I can understand why people want to comment on something that any celeb/zeleb has done that has been reported, yes.
That's fine, however, if the "report" is about a show and they refuse to watch that show, how can they comment on it knowledgeably with any authority backing their comments / opinions?
Well you don't need to do any of this to have formed an opinion over many years. Just as we all have opinions on anyone in the public eye without having to watch everything they've ever done.
What exactly is the misunderstanding then?
Yes you have an opinon gathered over many years, but how do you comment knowledgeably on recent events if you restrict your knowledge to past events?
a lot of people do that here
they say "i dont watch it cant stand her/him" then go on 5 page rants about something that happened????? either theyve seen it and can comment or theyve not seen it so their comments are based on hearsay and not the actual show in which case??? theyre not worth listening to with regard to the show etc
didnt know there was a point to be honest, but the one you just made i agree with you they are and people can have opinions on them as people and as parents etc generally right? but i wouldnt take any notice of someone who said "well petes perfumes shite" of they hadnt smelt it or "katies books shite" if they hadnt read it, so i dont take notice of people saying "he/she shouldnt have done this/ that in his/her show" if they dont watch it?
Again exactly. How relevant is a point made if it is not made with knowledge of the point.
Just to save all the other threads from being bogged down by this oh so important piece of info, are you a fan/supporter/defender of one, both or neither?
Personally - neither. Pair of talent-free, fame and money obsessed, greedy self-serving individuals who treat their kids as commodities.
For some reason he just annoys me more. Nothing she does surprises me, so I rarely comment on her escapades. But Andre's constant need for attention for doing what most dads do as par for the course gets to me. As does his hypocrisy and nice guy act. His dredging up of a "death threat" made some twenty years ago as a further story to flog sealed my opinion of him. Media **** of the highest order.
Although I am guilty of defending and supporting both on threads (not just on DS), depending what incident/topic they are about. I know, it's sort of like a car crash, you want to look and comment, maybe even give evidence for or against.
They each do the same things - slag one another off and find fault with every little thing the other one does. They've both used the children in their respective shows, the constant promotion of IPods/perfumes/baby clothes/horse blankets/records is now verging on the ridiculous and neither of them seem to be able to move on from their marriage.
I always remember reading The One Hundred and One Damatians when I was a kid, and the description of Cruella DeVil and her husband fit these two perfectly.
''There's only one difference - she's strong and bad, and he's weak and bad''.
Neither really.
I did use to prefer him, but hes getting on my nerves now. I do think hes a nice enough bloke and a good dad but so are hundreds of men and his voice really isnt all that.
But if i had to spend an hour locked in a room with one of them I'd defo choose him over her. I dont think there would be room for me, her and her ego.
In all fairness, you did originally say that people who didn't watch his show etc couldn't really comment on him (or words to that effect) and clarify afterwards so you can see where the idea came from if someone had't read the whole thread.
Exactly, if you don't know all the information available your comment tends to be restricted, eg, if someone only reads part of this thread they will
not get the whole picture or intention of each poster.
I fully understand where Mutts is coming from and what they mean, even if one of their posts was
not put as clearly as it could have been, or seemed contradictory, because I have followed their posts all the way through and have knowledge of them.
Go to page 14 or 15, where goldilocks said they have never seen a programme with him on ever because they turn it over, then artless tells her his take on the performance last night which he says he saw 2 seconds of. Then continue to read. It should all become clear.:)
Again, if you have all the information and knowledge of an incident / topic available to you, then you are able to comment more accurately and without being restricted to the lesser amount of knowledge you have.
Ok fine, it does make sense but I can also understand how that post in isolation could be misconstrued and I think it was a bit harsh of you and others to jump on someone like a pack of wolves just because they had read one post in isolation and quoted that. Not everyone reads the thread from start to finish
Just my thoughts on the subject.
This is your interpretation from what you have read? IMO. Read the thread and you will see it was not a "post in isolation" we were all discussing the matter and the supposed "post in isolation" was one of many posts made along the way.
i thought she was the one being jumped on?:eek: she made perfect sense to me
And me. It was an amicable discussion which, if anyone reads the whole thread, can see. Both Mutts and I had discussions with pro and anti PA posters, which was lighthearted and open. However, not all the posters were of the same manner (let's just say that).
Hi, seems like I touched a nerve with my boycotting of PA peformances. I have just been to the hairdressers and while waiting read a mag. Guess what I read Pete Planet. Can I play now.:D
Just to get back on track - these are the FM's who have chosen "neither". As in, they do not prefer/like either Kp or Pa.
I'd like to join that list please
In the past I've been accused of being a PA fan because I really, really can't stand KP....her comments about the self inflicted scars on her comedy melons being comparable to the scars experienced by breast cancer victims pushed me from mild dislike to loathing her.
I'm also of the opinion that PA and his publicists have shot themselves in their feet by the constant victimhood and "World's Best Dad" status. All he had to do was let KP revert to her Jordan ways, IMO he didn't need to ram home the point that she was "worserer", she was doing the job for him!
In the year/18 months since they split, I've gone from being a bit *whatever* about him to being more and more irritated by him.
