Good old Valeyard! Let's welcome him to the thread. Never mind the blatant rudeness...he's a welcome addition to the venerable gallery of "minutes per year" contestants. Even if he was here only briefly, made a crap contribution, tried his best to upset people and flounced out at first challenge. He was a jolly good sport and we value his minutes per year.
Does the animated 'dreamland' count towards the minutes? That might make it fairly equal then.
I still say we should count it as a whole, as in full episodes per year though.
It doesn't matter which actor was about at the time. It's really about the BBC and their budget slicing. We're still paying TV our licenses, yet this year has seen less episodes. In contrast to 2009, we've had it ok for series 5 and 6, but this year there has been a long gap, then only half a series, which is kinda crap. 2009 meant less Doctor who (which was also crap) but it seemed like there was always something to look forward to just a couple of months away all the time. Waiting for Who this year has felt like an absolute age. Then when it came it was over all too quickly (reminds me of something my wife said last night). I thought the standard was great as a whole, but not enough of it and too long a wait.
And I don't think it's Matt Smith's fault, or Moffat's fault. (or the Rani's) It's the BBC bosses,
There's just been a new controller who has taken over. Maybe we'll see more episodes commissioned? We can only wait and see.
Does the animated 'dreamland' count towards the minutes? That might make it fairly equal then.
I still say we should count it as a whole, as in full episodes per year though.
It doesn't matter which actor was about at the time. It's really about the BBC and their budget slicing. We're still paying TV our licenses, yet this year has seen less episodes. In contrast to 2009, we've had it ok for series 5 and 6, but this year there has been a long gap, then only half a series, which is kinda crap. 2009 meant less Doctor who (which was also crap) but it seemed like there was always something to look forward to just a couple of months away all the time. Waiting for Who this year has felt like an absolute age. Then when it came it was over all too quickly (reminds me of something my wife said last night). I thought the standard was great as a whole, but not enough of it and too long a wait.
And I don't think it's Matt Smith's fault, or Moffat's fault. (or the Rani's) It's the BBC bosses,
There's just been a new controller who has taken over. Maybe we'll see more episodes commissioned? We can only wait and see.
I have definitely felt more deprived of Doctor Who this past year than in the gap year of 2009, because during 2009, as well as the specials we also had all the accompanying Doctor Who confidential's, a series of SJA (with two episodes featuring the Doctor) and the awesome Torchwood: Children of Earth.
I don't think it's a new controller that's taken over but a new DG. I don't really know how much a DG would be involved with day to day commissioning, and he certainly seems to have his hands full with dealing with other rather more serious matters at the moment...
I have definitely felt more deprived of Doctor Who this past year than in the gap year of 2009, because during 2009, as well as the specials we also had all the accompanying Doctor Who confidential's, a series of SJA (with two episodes featuring the Doctor) and the awesome Torchwood: Children of Earth.
I don't think it's a new controller that's taken over but a new DG. I don't really know how much a DG would be involved with day to day commissioning, and he certainly seems to have his hands full with dealing with other rather more serious matters at the moment...
Ahh- I thought it was the same thing:o
What DOES a DG do then I wonder?
And what does the controller do? And why are we paying for both of them? lol. Director General seems like a pretty grand title too, you'd have to think he had some influence somewhere.
Also I had forgotten about the Children of Earth thing- that was awesome having it all in a week. And the SJAs with the doc was good too.
Yes it has been interesting to weigh up the amount of DW we are getting. It total terms it doesn't seem we are getting a whole lot less when put into minutes per day, I can see that it was a serious attempt to show that. But when it comes down to it I'm still feeling lacking and wanting more, as do many people. It's only amplified by seeing all the other rubbish that gets on to our TV screens.
Maybe we should round up the Doctor Who team - actors, producers, writers, directors etc., put them in a prison block and force them to work for us. Hey- that might actually make a good script:D
Ahh- I thought it was the same thing:o
What DOES a DG do then I wonder?
And what does the controller do? And why are we paying for both of them? lol. Director General seems like a pretty grand title too, you'd have to think he had some influence somewhere.
