone of a Blitzkrieg post) that leads me to wonder whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
It's all water under the bridge anyway, but just some food for thought nonetheless.
Doug
-
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 05:32 PM\'] There's enough bogus addresses flying around Usenet (not to mention how easy it is to imitate the tone of a Blitzkrieg post) that leads me to wonder whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
[/quote]
That's a good point. I'd hate to think that people looked at the various "matt _ottinger" Yahoo or Hotmail accounts and actually thought any of that was me!
-
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 04:32 PM\'] There's enough bogus addresses flying around Usenet (not to mention how easy it is to imitate the tone of a Blitzkrieg post) that leads me to wonder whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
[/quote]
The ATGS posts from Blitz, Zinkin, Ottinger, and a couple others since December 2002 were from people posing as them(and they didn't do a good job impersonating them).
-
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 02:32 PM\'] whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
[/quote]
Point taken, but I'm referring to those posts that were specifically Chuck Gibson's. As Zach said, the imitators were easy to discern.
That's Chuck Gibson.
G-I-B-S-O-N. ;)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 08:28 PM\'] [quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 02:32 PM\'] whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
[/quote]
I don't think we want to mention HD or GB in any context....
-
Agreed.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Let's Move On!
-
Well.....at least the slut coment was amusing =)
j
-
Calling you a whore is like telling your girlfriend her butt is big. You know it's true, it's just that you're afraid to say anything. With that aside, YES, you ARE a whore. :-)
And, OBWhoringAndGameshows: Did you get paid in Funny Money?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 04:11 PM\'] [quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 02:08 PM\'] What they should do is set up a GSN2 for all the GSN originals and Reality TV, and have GSN be nothing but classics. Maybe bring back some of the classics from days of yore. :) [/quote]
Yes, but you know it isn't gonna happen, so why keep harping about it? [/quote]
I've got to agree on that, Lemon. And even if it did happen, not enough cable outlets will pick it up, and it may take years before they do!
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 06:14 PM\'] [quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 05:32 PM\'] There's enough bogus addresses flying around Usenet (not to mention how easy it is to imitate the tone of a Blitzkrieg post) that leads me to wonder whether it might've actually been Harvey or Grant doing all of the posting (G-d knows they certainly have enough time on their hands to pull it off ;-D).
[/quote]
That's a good point. I'd hate to think that people looked at the various "matt _ottinger" Yahoo or Hotmail accounts and actually thought any of that was me! [/quote]
Sure, Matt...and I suppose, next you'll be telling us you host a game show up in Michigan, and that you went to college with Magic Johnson. :-P
-
[quote name=\'CBSJokersWildFan\' date=\'Feb 15 2004, 02:04 AM\'] I, for one, am glad that his act was silenced here. [/quote]
As am I....all he did for me was bash me for my controversial medical history.... :(
-
So, what were we originally talking about again?
-
Game Show Network and how it used to be all about the classics :)
-
In all honesty, Chuck and I haven't been on speaking terms since whoknowswhen. He ended up insulting my personal life (back then I had a crush on... not quite a girl, but not quite a guy). This annoyed me and kinda depressed me at times for things he said.
Most likely if I gave Chuck a second chance, he'd chew me out right in the offset.
-
Guys...
The Chuck bashing ended almost a week ago. Thanks for beating the dead horse.
-
Getting back on topic now, GSN is in some ways still all about the classics. Sure a lot of the shows that used to be there are not, but hey at least we still got FF and MG. Among a number others (Card Sharks, Blockbusters, etc). I say we quit complaining about what's not there, and enjoy what is. Would I like to see shows such as Super Password, classic Price, Tic Tac Dough etc, back on GSN? Of course I would. We all would. But complaining about it to anyone who will listen, isn't gonna make a bit of difference. Maybe if we just let it go for a while, maybe someday we will get our wish. But until then, I'm just gonna watch what I like, enjoy it, and just simply change the channel when there's something on I don't like. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
Besides, if you want to see the shows not on GSN currently that badly, there's always tape trades.
-
Would I like to see shows such as Super Password, classic Price, Tic Tac Dough etc, back on GSN? Of course I would. We all would. But complaining about it to anyone who will listen, isn't gonna make a bit of difference.
What bothers me is that they bought the Bob Stewart library and refuse to air such favorites as "chain reaction" and "$20,000 pyramid". They certainly have the time; GSN's parent company is a wealthy one, and I don't think they need paid programing. You're right about complaining, however.
-
[quote name=\'1978-Jeopardy\' date=\'Feb 24 2004, 08:19 PM\'] GSN's parent company is a wealthy one, and I don't think they need paid programing. [/quote]
I can't believe people are still saying things like this. GSN is a business. If it's better for the business to run paid programming instead of obscure library product, that's what they're going to do. Simple as that.
-
[quote name=\'EmiOfBrie\' date=\'Feb 24 2004, 06:38 AM\'] Game Show Network and how it used to be all about the classics :) [/quote]
It was. Did the Originals begin in 1997?
-
Actually, no. GSN had originals at the beginning. They were interactive shows. Anyone remember Trivia Track and Super Decades?
-
[quote name=\'adamjk\' date=\'Feb 24 2004, 10:18 PM\'] Actually, no. GSN had originals at the beginning. They were interactive shows. Anyone remember Trivia Track and Super Decades? [/quote]
I'd heard about those shows, when I came upon Travis's Homepage.