As a result of this thread I got caught watching PAs show (in order that I could become qualified to comment on it) by my husband. He has now stated repeatedly that my IQ has been instantly lowered by 50 points (I kid you not). I have learned to not take on board every suggestion made on this fourm, is it may entail a risk to my husbands health.
At least you have full knowledge to comment with authority on that show.
This is your interpretation from what you have read? IMO. Read the thread and you will see it was not a "post in isolation" we were all discussing the matter and the supposed "post in isolation" was one of many posts made along the way.
I stand by what I said.
If someone read that post in isolation, I can completely understand what was said. I do it myself. read part of the thread, quote a post, something comes up and I don't go back and read anything else that was said.
I felt that Blondie asked a perfectly reasonable question about that post she quoted and that she was deliberately attacked for doing so and some of the comments made were pretty spiteful and rude tbh.
Personally, I felt a lot of the comments were unneccesay and felt a bit like someone being ganged up on which was the reason for my pack of wolves comment.
If you read what she actually said and then what happened afterwards, the posts were out of proportion imo.
And me. It was an amicable discussion which, if anyone reads the whole thread, can see. Both Mutts and I had discussions with pro and anti PA posters, which was lighthearted and open. However, not all the posters were of the same manner (let's just say that).
im back from the shops :P
aand yeah does seem a bit cliquey here youre either part of the great conspiracy "pete is evil and we already know kate is" or youre part of the "kate bashers" and then they go on about being able to be both hateers or neutral to both but wont let YOU be both, being both only applies when it comes to THEM you see:rolleyes: the rest of us are to stupid and just dont get it apprarently oh to be as wise as them ive said id rather be stuck in a lift with him, fking shoot me jesus:rolleyes:
If someone read that post in isolation, I can completely understand what was said. I do it myself. read part of the thread, quote a post, something comes up and I don't go back and read anything else that was said.
I felt that Blondie asked a perfectly reasonable question about that post she quoted and that she was deliberately attacked for doing so and some of the comments made were pretty spiteful and rude tbh.
Personally, I felt a lot of the comments were unneccesay and felt a bit like someone being ganged up on which was the reason for my pack of wolves comment.
If you read what she actually said and then what happened afterwards, the posts were out of proportion imo.
and i felt the same way about yours to MUTTS as if you were ganging up on her, so whys it ok for you to have that opinion and not me think that about you? well?
Comments
That's fine, however, if the "report" is about a show and they refuse to watch that show, how can they comment on it knowledgeably with any authority backing their comments / opinions?
Yes you have an opinon gathered over many years, but how do you comment knowledgeably on recent events if you restrict your knowledge to past events?
Exactly.
Again exactly. How relevant is a point made if it is not made with knowledge of the point.
Just to get back on track - these are the FM's who have chosen "neither". As in, they do not prefer/like either Kp or Pa.
Exactly, if you don't know all the information available your comment tends to be restricted, eg, if someone only reads part of this thread they will
not get the whole picture or intention of each poster.
I fully understand where Mutts is coming from and what they mean, even if one of their posts was
not put as clearly as it could have been, or seemed contradictory, because I have followed their posts all the way through and have knowledge of them.
Again, if you have all the information and knowledge of an incident / topic available to you, then you are able to comment more accurately and without being restricted to the lesser amount of knowledge you have.
This is your interpretation from what you have read? IMO. Read the thread and you will see it was not a "post in isolation" we were all discussing the matter and the supposed "post in isolation" was one of many posts made along the way.
And me. It was an amicable discussion which, if anyone reads the whole thread, can see. Both Mutts and I had discussions with pro and anti PA posters, which was lighthearted and open.
I'd like to join that list please
In the past I've been accused of being a PA fan because I really, really can't stand KP....her comments about the self inflicted scars on her comedy melons being comparable to the scars experienced by breast cancer victims pushed me from mild dislike to loathing her.
I'm also of the opinion that PA and his publicists have shot themselves in their feet by the constant victimhood and "World's Best Dad" status. All he had to do was let KP revert to her Jordan ways, IMO he didn't need to ram home the point that she was "worserer", she was doing the job for him!
In the year/18 months since they split, I've gone from being a bit *whatever* about him to being more and more irritated by him.
At least you have full knowledge to comment with authority on that show.
I stand by what I said.
If someone read that post in isolation, I can completely understand what was said. I do it myself. read part of the thread, quote a post, something comes up and I don't go back and read anything else that was said.
I felt that Blondie asked a perfectly reasonable question about that post she quoted and that she was deliberately attacked for doing so and some of the comments made were pretty spiteful and rude tbh.
Personally, I felt a lot of the comments were unneccesay and felt a bit like someone being ganged up on which was the reason for my pack of wolves comment.
If you read what she actually said and then what happened afterwards, the posts were out of proportion imo.
im back from the shops :P
aand yeah does seem a bit cliquey here youre either part of the great conspiracy "pete is evil and we already know kate is" or youre part of the "kate bashers" and then they go on about being able to be both hateers or neutral to both but wont let YOU be both, being both only applies when it comes to THEM you see:rolleyes: the rest of us are to stupid and just dont get it apprarently oh to be as wise as them ive said id rather be stuck in a lift with him, fking shoot me jesus:rolleyes:
and i felt the same way about yours to MUTTS as if you were ganging up on her, so whys it ok for you to have that opinion and not me think that about you? well?