Crosswords, Temptation ratings are in

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'163478\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 03:34 AM\']As for Temptation, it may be the fact that it was marketed too much as a home shopping show and that the show was severely discomboulated from what Sale was back in the day.
[/quote]
You know, I'm really getting tired of you slamming the show, just because it's not your precious 1980s "Sale of the Century", and it's not "Sale" to a T. Two shopping segments do not mean they're marketing it as home shopping.

I know it gets a bad rap around here, and I'll admit it needs work, but you've dissed the show since the format was introduced, and you realized Todd Newton wouldn't host it.

Get over it already. Or how about they bring back "Card Sharks" with 2001 rules?

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'163467\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 11:23 PM\']
How does that "counter" David's post? Of all the opinions on whether Brian has been engaging in trollish behavior, I value Zach's the least.
[/quote]

It counters because Henke knows damn well what he's doing, just like Horan did. Henke just isn't as arrogant about it as Horan was.

If I can see that Henke's doing it because he knows that our benevolent mods won't do anything about it, then why is it so hard for anyone else to see?

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'163507\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:40 PM\']
It counters because Henke knows damn well what he's doing, just like Horan did. Henke just isn't as arrogant about it as Horan was.
[/quote]
No, it doesn't.  Even if you assume that Brian knows that what he's doing is wrong, when it comes to the "no friggin' place commenting on anyone else's behavior" category you couldn't pick a better example than Zach.  And based on what he's said both publicly and privately, I don't assume it.

Remember, Brian thought that it was vital for him to rewrite press releases from a lottery game show and post them here "for the record," whereas at least once Zach actually admitted that his "spoilers" were useless.  Zach takes pride in ticking people off and, to use Mr. Lemon's imagery, bounces up and down in his little chair when he does; Brian, when he responds at all, gets indignant and sees no reason why anyone should be annoyed by what he does, which brings to mind the image of breaking a chair in frustration.  (As opposed to the Kleistian method of denying that he did it at all and/or blaming the chair.)

If I can see that Henke's doing it because he knows that our benevolent mods won't do anything about it, then why is it so hard for anyone else to see?

Maybe because what you're providing is your opinion and not absolute truth, so others see it differently.  (Granted, my opinion is just that as well, but it's based on both more experience and more evidence.)  And as I said, we are going to do something about it — the moderation will be more strict.

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163510\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:02 PM\']
we are going to do something about it — the moderation will be more strict.
[/quote]

In other words, it's not really gonna be any different than it was before with Henke.

Fine...don't say I didn't warn you.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'163511\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:08 PM\']
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163510\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:02 PM\']
we are going to do something about it — the moderation will be more strict.
[/quote]
In other words, it's not really gonna be any different than it was before with Henke.

Fine...don't say I didn't warn you.
[/quote]
At this point, I give up.  If you want to continue to ignore all evidence that contradicts your position, you're entitled, but that's not going to stop us from continuing to do what we think is best.

[mparrish11]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'163451\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 06:04 PM\']
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'163445\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 03:26 PM\']
What metric would you propose?
[/quote]
Honestly? I don't know. But there has to be something a little more scientific available then asking people to write down what they watch or push a button on a box on top of their TV.
[/quote]

Isn't our channel watching habits tracked by the cable/satellite companies?  If so, they could easily expand that data (if they haven't already) to include 1/2 hourly times of what we're actively watching.

[TimK2003]

[quote name=\'mparrish11\' post=\'163522\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 04:25 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'163451\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 06:04 PM\']
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'163445\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 03:26 PM\']
What metric would you propose?
[/quote]
Honestly? I don't know. But there has to be something a little more scientific available then asking people to write down what they watch or push a button on a box on top of their TV.
[/quote]

Isn't our channel watching habits tracked by the cable/satellite companies?  If so, they could easily expand that data (if they haven't already) to include 1/2 hourly times of what we're actively watching.
[/quote]


Nielsen is slowly introducing ratings based on people using & watching DVRs/TiVos which track those watching the program live, those recording it and watching it within 24 hours, and those recording it and watching it within 7 days.  

The only flaw with the DVRs is that, while the overall ratings are a more accurate (as far as total household ratings) and can produce more instant ratings for advertisers instead of waiting for diaries to come back, it cannot tell Nielsen nor advertisers what households or demos are sitting in front of the TV when it is watched or relplayed at any given time.  So the Nielsen Metered families and diaries will continue to live on, at least for the near future.

[BMaurice06]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163505\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:19 PM\']
You know, I'm really getting tired of you slamming the show, just because it's not your precious 1980s "Sale of the Century", and it's not "Sale" to a T. Two shopping segments do not mean they're marketing it as home shopping.
[/quote]

So what if it's early in the run?  I don't care!  I am still adamant in my beliefs and I would appreciate a little more respect for my opinions, thankyouverymuch.

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163505\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:19 PM\']
I know it gets a bad rap around here, and I'll admit it needs work, but you've dissed the show since the format was introduced, and you realized Todd Newton wouldn't host it.

