Nanny State Redux

[Pei]

I think TiVo will think differently about it: one of their main selling points is the ability to control what you watch and this bill will restrict that.

But anyway you are avoiding my point: why should the state interfere with what I can and can't do solely to prop up some companies business?

I thought you were a good convservative and believed in free markets? Or is State interference only bad when it is for individuals?

[NUKE]

Tivo would hardly go out of business because of this. How would it affect them? You saying nobody would buy Tivo anymore?

Pei, the only reason I'm arguing with you is because you made a stupid statement: "people are legally required to view the commerials" and then became stubborn in admitting it was a fabrication.

I agree that government should no regulate what you can and cannot "edit" from your own home.  

Like I have said, this issue  has been coming up for at least 20 years and nothing has ever come of it.

[Pei]

Originally posted by NUKE
Tivo would hardly go out of business because of this. How would it affect them? You saying nobody would buy Tivo anymore?

Pei, the only reason I'm arguing with you is because you made a stupid statement: "people are legally required to view the commerials" and then became stubborn in admitting it was a fabrication.

I agree that government should no regulate what you can and cannot "edit" from your own home.  

Like I have said, this issue  has been coming up for at least 20 years and nothing has ever come of it.

Look Nuke,

You have chosen to interpret my statement absolutely literally, in a way that it was obviously never meant, which is why I haven't bothered arguing that point with you. There can be three main reasons for this
a) You are being deliberately argumentative.
or
b) You are incredibly credulous.
or
c) You don't want to examine or argue about the main point of my post but would rather try and warp what I said and so hijack this thread.

I personally beleive c) or possibly a), though if it is b) I have Nigerain ex-general friend who needs a foreign bank account to deposit some diamond money into.........

No back to the point: do you believe the state should be interfering in this matter?

[NUKE]

I answered you. End of argument.

I must add... Pei, you are the one who chose a poor statement to represent what you *really* wanted to discuss. I mearly addressed what you said. I'm not a mind reader.

Maybe next time you could just come out and say what you actually mean and this would have been a different discussion.

[Pei]

Originally posted by NUKE
I answered you. End of argument.

I must add... Pei, you are the one who chose a poor statement to represent what you *really* wanted to discuss. I mearly addressed what you said. I'm not a mind reader.

Maybe next time you could just come out and say what you actually mean and this would have been a different discussion.

I thought it was obvious that I what I meant. Maybe it was not and if so I apologize but I really think you will have to get used to people not talking literally all the time: it's actually quite common (especially in English).

However you have taken what could have been a quite interesting debate on general governance and ruined it by deliberatly focussing on pointless specifics. This is a tactic I normall associate with proffessional politicians who cannot or will not try and make a logical argument or will not state thier real point of view.

You have not answered point you have merely said you don't think the law will come to pass. You have not said whether you think it is good thing or not: take a stand Nuke!
Be brave - tell us what do you really beleive!

[NUKE]

Pei, I HAVE answered. I said that I do not think the government should be able to regulate what you can or cannot edit from your home. I was basically agreeing with you.

YOU are the one who dragged this out. You could have answered my first question and told me you did not mean to be literal, but instead chose to stoke it.

In fact, your whole original post contained NO CLUE as to what you were *really* interested in discussing. Based on the title of the thread and the content of the first post, I believed you were just looking for an argument.

[Pei]

Originally posted by NUKE
Pei, I HAVE answered. I said that I do not think the government should be able to regulate what you can or cannot edit from your home.
 

Thank you!

Originally posted by NUKE

YOU are the one who dragged this out. You could have answered my first question and told me you did not mean to be literal, but instead chose to stoke it.

I'm not sure how my first reply to you  could not have made what I meant obvious. Again if it didn't I apologize.

Originally posted by NUKE

In fact, your whole original post contained NO CLUE as to what you were *really* interested in discussing. Based on the title of the thread and the content of the first post, I believed you were just looking for an argument.

I thought the article made it obvious? Maybe I should have rip 'n' pasted it...
I can't say I was looking for an argument - I was certainly looking for a discussion. That it turned into an argument is not surpising though -  that's the way BBS go (especially this one). We could have had this conversation in real life (tm) and it would have been perfectly civil and more to the point.

[Nash]

Now what about them hard-hat wearing cowboys?

[Pei]

Originally posted by Nash
Now what about them hard-hat wearing cowboys?

It's probably because drinking Casltemaine XXXX lager increases your chances of falling off a horse or possibly that Aussie cowboys (or "jackaroos" as they are known) are all poo-punching nancy boys who are only in the business so they can wear leather chaps in public.

[NUKE]

Nash, maybe you could whip up a nice picture for us, hehe. The whole concept is funny to me.

[Pei]

Can you imagine John Wayne rolling up to the Saloon, tipping his ten-gallon crash helmet  and saying "Hello, pilgrim"?

[Holden McGroin]

Does the hard hat wearing cowboy stand next to the biker or the indian chief?

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Nash
Now what about them hard-hat wearing cowboys?

Bullriders have been wearing helmets for years. Flak jackets, too. You try and call an American Cowboy a wuss because he's wearing a helmet and I guaraGolly-geeTEEya you will get your igloo melted, Kanukian.

"Nash, maybe you could whip up a nice picture for us, teeheehee."
-NUKE

And maybe you two could get a room where you could look at the picture together.

I'm still PO'd over that EVE comment, Nuke. You thought it slipped under the radar, but it didn't.

I will go Ripsnort on your ass- I will stalk you.

[NUKE]

lol Airhead

You and Nash are probably the most humorous people on this BB.

I rememberate you in Air Warrior........you be funny on the radio and make me laugh much.

You quit the squad in AW though........so you're a big dik.

[beet1e]

The technology for skipping commercials already exists, if you have a DVD recorder (DVR) with time slip. If I watch something on Ch5 (which has a lot of commercials) I'll slip in a DVD and record it. Then I'll start watching it after it's been on about 15 minutes. Unlike VCR, no need to wait till recording is complete to start watching it. I skip through the commercial slots in about 10-15 secs.

Hehe Pei, fancy someone thinking you're Australian - with a Ringwood Old Thumper avatar!