I don't know exactly but I guess the Director General oversees everything at the BBC, but the output of each channel is decided by it's controller. I think the controller of BBC1 is still Danny Cohen. I also think the jury is still out as to whether he is a fan of Doctor Who or not.
Don't get me wrong, if the DG likes the show then that's no bad thing, and Danny Cohen would no doubt be keen to impress his boss, as anyone else would be, but I doubt that the DG has much direct say over particular programs.
But even if the DG and controller both hated Doctor Who it wouldn't be the end of the world if the series is still doing it's job in terms of ratings and selling abroad (which it seems to be). In my opinion far too much emphasis is put on Michael Grade and / or Jonathan Powell hating Doctor Who in the 80's and cancelling it because of that. There was a lot more too it than that...
Oh that reminds me, I've worked out the Valeyard's screen time, seeing as no one else could be bothered
The first part of The Trail of a Timelord aired on 06/09/86.
The last part of The Trail of a Timelord aired on 06/12/86.
That means that the Valeyard era lasted 92 days.
Using the episode lengths on Wikipedia, the total length of his episodes was 355 minutes.
That means we get the following averages:
Valeyard - 3.859 minutes of Valeyard per day.
10th Doctor – 1.568 minutes of Doctor Who per day.
11th Doctor – 1.729 minutes of Doctor Who per day.
So by my calculations it means that we actually had more Valeyard per day than the 10th and 11th Doctors combined!
It's not entirely certain. By the end of the story I had lost all track of what the bobbins may or may not have been happening and rather went beyond caring. Because I haven't seen it since. the definitive answer is : "I may never know". Hope that helps.
It's not entirely certain. By the end of the story I had lost all track of what the bobbins may or may not have been happening and rather went beyond caring. Because I haven't seen it since. the definitive answer is : "I may never know". Hope that helps.
But what about the Dreamlord? How should he be classified? As part of ALL the Doctors subconscious and therefore the longest running character or merely as an offspring of 11 in a single episode?
But what about the Dreamlord? How should he be classified? As part of ALL the Doctors subconscious and therefore the longest running character or merely as an offspring of 11 in a single episode?
Also no one has mentioned the eight morbious doctors yet. Each on screen for a mere second or two, they must have the highest averages of all!
You were given plenty of encouragement at the start of this thread. And were given plenty of opportunity to engage in a meaningful chat about what you thought your numbers were all about.
I kept asking you if you meant it just as fun, but instead of a straight answer you gave oblique replies suggesting you thought your calculation really did have a sort of meaning.
If you'd kept it to a bit of lighthearted fun along the lines of "fun way to look at the series split", then it would have been nice. But you seem to have slightly humourlessly decided to repeat several times that you think your calculation is some sort of "fair" assessment of something or other. Hardly a good way to start your posting on the forum with statements that people are "wrong". Try again, but if you're seriously going to want to use statistics to prove a point, prepare to have them "fairly" challenged.
Please note we are making fun of your ideas not making fun of YOU.
Light-hearted? Fun?Fair?
In defence of the OP you have been none of these things. Your posts are puerile and your pedantry flawed. By hijacking a thread and bullying the OP all you have succeeded in doing is showing yourselves up. Lots of people of all ages post in these threads. People of all ages and all vulnerabilities. With your incessant badgering you have driven someone away from posting or starting another thread. If you did not agree with the OP then you should of simply stated that and moved to the next thread. If, for instance it was my son that had posted and you had been this silly then how would I feel? Maybe you are not in that position to think about a consequence, and maybe that is why you should always be guarded with your response. You never know who the other person is or what they feel. Us humans are a mixed bag of emotions, stress and sensibilities. What is funny to you is not always funny to others.
Light-hearted? Fun?Fair?