Get over it already. Or how about they bring back "Card Sharks" with 2001 rules?
[/quote]

And what can I do to convince you that I AM already over that already (other than stop slamming the show early in its run)?!

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'163511\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:08 PM\'][quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163510\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:02 PM\']we are going to do something about it — the moderation will be more strict.
[/quote]In other words, it's not really gonna be any different than it was before with Henke.[/quote]
Man, that's just needlessly combative.  Again, you have no idea how much of Brian's stuff doesn't get through.  And again, if we decided who to banish based on requests, this would be a remarkably empty place.

[Dbacksfan12]

And what can I do to convince you that I AM already over that already (other than stop slamming the show early in its run)?!

Quit kvetching about the show at every opportunity you get.  That'd at least be a start.
[quote name=\'PYLDude\']It counters because Henke knows damn well what he's doing, just like Horan did. Henke just isn't as arrogant about it as Horan was.[/quote]
I'd love to know how you can prove this.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'163531\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 05:55 PM\']
So what if it's early in the run?  I don't care!  I am still adamant in my beliefs and I would appreciate a little more respect for my opinions, thankyouverymuch.[/quote]

Whoa, squirt. Calm down. It's not that serious. If I didn't respect your opinions, I would've said something crass, and I prolly wouldn't be posting right now. You being so adamant in your beliefs tells me you don't think too highly of anyone else's opinions.

"Black kettle to the courtesy phone, please..."

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163505\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:19 PM\']
And what can I do to convince you that I AM already over that already (other than stop slamming the show early in its run)?!
[/quote]

You just answered your own question. The show hasn't even made it through it's first week. And from what you've posted, you aren't AT ALL over the fact that this show is a new version of "Sale of the Century".

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'163531\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 02:55 PM\']
I am still adamant in my beliefs and I would appreciate a little more respect for my opinions, thankyouverymuch.[/quote]
When you understand that "respect" and "agreement" are two distinctly different things, you might have a better shot at that.

/respect is earned.

[Robert Hutchinson]

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'163507\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:40 PM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'163467\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 11:23 PM\']How does that "counter" David's post? Of all the opinions on whether Brian has been engaging in trollish behavior, I value Zach's the least.[/quote]
It counters because Henke knows damn well what he's doing, just like Horan did. Henke just isn't as arrogant about it as Horan was.[/quote]
. . . everything you wrote after "it counters because" is not made any more true or reliable due to the content of Zach's e-mail. It makes as much sense as arguing that cigar manufacturers are about to go bankrupt because Zach is promoting their product.

Just to absurdly simplify this, imagine if Zach had sent you an e-mail that said "Two plus two is five . . . and the sky is blue"? The falsity of the first statement certainly establishes that Zach is not a reliable authority on fact or reality, but it is not proof that the second statement is either true or false.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'163531\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 05:55 PM\']
So what if it's early in the run?  I don't care!  I am still adamant in my beliefs and I would appreciate a little more respect for my opinions, thankyouverymuch.
[/quote]
We have absolute, unconditional respect for your right to have an opinion.  Respect for the opinion itself is something else, and when it amounts to "the show has to be exactly like the original, oh but it has to have more emphasis on Q&A even when the original show didn't and Todd Newton has to host" — and you've steadfastly ignored all information that might cause you to rethink that opinion — it's clear that you're not basing it on anything rational, and therefore it's not likely to gain you much respect.

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163505\' date=\'Sep 12 2007, 01:19 PM\']
I know it gets a bad rap around here, and I'll admit it needs work, but you've dissed the show since the format was introduced, and you realized Todd Newton wouldn't host it.

Get over it already. Or how about they bring back "Card Sharks" with 2001 rules?

And what can I do to convince you that I AM already over that already (other than stop slamming the show early in its run)?!
[/quote]
The fact that you're still slamming it for the same reasons you've always offered — reasons that are based on absolutely nothing rational — proves that you're not over it.  And if that hadn't been enough, this post would prove it further — and on top of that, you've apparently decided that Crosswords also sucks because Todd isn't the host.  Given that you've been on the "Todd Newton has to host or the show's gonna fail" kick since almost a year before we even knew that $ale was coming back, I find it hard to believe that you've managed to get over it in the last two days.

You want to aspire to be Todd Newton's manservant for life?  Feel free; every person is entitled to his dreams.  But that's not an "opinion," that's an obsession.  Complaining that the rest of us don't share it, while pretending that you're over it when you're nowhere close, is making you look more and more ridiculous every time you post.

[Patrick S]

You know what?  I would LOVE it if more than half of the messages in this thread actually talked about the two new shows.  I've wasted minutes of my life reading posts that really don't mean anything.

The MyNetworkTV affiliate here wasn't even around last year at this time, and the network that carries Crosswords is independently owned, thus less likely to drop something right away.  It gets enough money from infomercials.