Were those Interactive games played the same way they are with today's Interactive games?
-
[quote name=\'1978-Jeopardy\' date=\'Feb 24 2004, 07:19 PM\']
Would I like to see shows such as Super Password, classic Price, Tic Tac Dough etc, back on GSN? Of course I would. We all would. But complaining about it to anyone who will listen, isn't gonna make a bit of difference.
What bothers me is that they bought the Bob Stewart library and refuse to air such favorites as "chain reaction" and "$20,000 pyramid". They certainly have the time; GSN's parent company is a wealthy one, and I don't think they need paid programing. You're right about complaining, however. [/quote]
A show that finishes in the bottom 50 of a fan poll isn't exactly a favorite, IMNSHO.
-
[quote name=\'adamjk\' date=\'Feb 24 2004, 11:18 PM\'] Actually, no. GSN had originals at the beginning. They were interactive shows. Anyone remember Trivia Track and Super Decades? [/quote]
Yes. To this day, I still marvel at Larry Anderson's ad-libbing skills.
-
Yes. To this day, I still marvel at Larry Anderson's ad-libbing skills.
Especially on the first episode which had major technical problems.
Actually, quite frequently the show would run 2 minutes over and cut into the next show.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Feb 25 2004, 03:25 PM\']
Yes. To this day, I still marvel at Larry Anderson's ad-libbing skills.
Especially on the first episode which had major technical problems.
Actually, quite frequently the show would run 2 minutes over and cut into the next show. [/quote]
Those were the good ol' days.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Feb 25 2004, 05:08 PM\'] Those were the good ol' days. [/quote]
Indeed. Still get a kick remembering that their on-air promos would literally say "-ish" as in "Watch What's My Line at 9:20-ish, only on GSN!"
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Oh, gosh...Chuck Gibson?!
Tis true, Chris...we are all the better without his psychodrama.
-
[quote name=\'AH3RD\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 10:20 AM\'] [quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Oh, gosh...Chuck Gibson?! How'd he get in here?! Never mind...I know. We are all the better without his psychodrama. [/quote]
Once again, kids, that's G-I-B-S-O-N. Nine points unmodified in Scrabble, but illegal because it's a proper name.
-
[quote name=\'AH3RD\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 12:20 PM\'] [quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Oh, gosh...Chuck Gibson?!
Tis true, Chris...we are all the better without his psychodrama. [/quote]
God... will you all leave this alone already? He's been gone for over a month. Find hobbies; preferably, watch more game shows.
Brandon Brooks
-
[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 12:25 PM\'] God... will you all leave this alone already? He's been gone for over a month. Find hobbies; preferably, watch more game shows.
Brandon Brooks [/quote]
I intend to! Thanks, Brandon.
-
[quote name=\'AH3RD\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 12:20 PM\'] [quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Feb 14 2004, 08:15 AM\'] Chuck's brand of psychodrama we don't need here. Chuck-B-Gone. [/quote]
Oh, gosh...Chuck Gibson?!
Tis true, Chris...we are all the better without his psychodrama. [/quote]
To quote another Chris's posts:
"Mr. Kettle? Mr. Pot is paging you to the black courtesy phone..."
-
[quote name=\'AH3RD\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 11:30 AM\'] [quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 12:25 PM\'] God... will you all leave this alone already? He's been gone for over a month. Find hobbies; preferably, watch more game shows.
Brandon Brooks [/quote]
I intend to! Thanks, Brandon. [/quote]
So do I. And speaking of which, I got to watch some GSN yesterday. Good thing, too, because the GSN we know will be gone in 10 days.
As they say: "Turn out the lights, the party's over..."
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 01:37 PM\'] So do I. And speaking of which, I got to watch some GSN yesterday. Good thing, too, because the GSN we know will be gone in 10 days.
As they say: "Turn out the lights, the party's over..." [/quote]
Why do you people keep insisting that this is happening???
A logo change.
The shortening of the channel name down to its initials (a la AMC, A&E, etc.).
Reality shows during prime time
Let me say it real slow and maybe you will understand...
NOTHING..........ELSE.............IS...........CHANGING.....
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 02:25 PM\']Let me say it real slow and maybe you will understand...
NOTHING..........ELSE.............IS...........CHANGING.....[/quote]
For now.
-
Over on the GSN board I posted a long comment about the network's February prime time ratings. According to Variety.com the numbers grew 18% over last February. Based on the numbers for last February from the old CableWorld site, this seems to indicate that GSN bumped up close to 300K households in prime time this February.
A very good (perhaps record) showing by GSN standards, and a clear explanation of why the network is only making cautious changes on March 15. The nightmare for GSN execs right now has to be that the new shows might scuttle the household numbers while not significantly improving the demos.
If those year-to-year gains start turning into year-to-year losses, a lot of shows might wind up sleeping with the fishes and the video games block.
-
[quote name=\'Mike Tennant\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 03:04 PM\'] [quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Mar 5 2004, 02:25 PM\']Let me say it real slow and maybe you will understand...
NOTHING..........ELSE.............IS...........CHANGING.....[/quote]
For now. [/quote]
That's right, for now. While it could change into the type of channel they're fearing, it's not at the current moment.
If all your life revolves around is GSN (and if it does, I feel truly sorry for you), rest assured, you will still see your favorite shows on the new GSN on March 15.