In defence of the OP you have been none of these things. Your posts are puerile and your pedantry flawed. By hijacking a thread and bullying the OP all you have succeeded in doing is showing yourselves up. Lots of people of all ages post in these threads. People of all ages and all vulnerabilities. With your incessant badgering you have driven someone away from posting or starting another thread. If you did not agree with the OP then you should of simply stated that and moved to the next thread. If, for instance it was my son that had posted and you had been this silly then how would I feel? Maybe you are not in that position to think about a consequence, and maybe that is why you should always be guarded with your response. You never know who the other person is or what they feel. Us humans are a mixed bag of emotions, stress and sensibilities. What is funny to you is not always funny to others.
Lecture over
And in defence of MYSELF I have not bullied or badgered anyone. I have posted many times to this thread, sometimes serious, sometimes fun, sometimes with genuine questions, even seeing how the theory can be expanded and applied to other aspects of Doctor Who.
As far as I am concerned this is a public forum and I am perfectly within my rights to post as I wish, provided I stay within the rules.
Once again, I am sorry that the OP was offended but I genuinely cannot see why!
I didn't want to go into it with my two posts and hoped people would just move on, and to be fair many have, but when I went back originally and read all the posts, alright most were meant harmlessly, but taken as a whole they did seem very harsh on the OP, like he or she was being swarmed.
Lots of people of all ages post in these threads. People of all ages and all vulnerabilities. With your incessant badgering you have driven someone away from posting or starting another thread. If you did not agree with the OP then you should of simply stated that and moved to the next thread. If, for instance it was my son that had posted and you had been this silly then how would I feel? Maybe you are not in that position to think about a consequence, and maybe that is why you should always be guarded with your response. You never know who the other person is or what they feel. Us humans are a mixed bag of emotions, stress and sensibilities. What is funny to you is not always funny to others.
I agree with all of this, thank you for saying it.
I don't think any harm was meant at all, but it's not how it comes across when taken as a whole.
If you're not prepared to have your views challenged on a public forum then don't post.
I've never understood bleeding hearts who take offence on behalf of someone else. Rather than accusing everyone of bullying (a common tactic on this forum when things aren't going the way you want), you should take your concerns to the mods.
The OP posted some very clever mathematics which were fundementally flawed. When people pointed this out during the discussion the OP point blank refused to accept that he/she had used an unfair method of comparison. To make matters even more confusing, the thread title had actually no relevance to the mathematics inside.
In my eyes the OP is far from being the innocent party. A misleading thread title is dodgy enough forum behavior at the best of times, and then starting a debate where you point blank refuse to acknowledge anyone elses opinion is just plain rude. However despite that, no one has specifically been rude or nasty to the OP, they've just had a bit of a laugh with the maths and the topic the OP brought up. This isn't a crime or anything to feel bad about.
Comments
I wrote 3.859. Are you splitting hairs over 0.01?
I still say we should count it as a whole, as in full episodes per year though.
It doesn't matter which actor was about at the time. It's really about the BBC and their budget slicing. We're still paying TV our licenses, yet this year has seen less episodes. In contrast to 2009, we've had it ok for series 5 and 6, but this year there has been a long gap, then only half a series, which is kinda crap. 2009 meant less Doctor who (which was also crap) but it seemed like there was always something to look forward to just a couple of months away all the time. Waiting for Who this year has felt like an absolute age. Then when it came it was over all too quickly (reminds me of something my wife said last night). I thought the standard was great as a whole, but not enough of it and too long a wait.
And I don't think it's Matt Smith's fault, or Moffat's fault. (or the Rani's) It's the BBC bosses,
There's just been a new controller who has taken over. Maybe we'll see more episodes commissioned? We can only wait and see.
I have definitely felt more deprived of Doctor Who this past year than in the gap year of 2009, because during 2009, as well as the specials we also had all the accompanying Doctor Who confidential's, a series of SJA (with two episodes featuring the Doctor) and the awesome Torchwood: Children of Earth.
I don't think it's a new controller that's taken over but a new DG. I don't really know how much a DG would be involved with day to day commissioning, and he certainly seems to have his hands full with dealing with other rather more serious matters at the moment...
Ahh- I thought it was the same thing:o
What DOES a DG do then I wonder?
And what does the controller do? And why are we paying for both of them? lol. Director General seems like a pretty grand title too, you'd have to think he had some influence somewhere.
Also I had forgotten about the Children of Earth thing- that was awesome having it all in a week. And the SJAs with the doc was good too.
Yes it has been interesting to weigh up the amount of DW we are getting. It total terms it doesn't seem we are getting a whole lot less when put into minutes per day, I can see that it was a serious attempt to show that. But when it comes down to it I'm still feeling lacking and wanting more, as do many people. It's only amplified by seeing all the other rubbish that gets on to our TV screens.
Maybe we should round up the Doctor Who team - actors, producers, writers, directors etc., put them in a prison block and force them to work for us. Hey- that might actually make a good script:D
I don't know exactly but I guess the Director General oversees everything at the BBC, but the output of each channel is decided by it's controller. I think the controller of BBC1 is still Danny Cohen. I also think the jury is still out as to whether he is a fan of Doctor Who or not.
Don't get me wrong, if the DG likes the show then that's no bad thing, and Danny Cohen would no doubt be keen to impress his boss, as anyone else would be, but I doubt that the DG has much direct say over particular programs.
But even if the DG and controller both hated Doctor Who it wouldn't be the end of the world if the series is still doing it's job in terms of ratings and selling abroad (which it seems to be). In my opinion far too much emphasis is put on Michael Grade and / or Jonathan Powell hating Doctor Who in the 80's and cancelling it because of that. There was a lot more too it than that...
Oh, good point. So does the Valeyard era exist to this day then?
It's not entirely certain. By the end of the story I had lost all track of what the bobbins may or may not have been happening and rather went beyond caring. Because I haven't seen it since. the definitive answer is : "I may never know". Hope that helps.
But what about the Dreamlord? How should he be classified? As part of ALL the Doctors subconscious and therefore the longest running character or merely as an offspring of 11 in a single episode?
Also no one has mentioned the eight morbious doctors yet. Each on screen for a mere second or two, they must have the highest averages of all!
Light-hearted? Fun?Fair?
In defence of the OP you have been none of these things. Your posts are puerile and your pedantry flawed. By hijacking a thread and bullying the OP all you have succeeded in doing is showing yourselves up. Lots of people of all ages post in these threads. People of all ages and all vulnerabilities. With your incessant badgering you have driven someone away from posting or starting another thread. If you did not agree with the OP then you should of simply stated that and moved to the next thread. If, for instance it was my son that had posted and you had been this silly then how would I feel? Maybe you are not in that position to think about a consequence, and maybe that is why you should always be guarded with your response. You never know who the other person is or what they feel. Us humans are a mixed bag of emotions, stress and sensibilities. What is funny to you is not always funny to others.
Lecture over
And in defence of MYSELF I have not bullied or badgered anyone. I have posted many times to this thread, sometimes serious, sometimes fun, sometimes with genuine questions, even seeing how the theory can be expanded and applied to other aspects of Doctor Who.
As far as I am concerned this is a public forum and I am perfectly within my rights to post as I wish, provided I stay within the rules.
Once again, I am sorry that the OP was offended but I genuinely cannot see why!
I agree with all of this, thank you for saying it.
I don't think any harm was meant at all, but it's not how it comes across when taken as a whole.
I've never understood bleeding hearts who take offence on behalf of someone else. Rather than accusing everyone of bullying (a common tactic on this forum when things aren't going the way you want), you should take your concerns to the mods.
The OP posted some very clever mathematics which were fundementally flawed. When people pointed this out during the discussion the OP point blank refused to accept that he/she had used an unfair method of comparison. To make matters even more confusing, the thread title had actually no relevance to the mathematics inside.
In my eyes the OP is far from being the innocent party. A misleading thread title is dodgy enough forum behavior at the best of times, and then starting a debate where you point blank refuse to acknowledge anyone elses opinion is just plain rude. However despite that, no one has specifically been rude or nasty to the OP, they've just had a bit of a laugh with the maths and the topic the OP brought up. This isn't a crime or anything to feel bad about.